Submission on the Proposed Traffic Calming Measures on Pearse Street, Mitchel Street, Emmet Place, Kickham Street and Silver Street, Nenagh

Link to scheme proposal; deadline for submissions Wed, 26/04/2023 – 16:30

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on the Proposed Traffic Calming Measures on Pearse Street, Mitchel Street, Emmet Place, Kickham Street and Silver Street, Nenagh, which I make in a personal capacity.

I would like to welcome the proposed raised zebra crossings as part of this scheme. I believe their introduction will result in an improved walking environment in the centre of Nenagh. As a compact thriving town which has the potential to grow and thrive over the period of the new County Development Plan Nenagh has an exciting future ahead of it and the focus on the four streets that serve as the central circulation route for people who walk, cycle, take public transport and drive through Nenagh is welcome. Unfortunately there was no rationale provided for this scheme, only a series of drawings; and any plans proposed under previous County Development Plans to change traffic circulation in Nenagh are no longer available online to the public. I have some reservations about the increase in capacity for private vehicles in the centre of Nenagh that will result from this scheme, and the compatibility of this scheme with statutory plans, which I have detailed below.

Premature introduction of this scheme ahead of Nenagh Local Transport Plan

I took part in the survey last year, which invited input ahead of “delivery of a Local Transport Plan for Nenagh will identify the key infrastructural requirements of the Town and prioritise the transport interventions required in the plan area as the Town grows and develops over the next 10 years”. At the time of the consultation last year, there was a commitment to publish a draft Local Transport Plan for Nenagh later in 2022. While I understand that the publication of the draft plan has been delayed, I suggest that this scheme is premature as it will define private vehicle traffic flows through the centre of Nenagh. Pausing this scheme to take account of an agreed Local Transport Plan, as recommended in the Regional Spatial and Economic Strategy for the Southern Region, would allow any scheme to change traffic flows in the centre of Nenagh (which have been unchanged since Kickham Street was the main road for traffic from Limerick, Clare, Kerry and North Tipperary to Dublin) to be supported by best practice and the provisions of the County Development Plan.

Compatibility with Tipperary County Development Plan 2022-2028

Modal shift targets [County Development Plan Policy 12-1 (a)]

(a) Support the achievement of the modal shift targets set out in Table 12.1 Modal Share Targets to apply to Tipperary, and require new development to demonstrate and ensure that land-use, connectivity and transportation are integrated in a manner which reduces reliance on car-based travel, promotes more sustainable transport choice, and co-ordinates particular land uses with their accessibility requirements.

It is not clear how this scheme is compatible with the latest adopted Development Plan for County Tipperary. The scheme will result in an increase in capacity for vehicles travelling through Nenagh town centre, and there is no provision for cycle facilities in the scheme. This appears to be in conflict with the modal shift target in Table 12.1 of the Development Plan which seeks to reduce the modal share of trips by car and van from 71% to 45% and to increase the modal share of trips by bicycle from 0.76% to 10%. Nenagh is Tipperary’s second largest town and if no provision is made for segregated cycling infrastructure in the middle of the town, it is difficult to see how this is compatible with the County Development Plan. 

Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets and National Sustainable Mobility Policy [County Development Plan Policy 12-1 (b)]

(b) Apply the principles of the National Sustainable Mobility Policy (DoT, 2022), the Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (DTTS and DHPLG, 2019) and the Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets Interim Advice Note – Covid-19 Pandemic Response (2020).

The Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (DMURS), adopted in the development plan, specifically cautions against one-way systems like the one proposed in this scheme:

One-way streets have also been widely implemented, retrospectively, in order to filter vehicle permeability and relieve traffic congestion. The use of one-way systems for traffic management should also be approached with caution by designers as they:

  • Promote faster speeds as drivers are likely to drive faster when no risk is perceived from oncoming traffic.
  • Will result in longer vehicular journeys, including those for cyclists and public transport.
  • Can be confusing for users when they deflect people away from destinations.
  • Require additional signage.

Conversion to one-way systems may be beneficial on narrow carriageways where the street reserve is limited in order to provide additional space for pedestrians, cyclists and other public realm improvements. Counter flow cycle lanes should also be considered in order to maintain permeability for cyclists Examples include Centres where the implementation of a one-way system has direct placemaking benefits as it allows for additional footpath width and/or on-street parking (see Figure 3.24).

