Upload
sean-o-hargain
View
122
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
This is the report commmissioned by Kilkenny Borough Council in 2006 into the best sites and type of public skate park for Kilkenny city.
Citation preview
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to examine the feasibility of the opening
of a skate park in Kilkenny city. The report outlines the important
critical success factors for such a park based on research on what
other providers have found over the past few years. These factors are
as follows:
o Design
o Insurance, Health and Safety
o Supervision
o Usage
o Local Support
o Fencing
o Partnerships
o Costings
These factors are used as a filter for examining possible sites near to
the city centre. Several such sites are identified and each is presented
outlining their usefulness for development. These sites are as follows:
o Riverside Walk – Handball Alley
o River Breaga/Nore confluence
o Water Barracks Area 1
o Water Barracks Area 2
o The Closh
An estimate of the possible costs of each site is based on figures for
site development and the provision of the skate ramps to each site.
1
The Authors feel that there is ample opportunity for building a skate
park in the area and furthermore that such a development should be
coupled with other activities for a variety of reasons. Skate boarding
has become an issue in Kilkenny and elsewhere because of the
dangers and inconvenience associated with street skating. There will
inevitably be some resistance to a skate park development no matter
where it is sited. Also there are the issues of security and usage of a
skating area and the Authors believe that if coupled with other
activities some of these issues will be addressed. To this end the report
identifies sites that have other development opportunities for the city.
The Appendices provide further information on a range of issues about
the skate park development.
2
INTRODUCTION
The provision of a Skate Park in Kilkenny has many advantages:
- Provide much needed youth facilities
- Regeneration of potential sites
- Development of physical activity provision for young
people
- Allow communities to work together
- Skills development for young people
- Development of ‘cultural hub’ in areas of youth interest
- Deliver a number of strategic aims for key
organisations
Kilkenny has a number of potential sites that would meet the criteria
needed for such a development and this report identifies in some detail
a number of key issues that will need to be addressed in order to
determine whether or not a skate park is a suitable asset for Kilkenny.
We have, through action based consultation, and investigative
research, been able to reveal and highlight the key issues and areas
of understanding that are required before embarking on any
development work.
The Department of the Environment recently announced funding for
the construction of skateboard parks in Ireland, and invited each City
and County Council to submit proposals to develop these facilities.
Some 21 Councils have already tendered for and been awarded
funding to build such facilities. (See Appendix 6). Though Kilkenny did
not make an application for this funding, at a recent local visit by the
relevant Minister (Mr. Dick Roche) the Department was strongly
3
supportive of a future bid by Kilkenny.
It is envisaged that this funding will have few, if any conditions
attached and presents a real opportunity for Kilkenny Councils to
provide a much needed facility. The amount of money awarded can be
used as part or full funding for skate parks. Funding from the
Department has varied from €35,000 to €150,000 with 14 of the 21
awards being over €100,000.
In examining the potential for such a development in Kilkenny,
Enterprise Actions Ltd. have paid particular attention to linking the new
park to other potential or existing facilities. This has been done to:
– Encourage the use of the facility
– Counter some of the objections that may arise in the
planning phase
– Provide co-financing opportunities
– Link with other sports clubs
– Support area rejuvenation
– Develop new partnerships with other service providers in
imaginative and innovative ways
It is entirely feasible that a suitable skate park facility can be provided
by Kilkenny local authorities, the critical questions that remain to be
answered however include; where, at what cost, how often it would be
used. Enterprise Actions Ltd have assessed the potential for a skate
park, and have highlighted issues and concerns, while presenting the
key factors that are needed to inform the future decisions the Council
may take.
4
1. METHODOLOGY
Consultation
Consultation took many forms, the Authors contacted local authorities
who host skate parks, and also sought advice and information from
private Skate Parks. We also consulted with schools, the Sports
Partnership, and the Council. An open meeting was held with skaters
locally that focussed mainly around design issues and what they
viewed as the most important success factors in a skate park. Three
Borough Councillors attended this meeting. This discussion meeting
was prompted by the use of skate park designs from the UK to
stimulate debate and allow for critical analysis of what would and
would not work here. Many of the skaters were well informed and had
experience of skating in parks elsewhere.
We also attempted to include the Gardai, but despite numerous calls
and contacts, this was not possible in the time frame of the report.
However, we strongly recommend that before a park is developed that
the Community Officer be consulted.
Liaison with the Community and Enterprise section of the Council was
maintained throughout the writing of the report.
Design, site and costings
We gathered a range of information from a range of suppliers, taking
on board comments from skaters, and those who run skate parks.
This allowed us to look at various designs, sizes, materials, and ensure
we were well briefed in terms of skateability and popularity. An
important aspect of any new facility will be on going costs – such as
5
maintenance and repairs and a number of suppliers were happy to
provide us with information.
Operational Models
Research was undertaken to investigate the most common forms of
skate park provision, and via consultation with skaters, suppliers and
providers, a list of ‘pros and cons’ were developed for each model –
leading to our investigating the two models with the least ‘cons’. After
this was completed we were able to assess Insurance and Health and
Safety issues more thoroughly. This aspect of our study is important
as it shows why we have developed our feasibility around the
development of outdoor parks. However, we have included the full list
so that Officers and Councillors can be made aware of all the pros and
cons that exist within each operational model.
Insurance and Health & Safety
A full study of the practical details of insurance and Health and Safety
issues was undertaken so as to inform the examination of potential
sites locally. Research also involved the need for fencing, lighting and
compliance with BSI safety standards.
Sites
Site visits were conducted, taking on board a number of critical issues,
informed by consultation with suppliers, providers and skaters. It
became obvious early on that the importance of providing the right
venue is of paramount importance to the future success of the
facility. We have compiled a list of sites that we feel have good
potential, and also provide a focus of regeneration to under used
facilities or areas of the City. We feel that our explorations, sometimes
in quiet, out of the way places have revealed an exciting number of
6
prospective sites, as early consultation showed that we needed to be
innovative and look beyond the obvious in this regard. A number of
skaters that took part in the Consultation Evening were invited to visit
the sites to make suggestions, and review their location and potential.
The most suitable sites were examined from a variety of perspectives
and some financial projections were arrived at in conjunction with
Council officials.
Partnerships
A number of interested parties were met or telephoned to discuss
possible partnerships or linkages for a skate park – including schools
and sports providers. The Authors strongly advise that as many
partners as possible are included in the Park development to ensure
increased usage and security and to help spread the development
costs.
