Carrick-on-Suir Main Street parking petition of over 6,670 names to be submitted to Council

An action group campaigning to save 27 parking spaces on Carrick-on-Suir’s Main Street plans to present a petition of 6,676 signatures calling for retention of the street’s existing parking facilities to Carrick Municipal District before a meeting of its councillors on Thursday.

Main Street Business Initiative representatives will bring the petition to Carrick Town Hall on Thursday and have requested Cathaoirleach of Carrick MD Cllr Mark Fitzgerald to accept a letter from an independent accountant certifying that it contains 6,676 signatures.

The petition was collected by the group that represents over 75 traders, businesses, property owners and residents of Main Street and some adjacent streets between October and the end of December. It has been signed by residents from throughout the town as well as people from communities in Carrick’s hinterland who travel to the town to shop or do business.

Bobby Fitzgerald of the Main Street Business Initiative said the number of signatures collected in the petitions shows the strength of public support for the MBI’s campaign to stop the removal of parking spaces from the street.

Twenty-one parking spaces will be axed under the Carrick-on-Suir Regeneration Scheme facelift scheduled to happen in 2026.

The group is also campaigning for the restoration of six spaces temporarily removed during the Covid pandemic.

“We have a mandate that exceeds the first preference votes of the councillors who are in favour of the Regeneration Scheme revamp of the street,” said Mr Fitzgerald.

Planning Regulator investigates MBI complaint

The Planning Regulator, meanwhile, has notified the MBI that it’s undertaking a technical examination of the complaint it submitted to the watchdog regarding the Carrick Regeneration Scheme planning process.

The Office of the Planning Regulator informed the MBI just before Christmas that the examination was underway and that it will issue a “detailed response” regarding the MBI’s complaint upon its conclusion.

MBI asks Department to intervene

Meanwhile, the MBI has requested the Minister for Rural & Community Development or the Department’s officials to intervene and request the Council to re-enter talks with the group which says it would welcome a compromise solution being reached.

The Department responded that it would be inappropriate to do this citing the independence of local authorities.

The MBI also lodged complaints to the Department of Rural & Community Development, the Public Services Ombudsman and Southern Regional Assembly in relation to the Carrick-on-Suir Regeneration Scheme funding application and planning process.

The MBI received correspondence from the Department of Rural & Community Development concerning its complaint to that Department on December 17.

Principal Officer Robert Nicholson stated the Minister’s office was of the “view that a significant number of the matters raised (by the MBI in its complaint) fall outside the Department’s remit”.

The letter dated December 13, stated: “ whilst fully agreeing with the underlying position that public bodies must undertake their duties in compliance with prevailing law”... “it would not be proper for the Department to interject itself into matters, which, in their own right, have an established avenue of procedure and recourse”.

He advised that where there was a view that the actors referred to in the MBI’s complaint were “not acting appropriately and/or in accordance with prevailing law” then the “most appropriate recourse” would be to engage with the designated bodies, for example the Council executive and/or the Council's elected representatives, the appropriate regulatory authority or ultimately the courts.

Mr Nicholson concluded the Department cannot find the RRDF funding made available to support the delivery of the Carrick Regeneration Scheme can be invalidated based on the MBI’s view that the underlying planning process was itself invalid.

But he added: “Should the Council’s planning authority, elected representatives or An Bord Pleanála, as the appropriate appeals authority find issue with the planning via the established processes, which are in place, this would, of course, materially inform the Department's view.”

In its response, the MBI requested the Minister or Mr Nicholson to communicate with Tipperary County Council’s executive and request that “meaningful engagement” be commenced in the new year with the group.

“We feel this is a reasonable request as we would welcome a compromise solution to the concerns and grievances of more than 75 traders and businesses supported by a petition of over 6,000 signatures,” said the MBI.

The action group stressed it represented “decent hardworking people with generational businesses”, who were “very worried” about their livelihoods.

In turn, Mr Nicholson responded that the Council advised him it previously met with the MBI and “undertook engagement in a constructive manner”.

But on being notified the MBI had initiated a formal complaints process against the Council, the local authority’s position was that it would not be appropriate to meet with the group until the complaints had been adjudicated upon.

“Given the intended independence of our local government structures, it would not be appropriate for the Department to interject itself in to this process,” he concluded.

The MBI wrote back to Mr Nicholson last week and gave its opinion that the Council hadn’t so far engaged with the group in a meaningful manner. It “listened and gave lip service only”, the group claimed

“We feel that an opportunity has now been missed because if a compromise resolution was reached, we would have considered a withdrawal of our complaint.”

In a press statement the MBI said. “We expected this political response from the Minister. Everyone in officialdom wants us to go away.

“The group believes they will do everything they can to bury our concerns and genuine grievances because they are too far into the Rural Regeneration Development Fund process.

The MBI went onto state that it was a real pity the Council and its elected members were not willing to engage or look at any form of compromise.

“Notwithstanding we await the Planning Regulator’s detailed findings and will consider further the legal option available to us. Before our campaign is completed, there will be a lot of lessons learned.”

The MBI said it planned to make its complaints to Department of Rural & Community Development, Planning Authority, Public Services Ombudsman and Southern Regional Assembly available to Carrick MD's public representatives.

Carrick-on-Suir Municipal District responds to the Main Street Business Initiative

Carrick-on-Suir Municipal District said it respects the rights of any group to organise a petition, appreciates the concerns of all who sign one and promised to examine any petition it receives.

In a statement responding to the MBI, Carrick MD Director of Services Brian Beck said the District has not yet received any petition but understands one may be submitted in the coming weeks. “We will ensure that we take the time to examine any petition submitted to us.

“However, it should be noted in recent months we have been engaging on a one-to-one basis with businesses from Carrick to listen to their concerns and ideas as to how we can work together to support economic activity in the town.

“We have also received significant correspondence directly to our offices from individuals and businesses who support the regeneration works.

Mr Beck said the MBI had at no time provided the Municipal District with copies of any of the complaints it has submitted.

“As such the MD is not privy to the allegations that have been made against it, apart from the contents of press releases issued by MBI over recent months.  

 “We understand from The Nationalist that the Department of Rural & Community Development, along with the Office of the Planning Regulator have now written to MBI. The Municipal District has not received copies of any correspondence to MBI.

“From information provided to us by The Nationalist as to the contents of the correspondence, we understand the Department of Rural & Community Development have decided not to take any action against the Council.

“We welcome this outcome and believe it reflects positively on the approach of the Municipal District to ensuring the people, businesses and communities of Carrick benefit from this €17.9 million investment in their town.

In relation to the MBI’s claim that the District and its elected members are unwilling to engage with the group, he reiterated that when the group was set up last May, the District “immediately responded” to the MBI’s request to meet with its members.

“We continued to engage with MBI during 2024.

“It was made clear to MBI that the Municipal District would engage constructively to ensure traders and property owners on Main Street could be supported during the construction works, identify opportunities to provide additional car parking close to Main Street and put in place a plan to seek to increase the number of people coming into the town centre.

“The decision by MBI to lodge formal complaints to the Department and State agencies against the €17.9m investment in Carrick, was made solely by them.

“This action has placed the Municipal District into a number of formal complaint procedures, which we as a public body, must respect.

Mr Beck concluded the Municipal District will continue to work on behalf of the people and businesses of Carrick in 2025. The recent Tractors and Tudors Festival highlighted the town’s potential to be a wonderful place to live, work and visit. 

“The MD will continue to actively seek further funding to develop new and innovative ideas to keep this momentum going and build on each successful project to secure the town’s future.”