Us councillors were placed in the invidious and totally unfair position that we had to take or leave the whole document, and in the end, we took the decision to reject it. All that said, 95% of the proposals in it I agree with, but I for one refused to be backed up against the wall and bullied into surrender!
On the 14th April last I wrote in the three page submission below, and am publishing it now for the record. Readers may not agree with everything, but these were my thoughts, and am happy to share...........
14ú Aibreán 2011
Senior Engineer,
Cork County Council,
Traffic and Transportation Section,
Floor 10,
County Hall,
Cork County Council,
Traffic and Transportation Section,
Floor 10,
County Hall,
Cork.
Re: Clonakilty Traffic and Transportation Study Draft Final Report
A Chara,
I write this submission as a democratically-elected member of Clonakilty Town Council since June 1994 (17 years). I do so with some regret, as I strongly feel that if the private consultants and Cork County Council officials who have been involved in compiling the study since August 2007 had engaged on a regular basis with the elected members of Clonakilty Town Council, then I believe I may not be making such a critical submission today. The elected representatives of the people of Clonakilty town are in daily contact with the people and in my view would reflect many people’s views more so than people who have little connection with Clonakilty outside of official duties. The fact that this study is about Clonakilty town and very immediate surrounding area, but that people must send their submissions to County Hall rather than to Clonakilty Town Hall reinforces this point for me. On a related note, I think it also remiss that there is not an option to email in submissions.
I accept that there were a series of protracted meetings with the Town Councillors in the summer of 2010 when this document was ready for the public consultation stage at that time. However, this process seems to me to have been just going through the motions so to speak, as it was clearly indicated by the reports authors that some of the fundamental issues of concern for me and other councillors would not be taken out. For me as a local Town Councillor, it was just another example of the County Council attempting to tell us the Town Council that we had to accept this document. I am making this submission therefore because as a Town Councillor I was not afforded any other vehicle to try to change things in it. I cannot endorse it in its totality.
That said I think 95% of the proposals in the document are sensible and positive. As someone who is interested in the environment and a founding member of Sustainable Clonakilty, I welcome the many proposals in the study that will enhance safe walking and cycling to and from work places, schools, shops, etc., sustainable transport, improvements to junctions, the proposal to install “press button” crossings (something that I advocated in my first election manifesto in 1994!), enhancement of disability-friendly streetscape and footpaths, etc. These are all laudable and commendable.
Submissions
Point 1.2
I think it disappointing that on the list of stakeholders contacted in December 2007 that Gaelscoil Chloch na gCoillte wasn’t on the list, especially given that the schools then rented site at Scartagh is mentioned a number of times in the report.
Point 2.2
The report says that in September 2008, the population of Clonakilty would increase by 74% to over 7,200 by the year 2020. A lot has happened since then, with youth emigration, unemployment, the recession and the prospects for the coming number of years not looking great. I therefore believe that this projection should have been amended before going out to public consultation to reflect more realistic figures going forward, as much of the report bases it’s proposals on these figures.
I also question the long-term sustainability of car transport given the increasing costs of fuel, and more and more going forward people will be exploring means of cutting down car usage and where practical, opting for other forms of transport.
3 Mobility Management Plans
I support the theoretical concept of the Mobility Management Plans as outlined in the study. However, I believe that there would be more success with persuasion and less bureaucracy and form-filling involved. Proper detailed consultation with individual businesses and institutions to ascertain what is practical, possible and “do-able” with encouragement and support is a better approach given the many other concerns that must be dealt with in these situations.
Point 3.3 – I believe that having a Mobility Management Plan as a standard planning condition, will do nothing to help this cause and will be seen by potential developers as yet another stumbling block. The planning system places many other standards conditions on developers already, but they are often poorly or not at all enforced, and I would see Mobility Management Plans as being a highly desirable proposition rather than an official planning condition.
Point 3.4 – I support the concept that the Town Council should lead the way with it’s own Mobility Management Plan, but propose an addendum to include the “County Council and all it’s offices”. (The County Council employs many more people in it’s Old Mill, Hume House and Emmet Square Offices than the Town Council, and results of a Mobility Plan there would be more dramatic and have a much greater impact).
4.2 Pedestrianisation
I support the broad concept that people should be facilitated to walk wherever possible and practical. However, it is also important to state that walkways going through isolated areas at the rear of private dwellings/public facilities, may often lead to anti-social behaviour, littering and other illegal activities, especially during the hours of darkness. I have read of many debates in Cork City Council over the last number of years whereby such walkways are being closed off due to anti social behaviour. I therefore believe that each proposed route must be looked at not just from a walking and access point of view, but also the possible negative consequences.
