Microsoft word - coolock residents assoc consultation report.doc

Parnell’s GAA, Coolock Village, Coolock, Dublin Richard Costello (Northside Community Forum/Edenmore CDP) An approach was made to the Urban Regeneration Sub-group of Northside Community Forum by John Crowely, Chairperson of the Coolock Residents Association in relation to the proposed redevelopment of the grounds at Chanel College, to be undertaken by the Marist Fathers and Parnell’s GAA Club in June of this year. The RA were looking for assistance in co-ordinating a response to the proposed development and it was felt by the members of the Urban Regeneration group that it would be appropriate to provide the association with this assistance. It was agreed that a community consultation session be arranged which would serve as an opportunity for the Residents Association to record and gauge the views of the local community on the proposed development. These views would be recorded and collated into a report which would be shared with the wider community and the organisation submitting the application. The overall aim of the process therefore was to facilitate a participatory consultation for Coolock Residents Association on the issue of the development of the land around Chanel College in Coolock Village, by Parnell’s GAA Club and Marist Fathers. A submission may be made to DCC Planning Dept as a result of the information gathered. This would be achieved by pursuing the following objectives: Existing Urban Regeneration Sub-group members will assist with the organisation of the consultation event in Parnell’s GAA Club. Members of the Urban Regeneration Sub Group will provide support to the Resident’s Association in the management of a consultation event. Collate the information and send it to the Management Committee of the Association. Aim to use this document as the basis for the establishment of an open, equitable and cordial dialogue between the Coolock Resident’s Association, Parnell’s GAA Club and the Marist Fathers which will lead to a satisfactory outcome for all parties in relation to the proposed development. Provide feedback to Forum Members and the Steering Committee on the consultation process. Initial meeting of the Coolock RA and Urban Regeneration Group. It was agreed that a community consultation would be the best way forward for the RA to achieve its aims. Second meeting between the groups, at which it was agreed that the consultation should be used as an opportunity for the establishment of an open, equitable and cordial dialogue between Coolock Resident’s Association, Parnell’s GAA Club and the Marist Fathers which will lead to a satisfactory outcome for all parties in relation to the proposed development. The date is set for Saturday the 18th of July, in St. Brendan’s Parish Centre. This is subsequently changed when Parnell’s GAA offer to make their hall available. Meeting with Parnell’s GAA Club Treasurer in which the RA outlines their plans to hold a consultation event. Agreement is secured from Parnell’s for the use of the club hall and their drawings, plans and photographs for the event. Final meeting ahead of the consultation. Community Consultation day held in Parnell’s GAA Club. Due to the size and scale of the development it was deemed necessary to divide the development up into 5 distinct elements in order to facilitate the community in responding to the overall plans. The hall in Parnell’s GAA Club was divided up into 6 separate ‘information points’, which were categorised as: A sixth, general feedback table was also set up along with a feedback point where participants in the consultation exercise were invited to record their views of the event. The plans, drawings and other materials provided by Parnell’s GAA club were divided up and placed at the most appropriate information points. Two planners, Niall Garvey and Steven Shannon were also on hand during the day to provide support to the participants with any technical planning questions or issues as they arose. There is a mixed feeling amongst the community in relation to the site layout. There are those that object to the residential elements and their placement within the overall plan while others are happy with it and feel that it is satisfactory. The community is for the most part unsupportive of the proposed building of apartments and houses in the area. In particular the community is concerned with the height of the proposed buildings as well as the issue of what percentage of these buildings will be private and/or social. Many feel that the proposed buildings are not in keeping with the overall character of the village while residents on Chanel Road are concerned about the proximity of the apartments to their homes. There is almost unanimous concern about the levels of traffic which will be generated by the proposed development. It is felt that Chanel Road will suffer greatly from the high levels of traffic that the community believes will be generated by the development. Many people have questioned whether the Median on the Malahide Road will be re-opened? The community is for the most part supportive of the medical centre. More detail is required by the community in relation to the running and operation of the medical centre as well as the type of services that will be offered in it. Services for drug users would not be welcomed. The community is in general very supportive of the proposed sporting elements as outlined in the plans. Some elements of the community have expressed concerns