The proposed scheme proposes no reallocation of road space to more sustainable modes and there is no evidence that consideration has been made to provide additional space for pedestrians, cyclists and other public realm improvements. Examples exist in other local authority areas where Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act has been used to reallocate road space away from the private car towards walking and cycling.

It is a specific aim of the National Sustainability Policy to reallocate road space in urban centres away from the private car towards more sustainable modes: “rebalancing transport movement in metropolitan areas and other urban centres away from the private car and towards active travel and public transport.” It is difficult to see how the implementation of this scheme as proposed is compatible with this aim.

Integrated pedestrian and cycling networks and infrastructure [County Development Plan Policy 12-1 (c)]

(c) Development proposals shall be required to provide for well-integrated pedestrian and cycling networks and infrastructure, such as cycle parking, as part of their planning application and ‘Sustainability Statement’, where applicable, the development management standards Volume 3 will apply.

The draft CycleConnects Network published by the National Transport Authority included both an interurban cycle network throughout County Tipperary and a series of urban cycle networks for towns in the county, including Nenagh. The proposed scheme includes streets that are part of the proposed network: Pearse Street and Mitchel Street are designated as primary cycle routes (in red), and Emmet Place and Kickham Street are designated as secondary cycle routes (in blue). Without cycle infrastructure on these streets which represent key destinations in the centre of Nenagh, it is difficult to see how Nenagh can support a quality cycle network as envisioned under CycleConnects and supported by the Tipperary County Development Plan.

Map of Nenagh showing primary cycle routes along Pearse Street and Mitchel Street and secondary cycle routes along Emmet Place and Kickham Street

Accessibility for people with disabilities [County Development Plan Policy 12-1 (d)]

(d) To apply a ‘whole journey approach’ to make public transport fully accessible to people with disabilities’, this refers to all elements that constitute a journey from the starting point to destination including footpaths, tactile paving, cycle paths, roads, pedestrian crossing points, town greenways and bus stops/shelters in line with relevant Guidance from the Department of Transport.

The inclusion of bollards in the new proposed bus stop on Pearse Street are a cause of concern. Specifically, the bollards will restrict the approach of buses to the bus stop and in the event of obstructions or existing buses being stopped at the bus stop, may prevent low-floor buses from pulling up at the kerb in a manner that will enable the deployment of a ramp to assist people with disabilities to board or leave their bus. It is strongly recommended that these bollards are omitted from the plan as they may result in a reduction in accessibility for people using public transport to and from Nenagh.

The maintaining of the narrow footpath width on Emmet Place at less than 1.8m is below the minimum mandated by DMURS, which states that 1.8m is the minimum width necessary to allow two standard wheelchairs to pass each other. It is not clear whether there is room on Emmet Place to accommodate two lanes of traffic and cater for a minimum footpath width, never mind a greater width more appropriate for an urban centre close to many trip destinations.

Submission on Safe Routes to School Section 38 scheme in Dooradoyle

Link to scheme details

I’d like to broadly welcome the proposal to calm traffic and provide a safer route to school for the pupils of St. Paul’s and St. Gabriel’s.

One item that may want to be considered is footpath width – it appears from the drawings that the footpath narrows to 1.6m in places. The Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (DMURS) notes that 1.8m is the absolute minimum for two wheelchairs to pass each other. Given the proximity of St. Gabriel’s it’d be great to have a small extension to the footpath width.

It appears that road width (excluding provision for active travel modes) has been kept to a 5.5m minimum. DMURS notes that the range for a standard carriageway width on Local streets is in the range of 5 to 5.5m. If the road carriageway width was reduced further, it would provide further width to facilitate active modes, and perhaps a different design would be possible.

I can’t help but think that a combined shared path would be better for all active modes but I think this proposal is better than leaving the street as it is.

Finally, I note one of the submissions stated that “It is not too late to put the interests and wishes of the residents first. Those who pay taxes, vote and live here 24/7/365.” I would like to respectfully disagree with that statement, I believe that providing infrastructure that would help children travel to primary school independently is the mark of a generous and civilised society, and reallocating road space to active modes of travel is an appropriate way of achieving this. Our children may not pay any taxes but we as adults have a duty to cherish and protect them so that they can lead healthy and fulfilled lives.