Point 4.2 – I believe the pedestrianisation of the whole town centre area as in figure 4.2 in unworkable, and impractical. The proposal is that it would be daytime pedestrianisation! I believe that this would be completely retrograde, and in fact if there was to be any pedestrianisation even considered, then it would only be in the evening time during summer months, and well planned with wide consultation with businesses in particular in the area. I also feel that this system would have a series health and safety impact at the top of McCurtain Hill/Assumption Place/Patrick St. which would in fact be a bypass route for traffic when Pearse St. would be pedestrian only. Traffic speeds would increase and danger levels increased to pedestrians, children and other road users. I note that the orange one way arrows points up McCurtain Hill and down Patrick St. but no indication of where the joining route between them is! As well as all this, the town centre businesses and related employments would be adversely affected. The Clonakilty Town Plan focuses on the need to keep the town centre as the main business area. I believe shoppers and consumers generally would avoid Pearse St. if it were pedestrianised by day especially.
4.3 Cycling
Page 16, I believe that Bicycle stands should be located widely and well dispersed rather than “Numbers of stands and locations provided might be small at first, with increased provision as demand builds up”.
Page 17 Correct to read “Gullane Lake” not Templebryan Lake.
Recommendations add 4.13 Add “That a new signalised pedestrian crossing is put in place to service the COPE facility, Clogheen and Clogheen Industrial Park”. Recommendation 4.4 would compliment this proposal.
5 Public Transport
That as part of the “Local Bus Service” plan, the possibility of using the “Choo Choo” road train be employed at off season times e.g. school runs with dedicated stops, within the town boundary area. This would be attractive for local school children, and possibly more successful than a standard mini bus.
Recommendations add 5.6 – “That Bus Éireann provide a west bound bus stop opposite Dunne’s Stores, and an east bound bus stop south of the “Maxol” roundabout on the N71”
6 Parking
As I mentioned in my earlier comments, I do not think the projected population growth to 7,200 by the year 2020 will occur. Therefore neither will the necessity for the projected parking levels. I believe that all current parking byelaws should be strictly enforced by all who are responsible and who have the powers to do so.
Recommendation 6.3 “That parking charges be introduced…”. I object to this proposal on a point of principle. Pay parking on the streets and in car parks in the town centre would result in forcing shoppers to the out of town facilities where there are large car parks free of charge. In these economically challenging times especially, it would spell the death knell of the many small (and large) town centre businesses who are already struggling. I note that the document states that this is the only way that new alternative car parking areas can be funded. Perhaps that this is how the authors of this study see it, but if there were to be proper reform of local government with proper powers given to the town council, which would include more imaginative ways of raising funds then this could possibly be achieved. As someone who deals frequently with visitors to Clonakilty and the town centre, they are always pleasantly surprised and appreciative of the fact that we have free parking. This is a difference with many other towns that we should hold as a positive and promote as a way to encourage more people into the town centre.
Wheel Pump
Recommendation 7.7 – I agree with signalising the junction, but object to the monument being moved. As well as being ornamental, the Wheel Pump is also functional in that it still pumps water. Part of its attractiveness is that it is in the middle of the road!! If it was to be moved to another location nearby, how can we guarantee that there will be a water source at that point? The real solution to the traffic problem is one that was part of the councils proposals for many years, that being to attain at least the last house (and possibly more), on the southern side of Casement St. next to the entrance to Deasy’s Car Park, with a view to demolishing same and re-aligning the road so that the Wheel Pump remains where it has always been and traffic flow for heaving vehicles in improved.
Fax Bridge Roundabout
Recommendation add 7.15 – That the diameter of the roundabout at Fax Bridge be reduced in order to increase lane widths within the roundabout area. Currently, traffic exiting Croppy Quay heading for Tubbereen Road/Ring Road on the inside lane is often forced to stop as the vehicle travelling on the outer lane heading into Scally’s Super Valu/proceeding up Convent Road, cuts across the car on the inside lane. Also that Traffic Calming measures on the Convent Road entrance to the roundabout be put in place in the interests of safety.
Other proposals
That if McCurtain Hill is to be made one-way, then it should be from North to South (i.e. downhill), to facilitate people from north of the town to access the town centre area directly. I believe that Patrick St. should be allowed continue as two way traffic for the moment.
I hope that he above submission is taken into consideration in future discussions and debates about the Traffic and Transportation Report.
Go raibh maith agaibh,
Is mise le meas,
_____________________________
Cllr. Cionnaith Ó Súilleabháin.