7
2. CRITICAL ISSUES
Enterprise Actions Ltd. feel it necessary to look at the wider contextual
issues regarding the provision of a skate park. These issues are
critical in determining the type of park and location that is finally
decided upon. The critical issues we identified are:
I. Design
II. Insurance, Health and Safety
III. Supervision
IV. Usage
V. Local Support
VI. Fencing
VII. Partnerships
VIII. Costings
I. Design
Consultation with skaters revealed that preferred designs include
street obstacles – steps, rails, benches etc. – indeed the type of
obstacle that they use in ‘The Street’ taking advantage of street
furniture and the urban landscape to perform tricks and refine their
style. Some felt that the archetypical feature of a skate park – the half
pipe, was out of favour, and that in some cases the obstacles provided
were too difficult to manage – too high, or inclined to break the flow of
certain moves. However, it would be unwise to reject the more
advanced obstacles, such as half pipes and bowls, as skaters will
inevitably progress in their sport. With more difficult ramps in place,
visiting ‘expert’ demonstrations become possible, as do competitions
8
and multi-use - inline skates, BMX - for example could also be provided
for.
Bowl type designs are becoming increasingly popular. This is an
undulating concrete base that follows the contours of the landscape
and has features built into it that form a continuous ride for the
skaters. The features are also formed in concrete and there is drainage
built into the base to allow for run-off from the lower parts of the bowl.
These bowls also have the advantage of being quieter than above
ground ramps. Many people consider them more aesthetically pleasing
than other parks and of course they are cheaper to maintain. The
parks being built in Bushy Park in Dublin and in Gorey in Co Wexford
are of this style. However, some skater’s have expressed that a
certain degree of skill is needed when using these structures, and it
would be advisable to keep in mind that most ‘amateur’ skaters prefer
‘street’ style obstacles in addition to bowl type, hence the possible
need for bowls and some above ground modular structures.
It is important that various grades of ramps be included in whatever
design is eventually opted for. Though the numbers of committed
skaters may be small in the area now, if the facilities are provided then
more will participate. These beginners need to be properly
accommodated in the park and given the space to learn so that they
will progress to more advanced levels in time.
Skaters are usually of school age, so it is important to cater for their
needs in terms of the times they may use the park – after school, in
the evening, and apart from school holidays at weekends. To ensure
usage in the winter, and in bad weather, some form of lighting may
9
well be necessary, as well as some form of roof covering creating a
hybrid indoor/outdoor style park.
II. Insurance and Health & Safety
The most difficult stumbling block to operating a skate park over the
past years has been the issue of insurance. With the growth of skate
parks in the UK and Europe, and the issuing of guidelines from various
agencies, the public body insurers in Ireland have relaxed the
conditions imposed on the operators of parks and this has opened up
new avenues for their development. In short, the provision of
unsupervised outdoor parks is now more feasible than it once was.
In order to satisfy most insurers, Skate parks and the way they are
installed and managed, need to comply with PAS30 and 35 :2002 of
the British Safety Institute (BSI). The BSI guidelines, released in 2002,
lay down the safety requirements and summarize the relevant design
issues for skate and similar parks. The guidelines aim to provide a
facility that is exciting but safe, specifying safety requirements to
protect users and spectators from hazards. PAS30 & 35:2002 are
generally the safety codes that are adopted across Europe. It should
be noted that in 2006/7 there will be new EU regulations issued .
It is envisaged that these new regulations will be stricter than at
present, so any new facilities should expect to fully comply with all
safety standards when designing new parks.
In addition to the BSI guidelines, the Irish Public Bodies Mutual
Insurances has set conditions for the insurance to cover the
operations of the parks.(See appendix 1) The main advantage of the
10
new regulations is that constant supervision of the parks is NOT
necessary for compliance with the regulations. This eliminates a huge
expense on the on-going costs of the park and one of the major
reasons for park failures in the past.
For the Council to comply with the IPBMI guidelines skate park
operators need to satisfy a range of requirements and a summary of
these are set out in Appendix 1 under IPBMI.
III. Supervision.
Part of the availability of new facilities is down to the issue of
supervision. Up to recently it was an insurance requirement that such
parks be supervised when open. This obviously presented a huge cost
and logisitical challenge to the operators. Many of the Councils are now
considering opening parks that will have full, easy and open access to
all, with a supervisory presence just to check on the condition of the
park regularly. Though this is tempting, the situation is a little more
complicated than just looking at the cost implications. The skaters are
viewed by many other youth groups as outcasts and a little bit ‘nerdy’
and so can be an easy target for some rough treatment. In the early
days of the skate park it would be important that the park not develop
a bad name amongst skaters and so the Authors feel that at least
some supervision should be made available. Parents will also be wary
at first of how safe their child(ren) will be in the park and any initial
trouble period will take a long time to reverse. The Council have a
recent example of the issues around supervision in the recently opened
playparks in the City. This highlights some of the issues at stake. An
indoor or enclosed park may have advantages over an open park in
this respect. If the skaters are involved in the design and planning of
the park, it is not unreasonable to suggest to them that the older
11
members form some sort of group, with Ossory Youth Services
providing some leadership skills. These individuals could then be
involved in the arranging of a limited amount of the supervision. If
individual skaters are not forthcoming with this initiative, it points to
some degree to their eventual usage of the park. Obviously there are
younger skaters who cannot be required to take part in this
programme but others could display ownership responsibilities. Older
skaters may be encouraged to take on a coaching role in the facility
and so help build a club atmosphere. Further research should also be
undertaken to encourage youth organizations in the supervision of the
parks.
The Garda cannot be expected to provide supervision for this type of
facility and it would be the wrong type of supervision anyway because
it may seem that ‘trouble’ is expected. Also it should be noted that
there may be changes in bye-laws needed if the Garda are to be in a
position to directly access the park in the case of trouble.
IV. Usage
As in other places, the skaters point out that they will still use Kilkenny
City Centre when the park is established. This is for various reasons:
– Because it is where they gather traditionally
– It is so central
– Because a certain percentage of them like the ‘outcast’
nature of skating and being identified as such
Skating defines more than just a sporting intention but also a way of
life, an attitude, an image and sometimes just a fashion accessory.
One judgement the Councillors will have to make is how much use the
12
park will get as time goes on. The limited experience in this country of
municipal parks makes it hard to judge such usage in advance.
The skaters are convinced that huge numbers will come out to use a
good park, however the Authors have concerns. Having spoken to
people who have been around such facilities for a number of years
they suggest that usage is periodic rather than continuous, that the
skaters are not interested in being organised, that they prefer the
street to the park and that most skaters maintain their interest only
between the years of 13 and 16/17. Obviously skaters deny these
impressions and say that this is all mainly because no facilities have
been provided to date and it is so ‘difficult’ to be a skater that it is not
surprising so many people give up. As a youth facility, a Skate Park is
more likely to attract only boys, unless youth leaders work with girl’s
groups to build teams and skills amongst the girls.
V. Local Support
It is important that whatever site is chosen, it should be one where
local residents are supportive of the proposal. In selecting a site The
Council should hold meetings with local resident’s associations and
actively campaign for their support. People in other localities have
expressed concern about the siting of a skate park in their area,
because skaters are seen as ‘outsiders’ and have a ‘bad image’
(possibly because of their use of the streets to date). However
unfounded the communities fears are, these issues must be addressed.
