Lukewarm welcome for Canal Avenue plan despite promises over rights of existing tenants

The masterplan for the Canal Avenue Regeneration project is now live on the Westmeath County Council website, together with a video that takes visitors on a virtual walk-through of the area as it will be when the project is brought to fruition.

The plan is for essentially a triangular-shaped development starting from Buckley’s car park, running to a point beyond the Springfield Tunnel, along the canal almost as far as St Agnes’s Cottages, and then back to Buckley’s car park.

A linear park is to run alongside the Brosna from Buckley’s car park to the Royal Canal; new apartments and townhouses will be built on a number of sites within the project area, and there is provision for a nursing home and a ‘later living’ complex for older people.

The plan was presented to members of the Mullingar Municipal District at their February monthly meeting – but it didn’t get a universal thumbs up, as some members expressed concerns about the potential effects of new housing developments on infrastructure and the community.

Councillors also warned that the district’s plan not to put existing social housing in that area back into use after the current occupants die was a waste of existing stock, and would lead to dereliction in the area.

There were also concerns about the impact on parking, and a number of councillors regretted that the plan did not include a multi-storey car park.

“The plan seeks to enable the comprehensive regeneration of the area and to encourage economic, social and community development by creating a highly sustainable and integrated mixed use corridor in Mullingar,” Lorraine Middleton, executive planner with Westmeath County Council, told district members as she gave the presentation on what the plan involves.

It is a 20-year plan, and the short-term targets will be active land management, demolition of derelict properties, and delivery of the first phase of the linear park and of the ‘Gateway Link’ – a space connecting the canal with the park and also with Friars Mill Road. That phase would include enabling works and marketing of sites.

The medium term priorities would be improvement of the greenway section along the canal front, delivery of the Gateway apartment building, the nursing home and later living homes, street improvements on McCurtain Street.

These phases will, she explained, open the way for the longer-term objective, which is the provision of the rest of the housing.

Ms Middleton explained that the council’s own Part VIII project, Cornmill, which is to provide 32 housing units, will mark the beginning of the transformation and regeneration of the area.

Criticism of plan

Criticism of the plan was led by Cllr Mick Dollard, who described it as being in many ways an opportunity lost. He noted that the plan involved removal of a lot of the existing car parks despite the fact that you had Buckley’s supermarket in the area, Dunnes Stores nearby, and also Cusack Park. It was his view that in fact the area would have benefited from a multi-storey car park.

Cllr Dollard also felt there was an over-emphasis on residential development, including three social housing complexes, as well as the existing Friars Mill Court (12 units), Canal Court (11 units) and the four maisonettes on Friars Mill Road, and there should have been more mixed use development planned.

“There’s a lot of fears and apprehensions among elderly and vulnerable residents in OPD complexes there, particularly the maisonettes,” he stated, claiming some have been told they will have to move as some of those homes will be removed.

“What is envisaged now for the existing social housing provision units down there?” he asked, going on to enquire whether these were all going to have to be knocked.

Cllr Denis Leonard commented that while all development was welcome: “It has to be the right development at the right location and to the right scale, with the right infrastructure and the right access.” He shared Cllr Dollard’s concerns over the lack of parking, and over the lack of a mixed use dimension to the plan.

Also in agreement with Cllr Dollard’s reservations was Cllr Ken Glynn, especially on the failure to provide car spaces, stating that the attempts to remove cars from town centres was “crazy stuff” that was not in touch with reality.

Cllr Andrew Duncan also had misgivings over what he termed the “anti-car-type measures” being imposed from national level. “The best way to describe them is ludicrous,” he said.

Cllr Emily Wallace also appealed for reason on the car issue: “The car and the human are going to have to coexist,” she said, adding that the views of residents, retailers and the Chamber of Commerce all need to be taken into account.

The view of Cllr Bill Collentine was that it was a good development, but that there was a need for parking because traders need support by allowing people to come in and park in the town. He also would have liked to have seen space for workshops, small business start-ups and offices.

Cllr Frank McDermott asked how many residential units would be provided – and how many of them would need cars, although he could see merit in having a multi-storey car park where Buckley’s is.

Also in favour of a multi-storey car park was Cllr Aoife Davitt, who went on to welcome the provision in the project of homes for older people, close to shops and services. She wondered if there would also be homes there for people with additional needs.

The mayor of the municipal district, Cllr John Shaw, said he liked “some aspects” of the development, including the Block A residential units and the linear park. He was, however, fearful of the danger of over-development of the site in terms of residential unit numbers and the impact that could have, and felt more thought was needed on the parking question, given the number of people from out of town who need to drive in to shop or to attend matches at Cusack Park.

Responding to points made, Ms Middleton said that even with the linear park taking up some space at Buckley’s, 90 per cent of the car parking spaces would be retained.

During the public consultation, it had emerged that there were not many ways of coming off the greenway, and so the idea of the linear park was devised as a space for taking people from the greenway to town. Addressing Cllr Wallace’s point about discussing the plan with interested parties, Ms Middleton stated that public consultation had been undertaken and the feedback had been very positive.

Continuing, Ms Middleton said that the plan was about regeneration, and to the forefront was the effort of trying to balance that with the needs of the wider town, and it was underpinned by an economic feasibility study and the work of transport engineers who factored in Active Travel requirements as well.

At the same time, she added it was “concept”, and aimed at showing the potential of what could happen: “It’s a non-statutory master plan,” she said, going on to add that the finer detail versions of the plan allow for mixed purpose use of the ground level of buildings.

Ms Middleton went on to say this was a long-term plan and there is no intention to take any of the existing residents out of social properties.

Director of services Deirdre Reilly reiterated this point: “This is a 20-year plan and at present there is no intention of moving anybody out of social housing there. And I can give you a copy of the letter that was issued to those residents when we did the walk around seeing them and that states very clearly that we’re not moving anybody who’s there,” she said.

On the subject of acquisition of privately-owned properties identified in the plan, a lot would have to happen before the council would venture down that road, she said.

On the subject of a multi-storey car park, Ms Reilly told members that had been investigated in the context of the Blackhall regeneration plan – but it turned out that at that time it would have cost over €18m, and therefore it would likely cost more than that now.

Cllrs Mick Dollard and Ken Glynn were not satisfied with the approach being taken towards the social housing units, arguing that leaving them vacant once the current tenants have died was effectively creating dereliction in the area.

“It’s just something we have to watch, you know, because the only way you can work with developers like this is to put your eggs in one basket,” responded Ms Reilly.

“We can’t be spending money on doing up something that we may in the short term be knocking down to build something better, you know, so that’s why we’re just trying to manage what we have there. And we want to keep people in their homes and we don’t want to cause that fear.”

If, however, it did transpire that the council was ending up with derelict properties, obviously they might have to change their minds on that,” she said.

westmeathcoco.ie/en/ourservices/regeneration/canalavenueandenvironsregeneration