Thurles Information

Tipperary parking shake-up to go to consultation in early 2026, with Thurles calls growing to scrap charges.

A countywide overhaul of parking charges and permits across Tipperary’s nine pay-parking towns is due to go to public consultation in early 2026, after councillors examined proposals at a series of workshops aimed at “harmonising” how parking is managed from town to town.

The nine towns currently within the Council’s eParking/pay-parking system are Thurles, Cahir, Carrick-on-Suir, Cashel, Clonmel, Nenagh, Roscrea, Templemore and Tipperary Town.

What’s in the proposals (as currently outlined)?
Three-tier classification: the nine towns would be grouped into Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3, with a different pricing structure depending on classification.
First 20 minutes free: the plan would introduce a formal 20-minute free-parking period in each town when implemented (reported for September 2026).
Charging hours: parking charges are proposed to apply 8.30am–6.30pm, every day except Sunday.
Permit overhaul: reforms are proposed for the full range of permits, including categories such as residential and visitor permits, alongside other permit types.
Off-street incentives and local “return” of revenue: the outline includes lower charges for off-street parking and a new approach to how parking income is used locally (with towns retaining a share of additional revenue above an agreed baseline).
Submissions urged: the public are being encouraged to make submissions, seeking calls for one hour duration in free parking, rather than 20 minutes.

Why Thurles is central to the debate.

Despite Tipperary County Council initiatives framed as boosting Thurles town-centre trade and footfall (including measures such as time-limited free parking promotions), local retailers have long argued the centre cannot compete with shopping centres offering easier/free parking.
They say that, following recent town-centre parking changes and the loss/uncertainty around key capacity, shopper activity has increasingly gravitated towards Thurles Shopping Centre and LIDL on Slievenamon Road, to the detriment of town-centre shops, because sufficient convenient parking has not been maintained with recent upgrading.

In Thurles, the conversation is being shaped by a series of recent town-centre parking and traffic changes, including:

• A push to increase short-stay turnover in central areas, following concerns that all-day parking by workers was squeezing out shoppers.
• Ongoing controversy around plans linked to Liberty Square, where parking spaces have been a recurring flashpoint.
• The introduction of updated local rules under Thurles Municipal District Parking Bye-Laws 2025, adopted by elected members and brought into effect in April 2025.
• Pressure on supply from the loss/closure of key town-centre parking, including the Munster Hotel car park closure, Market Area and The Source closures, alongside other long-term reductions referenced locally (reported as over 100 spaces).

“Abolish charges altogether” – the emerging Thurles position.
Against that backdrop, the argument being made by some in Thurles is straightforward: because the town centre has already absorbed significant disruption and a tightening of parking availability, parking charges should be abolished altogether rather than “rebalanced.”
There is precedent for this stance in the Liberty Square context, with calls previously made for parking charges to be suspended in Thurles during major works to help protect footfall.

What happens next ?
The Council is expected to publish consultation details in early 2026, allowing residents, traders and commuters to lodge submissions on:

• the tiering model,
• the free-parking period,
• charging hours and enforcement,
• permit eligibility and pricing,
• how parking income should be reinvested locally.

Tipperary County Council already uses its online portal to run formal public consultations on matters of upgrading and parking bye-law proposals, however, the petty exercise of same authority, by minor officials is perceived only as a “tick box” exercise, rather than a meaningful tool for future public consultative policy development.