Submission to the public consultation on the Land Development Agency’s master planning of Colbert Station

The efforts made to engage the public on this project have been significant and should be welcomed.

In drawing up the master plan, consideration should be given to how the development should be phased. In some cases this might mean that buildings might have an interim use that is different from their final use. This was successfully achieved in Grangegorman.

The development should be an exemplar, demonstrating that our regional cities are capable of significant housing growth in a manner that is sustainable and compatible with our obligations on climate change.

The development should developed as a car free development. Any car parking should be placed at the very southern fringes of the site, in a manner that will will allow future conversion of the car parking spaces to more productive uses. No vehicular access should be available on the North, East or West sides of the site. Significant and secure bike parking should be provided.

The majority of apartments in Limerick are 2-bed apartments. Consideration should be made to increase the diversity of apartment sizing, especially 3-bed and even 4-bed apartments which might be attractive to families. Currently 4-bed houses attract a premium in the Limerick property market.

The site should facilitate through cycling for the public from Roxboro and Careys Roads to Parnell Street. In general the site should be developed with excellent permeability for pedestrians and cyclists from all sides of the development.

Public/affordable housing should be mixed evenly through the development. It should not be possible to visually distinguish public and private housing in the development.

Consideration should be given to prevailing winds on the site and how they can play a role in cooling buildings.
The development should include lots of trees and plants.

A specific biodiversity strategy for the site is needed so that insects and wildlife can thrive on the site.

The master plan should be ambitious in terms of how many housing units and square metres of office space can be delivered. However phasing should allow for a portion of the site to be developed relatively quickly.

Grangegorman built a playground on their campus as an early part of the development. This helped to encourage the public to come in to the development and provided footfall and community amenity at an early stage.

Limerick City 8th Amendment Referendum Tally 2018

Thanks to everyone who helped with the tally. The tally for Limerick (County) is also available.

Results are also available as a CSV file.