The local community can offer a lot of passive security to the park and
their support can bolster this considerably.
Involving local Youth groups in the early stages of the park
development would be an important part of building interest in using
13
the park and a sense of ownership amongst the youth. If the park area
can incorporate several activities this will greatly improve the chances
of continued use and improve the security aspect of the development.
VI. Fencing
The issue of the need for fencing is unclear at present. The insurance
companies are not stating what exact type of fencing will be required
and as noted above, some Council’s have opted for minimal fencing
with just a corral type fence to prevent accidents (though currently
compliance with PAS 30 and 35 does rely on suitable fencing). One
argument is the fact that high security type fencing is a challenge to
the wrong people to attempt to break into the park when unattended.
It also creates the wrong environment for people to play in. There is
also the matter of then opening and closing the park and asking people
to leave at a particular time. This adds to the expense of running the
park. Obviously the Council has wardens that currently open and close
parks and public conveniences at given times and their duties could be
extended to include the skate park. The range of Council responses to
this question is quite wide and is usually established in negotiation with
the legal advisers of each Council. The insurers refer to the safety
guidelines PAS 30 and 35 but these are not overly prescriptive in this
regard.
VII. Partnerships
The idea of a stand alone skate park has several difficulties from both
a site location and operational point of view. The Authors feel that the
14
possibility of partnering with some organisation, club or association
should be explored when reviewing potential sites. It is important that
the skate park be used as much as possible and creating a sense of
activity is easier done in combination with others. To this end several
clubs, schools and associations were approached in the course of this
study to ascertain their willingness to become involved in the skate
park development.
Initially, the Authors felt that this might provide access to a much
needed site as well as offering the supervisory benefits. However, the
provision of a site in the City is not an issue here as there are several
suitable sites available. The changes in insurance requirements means
that supervision is not the costly imperative it once was. The issue of
partnership has become more one of ‘combining’ and looking at sites
to see if there are other symbiotic developments that could be linked
to the park. For instance, other compatible activities would include in-
line hockey, roller blading, BMX-ing, and other ‘action’ sports such as a
climbing wall. However, other linked activities are also feasible and in
examining the favoured sites below some consideration of possible
linked activity is suggested.
Sports Partnership. The Kilkenny Sports and Recreational Partnership
represents most of the major sports associations in the county. The
Partnership was contacted and a presentation made to their November
meeting about the possibility of providing a space in one of the local
sports facilities for the proposed skate park. Though this presentation
was well received it did not lead to any viable suggestions that could
be followed up. The Sports Partnership itself does not have a strategy
around the issue of minority youth sports such as skating, bmx biking
or roller blading. The Partnership focuses on programmes for particular
15
target groups, including Youth. There is an Action for Youth
programme that is based in 2 schools locally and it is suggested that
as and when the skate park is established that contact be made with
the Partnership in order to help the promotion of the park amongst the
local young people.
Schools. Kieran’s college, Presentation Secondary School and the
Loreto convent were identified as those schools with most potential as
they had developed extra curricular activity on an on-going basis.
However, the principals of the schools, though positive towards the
move, felt that they either had not the space or the commitment to
engage with the idea.
With the assistance of the offices of the VEC a contact was made with
all the schools in the area, outlining the idea and how the partnership
might work but again no expression of intent was made by any school.
The Authors believe that there is a genuine support for the idea of a
skate park from within the school system and that this should be
tapped as the park becomes a reality. The schools could help organise
those who are interested in using the park, eventually having school
teams that would help develop local competition. It would be a good
way of trying to include the skaters, many of whom feel outcast from
mainstream systems. The school grounds have invariably got some
hard surface areas that could be used for the placement of temporary
ramps to help build interest in the initial stages of the park’s
development.
16
Private Park. Kilkenny is unusual in having one of the very few private
skate parks in the Country based in Kiltorcan, Thomastown. The
Authors met with the Proprietor of this park and discussed various
issues at length with him. Obviously with his experience he had some
valuable comments to make, but asked us not to connect him
specifically to any comment. We would like to acknowledge that his
comments have informed this document.
VIII. Costings
The issue of the cost of the skate park is difficult to ascertain at this
stage as there are too many variables left undecided. All of the sites
detailed below have different cost implications. Some would need more
fencing than others, some would need more preparatory ‘groundworks’
and others have costs of roofing and lighting. What the Authors have
set out below are some of the important issues that affect how much
the park will cost the Council to set up.
The over riding issue is how much the Council is prepared to spend on
the park. This is not just a matter as to how much may be available
from the Department of the Environment as the question of matching
funding has to be decided. The monies allocated to date vary from
€35,000 up to €150,000 and average at around €100.000. However,
some Councils are providing some extra funding to the parks though
this is not a criterion for the funding. The Gorey Skate Park has
received Department funding of €110,000 and Wexford County Council
is matching this with a further €130,000. This is, we believe the largest
spend in the country and will be for a ‘bowl’ type park (see Appendices
2 and 6 ) of 700 square metres in size. The Council needs to consider
the issue of ‘hard cash’ it might make available and also what, if any,
17
other services it may contribute in terms of time and expertise from
within their own staff.
Obviously there is the question of the park size and for the sites
examined in detail below this is an open question. By that we mean
that there is more than enough space available at each site to cater for
a decent sized park. So the Council needs to decide on how big an area
to fence off to provide the skating area. A small park would be around
150 square metres and most parks would be between 200 and 300
square metres, and as noted above the largest park planned is of 700
square metres.. The sites identified below have all got more than 300
square metres of useable area available for conversion into a park.
(see Section 4)
Decisions need to be made about the type of fencing to be erected. As
stated above the insurance requirements are vague on this and leave it
up to the Councils themselves to decide on what exactly would be
used. It varies between a low corral type fence and some quite high
netting fence of 2.4 metres in height. The cost per running metre of
these fences varies quite substantially and each site has different
lengths of fencing needed.
Concrete is the most common ground surface used in skate parks and
this can be estimated at €50 per square metre. This would be a price
for laying and power floating once the ground has been prepared to a
reasonable condition. The various sites have different amounts of
groundwork needed to prepare the site.
Roofing and lighting. Two of the sites detailed below are suitable for
the development as covered areas and this would involve some
18
structural steel works and roof cladding materials. The resultant park
would be ‘semi-enclosed’, by which we mean that they would not be
indoor parks but would be weather proof yet open. An estimate for the
cost of such a covering is given in the details of these sites.
