Limerick councillor wants landowners held responsible for adjoining footpaths

Cllr Stephen Keary.
Advertisement

FINE Gael councillor Stephen Keary has called on Limerick City and County Council to consider drafting a bye-law making all property owners responsible for footpaths adjacent to their premises.

Speaking at the recent Travel and Transportation Strategic Policy Committee (SPC) meeting, Cllr Keary deemed his proposal, seconded by Independent Ireland councillor John O’Donoghue, as “common sense”.

“Particularly when there’s snow or ice, if you have a premises that has footpaths that are laden with with snow or ice, they’re extremely dangerous, particularly for elderly people who have to pass through them,” he told the meeting.

“If five out of six clear the footpath, and the other doesn’t, a very serious accident could still take place with a fall. So I do believe that in other jurisdictions that is imposed quite seriously and there are heavy fines.”

Advertisement

During a visit to Boston, the Adare-Rathkeale area representative said that he met with an elderly relative of his wife, a woman in her 90s, who is out shovelling the footpaths when it snows.

“She’d be given hellfire by her neighbours, but they make a point of keeping the pavements clear at all times, and they use salt to keep the snow and frost thawed. I don’t believe it’s a major challenge for anyone who has a premises on the side of a street that they wouldn’t be able to keep their pathway, a clear way, free of ice and snow at all times during the winter. It’s not a big ask,” Cllr Keary opined.

Replying to the Fine Gael man, the Council said that maintenance of footpaths by landowners should be limited to superficial, non-destructive tasks, such as sweeping or clearing of debris that would not fall under the requirement of the need for a road open license.

“Any such maintenance does not relieve the roads authority of the duty to maintain footpaths. Anything significant in terms of maintenance by landowner could place a legal liability on such a landowner in the event of a public liability case. Any bye-law introduced would not place any additional legal obligation on landowners. So as such, no new bye-laws would be justified,” the Council commented.