Box Constituency Yes No Yes % No %
Postal Limerick City 163 110 59.7% 40.3%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 1 Limerick City 210 108 66.0% 34.0%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 2 Limerick City 289 155 65.1% 34.9%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 3 Limerick City 299 131 69.5% 30.5%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 4 Limerick City
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 5 Limerick City 220 131 62.7% 37.3%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 6 Limerick City 246 170 59.1% 40.9%
J.F.Kennedy N.S. N.C.R. 7 Limerick City 300 169 64.0% 36.0%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.1 Limerick City 211 95 69.0% 31.0%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.2 Limerick City 173 103 62.7% 37.3%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.3 Limerick City 230 103 69.1% 30.9%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.4 Limerick City 214 138 60.8% 39.2%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.5 Limerick City
Caherdavin Girls N.S.6 Limerick City 253 129 66.2% 33.8%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.7 Limerick City 157 64 71.0% 29.0%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.8 Limerick City 237 95 71.4% 28.6%
Caherdavin Girls N.S.9 Limerick City 139 63 68.8% 31.2%
Corpus Christi N.S. Moyross1 Limerick City 239 141 62.9% 37.1%
Corpus Christi N.S. Moyross2 Limerick City
Corpus Christi N.S. Moyross3 Limerick City 39 26 60.0% 40.0%
Ballynanty Beg N.S.1 Limerick City 240 125 65.8% 34.2%
Watch House Cross Library,1 Limerick City 165 96 63.2% 36.8%
Watch House Cross Library,2 Limerick City 118 81 59.3% 40.7%
St Lelia’s Age Friendly Comm . Edu. Campus1 Limerick City 216 116 65.1% 34.9%
St Lelia’s Age Friendly Comm . Edu. Campus2 Limerick City 117 61 65.7% 34.3%
St. Munchin’s Temp. Hall Limerick City 188 102 64.8% 35.2%
St. Mary’s Girls School, Bishop St.1 Limerick City 105 65 61.8% 38.2%
St. Mary’s Girls School, Bishop St.2 Limerick City 148 89 62.4% 37.6%
St. Mary’s Girls School, Bishop St.3 Limerick City 122 98 55.5% 44.5%
Scoil Ide Corbally1 Limerick City 167 81 67.3% 32.7%
Scoil Ide Corbally2 Limerick City 241 74 76.5% 23.5%
Scoil Ide Corbally3 Limerick City 197 123 61.6% 38.4%
Scoil Ide Corbally4 Limerick City 267 103 72.2% 27.8%
Scoil Ide Corbally5 Limerick City 155 97 61.5% 38.5%
Scoil Ide Corbally6 Limerick City 298 138 68.3% 31.7%
St. Patrick’s Boys N.S. Dublin Road1 Limerick City 236 79 74.9% 25.1%
St. Patrick’s Boys N.S. Dublin Road2 Limerick City 196 82 70.5% 29.5%
St. Patrick’s Boys N.S. Dublin Road3 Limerick City 104 45 69.8% 30.2%
St. John’s Gns & Infant Boys School1 Limerick City 214 103 67.5% 32.5%
St. John’s Gns & Infant Boys School2 Limerick City 223 120 65.0% 35.0%
St. John Bapist C.B.S. Killalee1 Limerick City 113 78 59.2% 40.8%
St. John Bapist C.B.S. Killalee2 Limerick City 88 81 52.1% 47.9%
St. John Bapist C.B.S. Killalee3 Limerick City 166 90 64.8% 35.2%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road1 Limerick City 252 105 70.6% 29.4%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road2 Limerick City 275 135 67.1% 32.9%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road3 Limerick City 93 59 61.2% 38.8%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road4 Limerick City 201 124 61.8% 38.2%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road5 Limerick City 108 46 70.1% 29.9%
St. Brigid’s N.S. Singland Road6 Limerick City 260 131 66.5% 33.5%
Pres N.S Roxboro Road1 Limerick City 152 88 63.3% 36.7%
Pres N.S Roxboro Road2 Limerick City 271 158 63.2% 36.8%
Pres N.S Roxboro Road3 Limerick City 247 78 76.0% 24.0%
Le Cheile N.S., Roxborough Road1 Limerick City 100 74 57.5% 42.5%
Le Cheile N.S., Roxborough Road2 Limerick City 186 138 57.4% 42.6%
Le Cheile N.S., Roxborough Road3 Limerick City
Le Cheile N.S., Roxborough Road4 Limerick City 84 58 59.2% 40.8%
Our Lady Queen Of Peace N.S.,O’Donoghue Avenue1 Limerick City 204 154 57.0% 43.0%
Our Lady Queen Of Peace N.S.,O’Donoghue Avenue2 Limerick City 172 132 56.6% 43.4%
Our Lady Queen Of Peace N.S.,O’Donoghue Avenue3 Limerick City 165 102 61.8% 38.2%
Donoughmore N.S Limerick City 286 200 58.8% 41.2%
Ahane N.S. Limerick City 247 101 71.0% 29.0%