The number and type of ramps also has a bearing on the cost of the
park and contact was made with suppliers to ascertain the
approximate cost of providing and installing such equipment. Again the
size and nature of the park affects this cost but it is safe to assume
that between €30,000 and €50,000 would cover this cost. In costing
each site we have assumed a constant cost of €40,000 for each site as
an indicative figure. More detail on the types of equipment are outlined
within Appendices 2 and 6.
As regards the running costs of the parks this is basically down to the
cost of supervision, some maintenance of the equipment, grounds
maintenance, disposal of rubbish, inspection costs to meet insurance
requirements and some electricity where lighting is provided. The
supervision is the cost of a park warden to check the park daily when
open over the whole year and also the cost of more intense
supervision in the first three months, and possibly beyond this time
frame.
In the examination of the sites below a rough guide price on what the
cost of the park might be is given. However, it is stressed that this is
only a ‘guesstimate’ and is not a comparative figure between each site
because of the differences in the nature of each site. To try to keep
consistency it is assumed that each park would be around 300 metres
in size and that the ramps would cost €40,000 in each park. Fencing is
19
assumed to be 2,4 metres in height and is costed at €85 per linear
metre.
Our costings do not include any budgets for the provision of Council
staff in developing these parks.
20
3. OPERATIONAL MODELS:
Although a full business model is inappropriate at this stage of a
feasibility review, it is important to assess the types of park that could
be possible, which will in turn determine how they operate and how
they are managed. Partnership approaches have also been considered,
and these are dealt with in the following chapter. For ease of use we
have looked at the pros and cons of the different types of park that
could be possible, and have made some observations on each.
I. Indoor – supervised facility – Which provides potential for
franchising and strong income generation
II. Outdoor – supervised facility – which can reduce liability issues
III. Outdoor – free standing where the public can come and skate on
their own, at their own risk
IV. Mobile – a facility that can be used as a temporary fixture in a
range of settings
21
I. INDOOR FACILITY
PROS
All weather facility allows for gate money and income generationCan be open at night and in the evenings – a popular time for
skatersCan be monitored – reducing risk of Anti Social BehaviourWooden ramps are more feasible – which are more comfortable
for skaters, arguably some say a safer surfaceEasier to supervise – safer for younger skatersMore vandal proofMore opportunities for marketing and promotional eventsFranchising opportunities for related activity – shops, youth
centre etc.Users are ‘off the streets’ and relatively safe while using the
buildingFirst aid room can be an option
CONS
Costly – large, indoor space needed at least 150sq.mAdditional costs include lighting, cleaning, heating, air
conditioning, security, and other building maintenance
issuesBuilding will need to be staffedNeed to ensure enough space within the building to
minimise collisions, and smooth transitions between
obstacles – difficult in a confined spaceNoisy Needs air conditioningFinding a suitable venue, and preparing it could use up a
lot of time Can become crowdedStreet skaters prefer outdoor parksNeed to charge a fairly hefty entrance fee/membership fee to
cover costs
22
23
II. OUTDOOR FACILITY - SUPERVISED
PROS
Usually, more space is available outdoors, leading to bigger park
– more popular with skaters, and saferCan be fenced off for securitySkate Park designs can be adapted after installation Can use durable, popular, and reasonably safe concrete where
necessaryObstacles can be more ‘unique’ leading to greater popularityMore realistic ‘street skate’ atmosphere – popular amongst
young peopleCheaper than an indoor facilityCan charge entrance fee/membership fee if the facility is fencedCan be monitored – reducing risk of Anti Social Behaviour
CONS
Security can be an issue – needs to be secured when not in
useCannot be used in certain weather conditionsCan be a target for vandalsSupervision may be difficult logisticallyUsage limited to daylight hours – unless floodlighting is
providedThe provision of some sort of covering/shelter may be
required to ensure usage
III. OUTDOOR FACILITY – UNSUPERVISED
24
PROS
Cheap to installBoarders can be supervised by parents and peers if necessaryYouth have the opportunity to develop a sense of ‘ownership’ of the
park – for them, by them, and supervised by themDoes away with the costs associated with supervisionNo need for membershipNew relaxed insurance laws make this more of a possibilitySkaters can use the facility when they choose to
CONS
Unless fenced off, does not comply to European Safety CriteriaTarget for vandalsCan be a focal point for ‘loitering’ and bullying – which could push
skaters back on the streetWill not be able to charge for use – no income streamUnable to develop a strategic sports profile for KilkennyAs fencing is required, staff will be needed to lock up
IV. MOBILE SKATE PARK
PROS
Can meet young peoples needs where they areEncourages participation in sportsEncourages youth development in a variety of settingsEasy to store (in a standard car park space)Is suitable as a starter provision, possibly before a permanent
park is consideredIs a cost effective provision across a widely spread populationUseful where planning permission for a static Skate Park may not
be availableA mobile park can be ‘shared’ by a variety of groups giving the
maximum enjoyment for the minimum cost
25
Park design can change to suit ability of rider – and/or to reduce
rider becoming bored with the layout – adapts to his or her level
of skillGood opportunity for private/public sector partnership
CONS
Hard to establish a sense of place/cultural hub around mobile
facilityWill need to be packed up, driven, erected and dismantled at the
end of each session – causing extra expense in terms of staffingWill need careful marketing to ensure skaters know where and
when it will be in placeModular design may be limitingUnsuitable for demonstrationsSitings will need to be found on a regular basis – leading to
insecurityCannot be left overnight as it is not vandal proof (unless on
guaranteed secure site)Not a particularly popular option with skaters – particularly street
skatersDrivers will need training in constructing and dismantling the
equipmentStorage is a key issueWill need regular checking to ensure safetyRequires smooth surfaces for placement –and skateability
With regard to these findings, we have concentrated on the two
outdoor options, as the ‘pros’ currently outweigh the ‘cons’
-unlike the mobile facility, or the indoor facility. However, there
are possibilities for certain sites to develop a ‘hybrid’ type park
that would have many advantages, as outlined in the tables
26
above. The Council will need to balance the ideas of supervision,
safety and costs very carefully when making future decisions, as
the issue of supervision has only recently been relaxed in terms
of insurance, and may well change again in the future.
As stated earlier, Kilkenny is blessed with having several site
options open to the Council to develop. The next section deals
with the various favourite sites identified and these are examined
in relation to the critical success factors.
27
4. SITES
This section deals with the identification and assessment of several
sites in the city environs.
Each of the sites are examined under the following criteria:
I. Security/ Fencing
II. Access
III. Proximity to City Centre
IV. Skate-ability
V. Town Development
VI. Noise Control
VII. Covering & Lighting
VIII. Other
IX. Costs
The sites we recommend for further investigation include:
a) Michael Street – Handball Alley
b) River Breaga/Nore confluence
c) Water Barracks Area 1
d) Water Barracks Area 2
e) The Closh
28
a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.
This is a handball alley park with a disused basketball court and some
grass areas. It is bounded by the road, Michael Street, on one side, St
John’s primary school grounds and the new river walk. It has great
potential as a skate park for a variety of reasons. A really imaginative
use of this area would be to retain the ball alleys and to roof them and
open a connection in the current dividing wall. It is not suggested to
try to make an indoor park but a type of ‘middle ground’ structure.
Using a modern sheeting material that is quite lightweight and leaving
open screen windows in the walls. The area would offer a degree of
weatherproofing, yet is light and airy, giving year round use of the
facility with easy security at the entrances.
a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.
29
a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.
a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.
30
I. Security/ Fencing: this area could be fenced off easily as there are
walls on two sides already in situ and the site forms a natural,
separate area on its own.
II. Accessibility: Getting in and out of the area is easy as it is bounded
by a road and the riverwalk. Vehicle access on the street above the
area is busy at school times but otherwise is relatively quiet for drop-
off purposes. The quayside is also accessible by vehicle.
III. Proximity to City Centre: The area is very central and if and when
the proposed footbridge is erected, will be even more so. It is visible
from the ‘Dunnes’ car park and with an open aspect that would be
good for security and supervision.
IV. Skate-ability: This area is the one that is favoured by the skaters,
especially if it is was to be ‘semi-enclosed’. It has a couple of different
slopes that could be used as ‘bowl’ type rides that would improve the
value to the skaters.
V. Town Development: currently the area is used for drinking and anti-
social behaviour and it could do with being cleaned up. The provision of
a Skate Park would add to the already improved river walk area –
regenerating the area. This is becoming a keen walking area for town
residents and as such, there may be some complaints about using this
site as a Skate Park. Local residents may also have to be reassured
regarding noise, but given the area’s current use, the positive aspects
of the facility may actually reduce the amount of noise currently
witnessed.
31
VI. Covering/lighting: The alleys could be quite easily converted into a
semi open structure providing a weather proof facility. It would be
quite feasible to place a modern sheet roof using the existing walls but
leaving it semi-open. The centre wall could be largely removed
allowing access to both ball alleys and an area of about 200 square
metres of Skate Park.
VII. Noise control: The high walls of the alley and the hedging by the
school grounds are natural noise control factors. The nearby housing
would need to be assured that the area would be secured to prevent
late night use of the park.
VIII. Other: The re-development of the area could include the use of
part of the area as a school playground. As the area in total is larger
than a Skate Park would need to be. The handball alley is very much
underused and if part of it was demolished a couple of walls could be
used as a climbing wall and training centre for that type of activity. The
larger basketball area could be used as a pitch for the Kilkenny in-line
hockey team or for more beginner type ramps that are easily
moveable. Although the handball alleys are of little architectural merit,
they are part of a national cultural heritage, and therefore any
development must be dealt with sensitively. Access may be difficult
for emergency vehicles.
IX. Costs: Groundwork. If the alleys were to be converted into covered
skating areas it is estimated that a roof, lighting and associated works
would cost in the region of €50,000. Creating an opening in the middle
wall of the alleys and building some features within the alleys would
probably cost another €15,000. Access for machinery to this area is
limited so would add to the costs.
32
Concreting the outside area over the basketball court would cost
approximately €20,000.
Fencing : 60 metres @ €85 per metre = €5,100
Ramps : €40,000
Total : €130,000
b. River Breaga/Nore confluence.
This site is situated at Green’s Bridge and is on the ‘down river’ side. It
is a large, under used area that has access through a gate and a road
33
that curves through the area. It would need fencing by the river for
security and safety reasons but has massive potential and would be
relatively cheap to develop. It has two bridge arches that could be
used as part of the park as bench areas and/or shelter.
b. River Breaga/Nore confluence.
34
b. River Breaga/Nore confluence.
b. River Breaga/Nore confluence.
I. Security/ Fencing: Security here may be an issue as it is a little
secluded or out of view in some ways. However, because of the size of
the area it could be coupled with other uses (such as canoeing and
river sports) and lead to a general upgrading of the area. Obviously
the river banks would have to be properly fenced for safety reasons. It
is a walled area at the boundaries.
II. Access: The area already has gated access and a road that is
serviceable for vehicles and would be safe for dropping off children
from cars.
III. Proximity to City Centre: This site is in walking distance from the
City Centre – a factor that consultation revealed as important to users.
However it is far enough away from the centre that may result in it not
35
being used as often as other proposed sites. It is in an area that would
have limited potential for other types of development, as river walk
access is not continuous and the area appears unused.
IV. Skateability: There are some sloping areas that could be
incorporated and also two bridge arches that may prove useful as
variety. The arches could also provide shelter in poor weather.
This site could be extended with relatively little additional costs.
V. Town Development: There is some talk of canoeists using this area
as a suitable access area for the river. There should be no conflict of
interest in both groups being accommodated at this site. There is
enough room for both and they would not be incompatible in nature or
indeed culture – both being considered ‘extreme’ sports. Having as
much activity going on in the general area of the proposed skate park
would be good for security and building enthusiasm, and interest in
both sports. Other possible development issues are the linear park
developments along this side of the river. There is no reason that both
these developments could not go hand in hand and the river walk
would allow for extra passive security for the skate park.
VI. Covering/lighting: Cover would be difficult for this area as it is so
open but some lighting could be provided from extra lights being fitted
to the street lights on the bridge. Safety restrictions may require
lighting along the river bank. Lighting will need to be carefully situated
to avoid residential interference
VII. Noise Control: There are very few nearby houses that would be
disturbed and the road noise would far outweigh the park noise.
36
VIII. Costs: Groundworks: Some clearance works would be needed but
probably no more than about €5,000. Lighting could be provided,
mounted off the bridge and the archways incorporated as shelters,
€5,000.
Concreting : 300 square metres but incorporating some sloping areas
as park features. Total €25,000
Fencing : The river front would need to be securely fenced and in total
about 60 metres of fencing would be required. Total €5,000.
Ramps : €40,000
Total : €80,000
c. .Water Barracks Area 1.
This area has several sports facilities already on both sides of the road
leading down to Kilcreene Lodge. On one side are two handball alleys
and it is possible to see how this area could be landscaped and shaped
to accommodate a skate park. Again as with the Riverside alleys these
could be left in place and a semi-enclosed area built - with some
imaginative roof covering and the connecting wall between the alleys
opened to increase the size.
37
c. .Water Barracks Area 1.
c. .Water Barracks Area 1.
38
c. .Water Barracks Area 1.
I. Security/ Fencing : The park would have to be bounded on the road
sides for safety reasons but two sides are already walled in. It would
have good open visibility from the roundabout for security purposes.
II. Access: The roundabout is a busy one but there is a safe ‘pull-in
and drop off’ area on the road that leads to Kilcreene Lodge.
Pedestrian crossings are located nearby for those approaching on foot.