Lisnagry N.S.1 Limerick City 193 100 65.9% 34.1%
Lisnagry N.S.2 Limerick City 292 132 68.9% 31.1%
Castleconnell N.S.1 Limerick City 235 94 71.4% 28.6%
Castleconnell N.S.2 Limerick City 295 96 75.4% 24.6%
Castleconnell N.S.3 Limerick City 265 128 67.4% 32.6%
Castleconnell N.S.4 Limerick City 202 94 68.2% 31.8%
Milford N.S.1 Limerick City 201 61 76.7% 23.3%
Milford N.S.2 Limerick City 174 81 68.2% 31.8%
Milford N.S.3 Limerick City 237 92 72.0% 28.0%
Milford N.S.4 Limerick City 212 116 64.6% 35.4%
Milford N.S.5 Limerick City 192 104 64.9% 35.1%
Montpelier Comm. Centre Limerick City 132 43 75.4% 24.6%
Monaleen N.S.1 Limerick City 485 148 76.6% 23.4%
Monaleen N.S.2 Limerick City 268 79 77.2% 22.8%
Monaleen N.S.3 Limerick City 276 116 70.4% 29.6%
Monaleen N.S.4 Limerick City
Monaleen N.S.5 Limerick City 231 130 64.0% 36.0%
Gaelscoil Chaladh An Treo1 Limerick City 212 77 73.4% 26.6%
Gaelscoil Chaladh An Treo2 Limerick City 110 47 70.1% 29.9%
Gaelscoil Chaladh An Treo3 Limerick City 235 88 72.8% 27.2%
Gaelscoil Chaladh An Treo4 Limerick City 294 84 77.8% 22.2%
Roxborough N.S. 1 Limerick City 76 37 67.3% 32.7%
Roxborough N.S. 2 Limerick City
Roxborough N.S. 3 Limerick City 270 177 60.4% 39.6%
O Lady Of Lourdes Comm. Centre, Ballinacurra Weston3 Limerick City 242 167 59.2% 40.8%
O Lady Of Lourdes Comm Centre, Ballinacurra Weston1 Limerick City 175 119 59.5% 40.5%
O Lady Of Lourdes Comm Centre, Ballinacurra Weston2 Limerick City 44 30 59.5% 40.5%
O Lady Of Lourdes Comm Centre, Ballinacurra Weston4 Limerick City 96 76 55.8% 44.2%
Scoil Mhathair De S.C. Road1 Limerick City 205 120 63.1% 36.9%
Scoil Mhathair De S.C. Road2 Limerick City 193 106 64.5% 35.5%
Scoil Mhathair De S.C. Road3 Limerick City 123 97 55.9% 44.1%
Model N.S O’Connell Ave.1 Limerick City 170 98 63.4% 36.6%
Model N.S O’Connell Ave.2 Limerick City 100 81 55.2% 44.8%
St. Michael’s N.S Barrington St.1 Limerick City 188 87 68.4% 31.6%
St. Michael’s N.S Barrington St.2 Limerick City 121 80 60.2% 39.8%
St. Michael’s N.S Barrington St.3 Limerick City 193 78 71.2% 28.8%
Pres. N.S. Sexton St.1 Limerick City 105 43 70.9% 29.1%
Pres. N.S. Sexton St.2 Limerick City
Pres. N.S. Sexton St.3 Limerick City 189 131 59.1% 40.9%
Pres. N.S. Sexton St.4 Limerick City 103 62 62.4% 37.6%
St. Pauls At Dooradoyle Library4 Limerick City 295 119 71.3% 28.7%
St. Pauls At Dooradoyle Library5 Limerick City 335 125 72.8% 27.2%
St. Pauls At Dooradoyle Library6 Limerick City 257 114 69.3% 30.7%
St. Pauls N.S. At County Hall 1 Limerick City 237 181 56.7% 43.3%
St. Pauls N.S. At County Hall 2 Limerick City 335 125 72.8% 27.2%
St. Pauls N.S. At County Hall 3 Limerick City 245 140 63.6% 36.4%
County Library, Dooradoyle1 Limerick City 360 144 71.4% 28.6%
County Library, Dooradoyle2 Limerick City
County Library, Dooradoyle3 Limerick City 347 124 73.7% 26.3%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret1 Limerick City 360 167 68.3% 31.7%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret2 Limerick City 337 143 70.2% 29.8%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret3 Limerick City 292 175 62.5% 37.5%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret4 Limerick City 319 149 68.2% 31.8%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret5 Limerick City 227 106 68.2% 31.8%
St. Nessan’s N.S. Mungret6 Limerick City 360 173 67.5% 32.5%
Killinure N.S. Limerick City 193 136 58.7% 41.3%
Bilboa Ns Limerick City 206 150 57.9% 42.1%
Caherconlish N.S.1 Limerick City 148 67 68.8% 31.2%
Caherconlish N.S.2 Limerick City 209 116 64.3% 35.7%
Cappamore Comm. Centre1 Limerick City 213 159 57.3% 42.7%
Cappamore Comm. Centre2 Limerick City 184 166 52.6% 47.4%
Murroe N.S.1 Limerick City 294 174 62.8% 37.2%
Murroe N.S.2 Limerick City 277 173 61.6% 38.4%
Murroe N.S.3 Limerick City 290 156 65.0% 35.0%
Knockea N.S.1 Limerick City 304 133 69.6% 30.4%
Knockea N.S.2 Limerick City 317 158 66.7% 33.3%
Parteen NS 1 Limerick City 280 141 66.5% 33.5%
Parteen NS 2 Limerick City 300 136 68.8% 31.2%
Parteen NS 3 Limerick City 287 120 70.5% 29.5%
Scout Hall Shannon Banks 1 Limerick City 310 106 74.5% 25.5%
Scout Hall Shannon Banks 2 Limerick City 310 126 71.1% 28.9%
Scout Hall Shannon Banks 3 Limerick City 173 68 71.8% 28.2%
Scout Hall Shannon Banks 4 Limerick City 248 73 77.3% 22.7%