III. Proximity to City Centre: Close to the Irishtown area and within
easy walking distance of the city centre, though probably at the outer
limit of what the skaters would regularly use.
IV. Skateability: The whole site has potential as a circular park based
around the existing alleys, though this would require imaginative,
extensive landscaping. In fact the difficulty would be to find level
ground for modular equipment and ‘beginner’ ramps.
39
V. Town Development: This site is close to an established sports area
and would perhaps rejuvenate the sports facilities as they are
underused at present. This could allow for the creation of a youth
sports ‘hub’ in the area, and as with other sites – offer The Council
interesting regeneration solutions. The site is also near the two RAPID
areas of St Canice’s and The Butts.
VI. Covering/lighting: It would not be necessary to remove the
handball alleys to accommodate the park but as with the Michael
Street site they could be incorporated into a semi-open ramp area.
VII. Skateability: The area around the alleys could be developed as
ramps, the exact area available would need to be designed in
conjunction with the Council’s Roads Department.
VIII. Noise Control: This would not be a problem as the road noise
would be far greater and there is limited housing at the roundabout.
IX. Other comments: The handball alley is very much underused and if
part of it was demolished a couple of walls could be used as a climbing
wall and training centre for that type of activity. Road safety would
need to be looked at in terms of young people using a busy crossing.
X. Costs: Goundworks. There would need to be careful groundworks
done around the alleys, cutting back the bank towards the road to
provide suitable level areas for ramps. Estimate of €15,000. The
roofing, lighting and associated works would probably be slightly
cheaper than at Michael Street because access is easier, €40,000.
40
Concreting. 300 square metres but including some sloping areas,
€25,000
Fencing. 70 metres of fencing, €6,000.
Ramps . €40,000
Total. €126,000
d. Water Barracks Area 2
This site is located around the basketball court and seating area
opposite the alleys discussed above (Water Barracks 1). There is a
large grassed area behind the seats and before the footpaths. This site
could stretch down to the Breaga River on one side. There is a
basketball court there that would not need to be part of the skate
park, but as with other sites, its location could create an interesting
multi-use sports area.
41
d. Water Barracks Area 2
d. Water Barracks Area 2
42
d. Water Barracks Area 2
I. Security/ Fencing: This area is very open and would need proper
fencing from a road safety and river safety aspect. The length of
fencing would add to the cost of the park. The amount of traffic and
passers by would allow for some passive security for the skaters.
II. Access: This is excellent. The roundabout is a busy one but there is
a safe ‘pull-in and drop off’ area on the road that leads to Kilcreene
Lodge. There are pedestrian crossings in operation for those
approaching on foot.
III. Proximity to City Centre: Close to the Irishtown area and within
easy walking distance of the city centre. It is probably on the outer
limit of where the skaters might regularly use.
IV. Skate-ability: The area has a large flat space that is really quite
large for a park and has some sloped ground towards the road that
43
would make an interesting feature within the park. The area is large
enough to incorporate several different ramps, obstacles and modular
equipment.
V. Town Development: The site is exposed as it is attached to the
soccer pitch area which is a little underutilised at present. There would
be the possibility of using the park development to reawaken interest
in the sports grounds area. Close to two RAPID areas: The Butts and
St. Canice’s.
VI. Covering/lighting: This would be difficult due to the size of the site
Lighting would need to be incorporated into the design of the park.
Teen shelters may need to be erected to provide shelter from
inclement weather.
VII. Noise Control: This would not be a problem as the road noise
would be far greater and there is limited housing at the roundabout.
VIII. Other comments:
Area needs to be assessed in terms of possible flooding
IX. Costs: Groundworks. Simple works needed to cut back the current
bank to nearer the road but leaving slopes to be incorporated into the
park as steps and ramps. €5,000. Lighting for security purposes and
two simple shelters, €10,000
Concreting. Again easy access and a lot of the ground is currently
level, 300 meters, €15,000.
44
Fencing. The full perimeter of this park would need fencing, a total of
100 meters, €9,000
Ramps. €40,000
Total. €79,000
e. The Closh.
There is an area of green in a triangle shape that is between two roads
- beside where many school buses pick up children from school. The
grass area is quite large and at one end are temporary buildings
currently occupied by a School for the disabled. The area is walled and
as it is beside the cinema, has adequate ‘drop off’ facilities. Only a
section of the total area need be used as a skate park.
45
e. The Closh.
e. The Closh.
46
e. The Closh.
I. Security/ Fencing: There is a low wall around the area at present and
railings could be placed on top of this if deemed necessary. The
ground level could be lowered inside and so the wall may be of
sufficient height to provide adequate security. The area is in a very
public space with a lot of people coming and going.
II. Access: The Closh area has fabulous access as it is at the cross
roads of several access routes to the centre and is a typical ‘drop-off’
area with the general public.
III. Proximity to City Centre: It is also within a very short walking
distance from the centre. It is located between the centre and a
housing area.
IV. Skate-ability: The area within the walls is level and because of the
height of the walls it may not be possible to create safe sloping areas
47
for the skaters. However, it would be easy to construct a very simple
park here.
V. Town Development: This area is underused, except when the circus
and funfair comes to town and because of its irregular shape it is not a
viable area for a regular sports field. Only a section would be needed
to create a Skate Park and it could also be used as a children’s
playground area, though safety standards would need to be referred
to (ensuring compliance with BSI standards). There is an established
housing community here and there may be some objections to a Skate
Park from locals.
VI. Covering/lighting: This area would prove difficult to cover or light
though street lights would have some effect as security lighting.
However, streetlighting may not be powerful enough to allow for safe
skating outside of daylight hours.
VII. Noise Control: The area is busy and so noise from the park should
not cause a substantial problem.
VIII. Other comments : The provision of space for the Mother of Fair
Love School has an attendant clause that the school would not be
unduly disturbed. The skate park could be sited away from the
temporary buildings and would be far enough away so as not to disturb
the school.
IX. Costs: Groundworks. The ground level inside the walls would need
to be lowered and quite a lot of earth would need to be removed off
48
site. Estimated costs €7,000. Some lighting and security gate at the
access point, €3,000.
Concreting. 300 metres at €50 per metre, €15,000
Fencing. Lowering the ground level would facilitate using the existing
walls as boundary fencing and these are probably high enough and
secure enough as they are with no extra work needed.
Ramps. €40,000
Total €65,000
Appendices
1. INSURANCE -IPBMI
2. MATERIALS
3. OTHER POTENTIAL SITES
4. OTHER COUNCILS
5. CONTACTS
6. SAMPLE DESIGNS
49
50
APPENDIX 1. INSURANCE - IPBMI
The following are the major conditions of the provision of insurance for
skate parks from the Irish Public Bodies Mutual Insurance.
* Site location: The site should be located in an area that has
reasonable visibility for the purposes of passive security. It should be
remembered that many of the skaters are between 13 and 16 years
old and so their safety and security, not just from accidents, but from
unwanted attention is paramount. Sites should be accessible by
emergency vehicles.
* Construction of equipment and its maintenance: the ramps and rails
used in the park should all comply with the BS specifications. Most of
the suppliers of such equipment now do so but it should be noted that
with the sudden development of 21 parks in the country new suppliers
will enter the market that may not be fully aware of the safety
specifications. The ground base of the park needs to be of a durable
and stable quality and in Ireland this generally has to be power floated
concrete base as other materials used elsewhere are not available
here.
* Fences: This is in order to discourage sudden entrance into or exit
from the skating area that could lead to accidents to skaters or passers
by. The fencing can be a simple corral type fence and not a full
security fence. Another aspect of the fencing is to limit dog fouling of
the skating area.
* Notice boards: At the entrance gates giving safety information
51
including how to report a hazard, and the location of first-aid facilities
and the nearest phone. Rules for the use of the park should be
outlined e.g. users must be over 10 years of age, users are
encouraged to wear safety gear, no cans or bottles allowed etc. A
disclaimer notice indemnifying the Council should be posted.
* Safety inspections: Daily inspections for litter, fouling, obstacles,
vandalism and weekly inspections of the ramps and rails by a Council
employee who has had some training in the work. A comprehensive
inspection by experts is required at least once a year. All inspections
must be documented and records kept.
Exact interpretations of each of the conditions are left to the discretion
of each local authority and there are sometimes wide discrepancies as
to how the above directions are put into practice. Legal advice should
be taken on these matters before going ahead with the Skate Park.
Further Information
The guidelines, titled: PAS 35:2002 "Specification for wheeled sports
facilities" can be ordered from British Standards Online. Alternatively,
from BSI Customer Services, 389 Chiswick High Road, London W4 4AL,
England. Phone: +44 (0)20 8996 9001, fax: +44 (0)20 8996 7001,
email: [email protected]
52
APPENDIX 2. MATERIALS
There are three main materials that are used in making the ramps –
1. Concrete- Concrete is durable, relatively inexpensive, and can
sustain a lot damage. It will last the longest and requires the least
amount of maintenance. Some elements require precision, which can
be found with this material. Elements put in with concrete are
permanent and cannot be moved.
2. Wood- Wood is relatively inexpensive, easily constructed, and easy
to repair. Wood can be used as an original construction material or for
later repair during a ramp’s life span. It is not very durable and
requires a lot of maintenance, especially if the park receives heavy
usage, such as from BMX biking. Wood is prone to impact damage,
which can lead to increasing risk and likelihood of injuries. Wood gives
the Skate Park the option of moving elements so skaters do not
become bored with the park although moving elements may not be
cost efficient. Wood can also be slippy, and is best suited to indoor
facilities.
3. Steel: Steel requires low maintenance and has the mobility of wood.
Cost of this material will be higher than wood, however, it is more
sustainable than wood. There are also many companies that sell pre-
constructed steel ramps that can be assembled on site by non-
professionals. Steel is used for framing and ramp construction however
not as an overall surfacing unless covered by another materials such
as Skatelite or Ramp Skin. Steel is not a popular choice among
skaters.
53
Other Materials:
There are also two main proprietary products that are sometimes used
to cover the base materials on the ramps.
Skatelite- a surfacing material used to cover ramps and the skating
surface. It is built right onto the sub frames. This popular surface is
stable under humidity and temperate environments. It also cuts down
on maintenance costs; however, it is fairly expensive to install, and
skaters sometimes report that it makes obstacles too slippy.
Rhino-top – this is a proprietary surfacing used on many parks. It is
very durable, has good grip and is less injurious in the case of falls. It
is resistant to vandal attack and can be repaired. It is also suitable for
BMX biking on the ramps.
The ramps are usually assembled in sections of certain widths and if
required they can be bolted together to extend the size of the ramps.
Groundworks:
Asphalt- It is used to cover tennis courts and other areas that are
converted into skate parks by serving as a base pad. It tends to
expand in the heat – causing cracks, bumps and hollows which can
lead to accidents. Another problem is that in Ireland, the chippings
used in laying asphalt are too large and slow down the skaters far too
much.
Floated Concrete base – This is the most common material used and is
relatively cheap and easy to install. The park area is divided into
sections and a concrete bed is ‘power-floated’ over the entire surface.
This gives the required smoothness coupled with the durability needed.
54
APPENDIX 3 OTHER POTENTIAL SITES
As part of this study several sites were suggested by a variety of
people that have not been included in the list of favoured sites above.
The reasons for not including them are outlined below and one other
site (Nowlan Park) that has great potential for the future is
highlighted.
CASTLE PARK
The Castle Park is probably the most talked about site for such a park
locally and there is ample room for such a development with several
benefits such as location, aspect, noise control etc. However, the
number of potential protests that such a suggestion would stir up
across a range of interested parties - heritage groups for example,
would in our view present grave, unnecessary obstacles when there
are other sites available. Also the cost of developing such a site would
be quite high as, understandably, people would insist on a better
degree of finish and landscaping than elsewhere.
ST JAMES’S GREEN
The Authors felt that another suggested venue,that of St. James’s
Green, would not be practical. Locally there would be uproar at the
suggestion of such a park as was shown when it was suggested that
part of the Green’s fencing be removed to allow a better view of the
Abbey. Also because of the size of the Green, it would mean the whole
area would be taken over by the skate park to the exclusion of
anything else.
55
SCANLON PARK.
Another suggested site is Scanlon Park itself, as it would link the skate
park to other sports. The site is too far away from the City, and would
run the risk of being used only by skaters from Loughboy. We spoke to
Martin Gaffney, the manager of Scanlon Park and he also feels that the
distance from the town centre would be a major drawback to such a
park. The development of a skate park would probably be of about 300
square metres in size and though this could be sited in the car park of
Scanlon Park, this would, in turn, create parking difficulties on the
busier days at Scanlon Park, making an already difficult situation
worse.
NOWLAN PARK GAA GROUNDS
In the course of researching this report the Authors paid a visit to
Nowlan Park grounds. There they discovered a really magnificent
potential site that could be used as a skate park. Between the
turnstiles on the Hebron Road entrance and the back of the main stand
is an open area which is used by service and emergency vehicles.
There is ample space however, to develop a world-class park here,
which could have the potential of developing a ‘centre for excellence’
of wheeled sports in Kilkenny, providing the facilities and infrastructure
necessary for competitions and demonstrations. The park design
could incorporate steps, railings and so on that Nowlan Park require
on match days, so clever, innovative design would be required. This
area is very large, has sloping grounds, is already fenced off and could
be transformed into a large ‘bowl’ type skating area that could be the
best in the country. Such a development would enhance the assembly
area and not interfere with its very necessary primary function. It
could be used as a skate park at all times except when there are
matches on in the grounds. The Authors were due to make a
56
presentation to the GAA county board meeting in early December but
this was unfortunately cancelled with no other meeting to be held
within the time frame of this report. The County Secretary, Mr Pat
Dunphy, was generous enough to suggest that we make a presentation
at another time but understandably he could give no indication as to
what the reaction of the members might be towards such a suggestion.
The Authors feel that the Council should make some representation to
the Board as the potential to meet the needs of both the Council and
the Board is really too good to be left unexplored. Kilkenny city is well
established to hold national festivals and there is no reason that, if it
had the suitable skate park, it could not hold the national
championships for skating and BMX-ing on a regular basis.
A similar partnership exists within the UK – with international motor
sports stadium Rockingham Motor Sports Circuit (owned by BMW), and
Adrenalin Alley – a Skate Park and youth culture facility in Corby,
Northamptonshire. The opportunity to work in partnership with
Rockingham Motor Sports - was a dream come true for the skate
park project . The partnership enabled the project to more than
double its membership, and to become a focus for international
skaters and other youth culture events, such as arts projects, band
nights, and music workshops. In February 2003 Rockingham Motor
Sports made the decision to provide land to Corby Wheels Project
that would enable the construction of a major outdoor facility, set in
the prestigious grounds of the Motor Sports Stadium. This successful
model is one that could be repeated here at Nowlan Park.
57
APPENDIX 4 . OTHER COUNCILS
Waterford City. Have had a skate park for several years now and it
is based in the car park of the Council’s sports ground on the Cork
road. It is quite a distance from the City and many skaters don’t use it
regularly for this reason. It is also quite small and is used more by the
younger, inexperienced skaters than the older street skaters. As this
was built before the changes in the insurance rules it was felt that
there would have to be constant supervision and so this choice of site,
beside a sports facility allowed for supervision to be arranged more
readily. However, the Council is now also building another one in the
People’s Park which is more central and may prove more popular. In
the initial year of the Park there was an annual membership charged
but this did not persist. They have received a grant of €140,000 for the
new park.
Laois County Council. The Council here have a difficulty in finding a
park that would be a permanent home for the facility. They have
decided to use a small amount of equipment that will be mobile, using
Council workers and a truck with lifting gear. They are considering
moving the equipment about three times a year to other towns and so
give everyone a chance of the experience. A final decision on a
permanent site will depend on uptake and usage of this facility. They
have had very positive involvement with local skaters who have
formed their own club and will jointly manage the club with the help of
the Council. There will be a membership fee involved and a day rate
also. It is envisaged that this fee will be collected by older members of
the club who will operate a rota system of attendance. This system will
be reviewed after the first few months to see if it is working. Laois
County Council has been awarded a grant of €35,000 to develop this.
58
Donegal County Council. The Council has been awarded a grant of
€60,000 from the Department and intend to open a small park in
Bundoran. They have not selected a design as yet but will opt for the
higher fencing on legal advice even though they feel that erecting
fencing can present temptation to some vandals.
Offaly County Council. The Council only looked at one site that was
available in Tullamore. They will fence in the park and use security
cameras to control behaviour. It will be opened and closed by local
park warden on his/her daily rounds. They have been awarded a grant
of €72,000 and expect the park to cost about €100,000 in total. It will
be a small park at about 100 square meters only in size.
Louth County Council. They are planning to develop a small skate
park area in a larger development in Ashling Park in Dundalk. They
plan to have about 4 ramps placed there about the size of two tennis
courts. There will be a small corral type fence around the skating area
to prevent accidents and ‘bmx’ bikers form accessing the area at
speed. The Council will invest some extra money to the €40,000
already provided by the Department.
Clare County Council. This park will be based in Ennis alongside a
sports and amenity facility outside town. This site has been chosen by
the local skaters themselves as their favoured site. There are no
definite site plans drawn up as yet but an indicative cost of €150,000
has been agreed and the Department figure of €90,000 has been
approved. They will not be putting in place a fence of any size because
previous experience has shown this only to be a challenge to some
people to try and get into the site. There will be a concrete base to the
59
park and standard steel and laminate ramps. They hope to involve the
skaters with the final designs.
60
APPENDIX 5 . CONTACTS
Suppliers
Martin Barnett (Modney Concepts – mobile parks)
http://www.highlineSkate Parks.co.uk
00 44 (0)1366 377232
00 44 (0)7740 703 270
Fawns Skate Parks
Pat Boyle, or Andy Kelly
44 (0)1252 515199 Fax 44 (0)1252 515858
www.fawns.co.uk mailto:[email protected]
Fawns Recreational Services Ltd, Woodcot Court, 2a Woodcot
Gardens, Farnborough, Hants GU14 9RD
Wooden Delights Ltd (Supplier of Rhino Ramps in Ireland)Mr Christy HanburyMincloon, Galway. Tel (091) 525709 [email protected]
County and City Councils
Waterford Corporation. Ms Jackie Freyne
Loais Co Co Ms Anne Marie Maher
Donegal Co Co Ms Aideen Doherty
Clare Co Co Mr Leonard Cleary
Louth Co Co Mr Noel Redmond
Offaly CO CO Mr David Minton
61
Wexford Co Co Mr Sean Cooke
Kilkenny Borough Councillors
Mr Andrew McGuinness
Mr Malcolm Noonan
Ms Betty Manning
Schools
Kieran’s College Fr Kieran Kennedy
Presentation Mr Cathal Cullen
Loreto Ms Helen Renehan
VEC Mr Roger Curran
Skate Parks
Kiltorcan, Thomastown Mr Tony Holland
Ramp City, Dublin Mr Karl Lennon
Wooden Works, Cork Natasha
Tramore Surf Centre Billy Butler
Corby Wheels Project/Adrenalin Alley, UK Mandy Young
The Edge SkateparkLeicester UK ‘Deano’
62
Organisations
GAA – Kilkenny County Board Mr Pat Dunphy
Scanlon Park Mr Martin Gaffney
O’Loughlin Gaels Mr Joe Malone
Dept of Environment Ms Evelyn Downes
Kilkenny Sports and Recreational Partnership
Ms Miriam Cleary & Nicola Keeshan
Irish Public Bodies Mutual Insurance
Ms Lorraine Scanlon
Skaters
– at open meeting on 17th November
Vincent O’Brien
Aaron Sault
Kieran Carroll
Darren Murphy
Darren Kelly
Michael Walsh
Kevin Maher
Anthony Rafter
Individuals
Ms Marion McDonald, consultant.
63
APPENDIX 6 SAMPLE DESIGNS
The next few pages show some styles of skate parks that the Authors
consider representative of the type of park that would be appropriate
for Kilkenny. It was not possible to obtain drawings of indoor or ‘bowl’
type parks.
64