in relation to flood lighting on the pitches and the impact of light pollution on their homes. A wide range of views and opinions expressed by the community including aforementioned concerns about traffic impact and residential elements as well as concerns with overall community gain and access to the development. In order to gauge the response of those attending the consolation, the following four questions were posed and the results are as follows: Question 1: Has this day helped you to understand this development more? Question 2: How involved in the consultation did you feel? Question 3: How difficult did you find this? Question 4: How useful have you found this consultation overall? Upon completion of the consultation exercise the Coolock RA may now want to consider one or a series of actions which bookend this stage of the process. The Urban Regeneration Sub-Group considers the following to be worth the consideration of the RA committee: 1. Make the report and the information gathered through the consultation available to all those who contributed 2. Make the report and the information gathered as a result of the consultation available to those stakeholders 3. Assess and evaluate the information gathered through the consultation and formulate appropriate next steps and actions which reflect the position of those people who contributed to the process Overall excellent; be great (Ann Marie Redmond, 22 Ennel Drive, Artane) There are too many people in this district, now the plan will mean more people – where are they to go? This village is self-contained at the moment, the football pitches will mean more noise & more people from all parts coming in. It will encroach on Chanel Rd residents and others – these are only a few of the problems these buildings will bring (Chanel Avenue, Artane) Concern over height of apartments and floodlighting impact on existing residents. How many council houses? Strongly object to any proposed buildings being greater than 2 storeys. Open up the median located at Chanel/Mercy College (St Brendan’s Avenue, Coolock) Immediately concerned about traffic numbers that will increase going down Chanel Rd (Chanel Road) I think the housing proposal is to dense for this area; the sporting area is fine but I do not agree with the housing end of it (St Brendan’s Terrace, Coolock) Large influx of people in to the village; Over (?) large apartment block overlooking village; large high houses overlooking Chanel Rd concern (Brookville Park) Chanel Rd is directly impacted as far as proposed housing block will be backed up the houses on Chanel Rd; the main pitch with floodlights in the winter will be on a considerable amount of time. Will have a negative impact on the residents on Chanel Rd and the other surrounding roads. The proposed layout for the bins is not acceptable as it could encourage vermin No problem with sport club & facilities but feel there are too many residential units going up; also plan for layout of units should be reversed so the greenery end of layout would face on to Coolock village rather than house units practically on pathways. Less units, more parking space then there would be no overflow of traffic or parked traffic in area (Brookville Park, Coolock) The planned layout is a constructed nightmare for the local residents, this is the last green are in what would call a very mature area. Not alone are the apartments too high but they are obstructive. We will no longer have access to the grounds but our children can no longer play in this area! (Chanel Rd) Boundary behind St Brendan’s Terrace? Drainage ditch was filled in some years ago – if a wall is being built my fear is that water will back up into the houses ( St Brendan’s Terrace) Happy with the sporting proposal but very concerned about any increase in traffic on Chanel Road. ( Chanel Rd) Block 2 at 3 storeys too tall next to houses. Development should be kept to 2 storeys It is badly needed – hope it works out (Beechlawn Grove) We would prefer if there were no apartments as this would cause huge problems with anti-social behaviour. There also very unsightly and prime for graffiti, etc. We also feel strongly about losing the trees at the back of our house. One suggestion would be to stick to 2 storey apartments and build any apartments, if absolutely necessary at the proposed site for the main pitch and put the main pitch to the front beside the medical centre. The only houses overlooked in this scheme are Chanel Rd houses so I would suggest that the housing at the back of us be moved to the green area and the green area be put at the back of our houses as this would be a lesser impact on us (Chanel Rd) More trees to compensate for loss in apartment block. 3 storeys on village road (?) side. Road access to village and traffic volume – I’d like to see the village more pedestrian friendly, more coffee shops, shops in village itself so less traffic (Brookville Park) The only houses overlooked in this scheme are Chanel Rd. I would like to suggest that the houses at the back of us, the single family dwelling, be moved to the green area around the green area be put at the back of our houses (Chanel Rd) Overall very good but L shaped apartments on centre on Chanel grounds look too high and not in keeping with the average height of the buildings in the village (Brookville Park) There are inaccuracies in your maps & drawings. The Median on some (at Old Garage junction) are closed, on others it is open. At the moment (17/07/09) the median is closed (Moatfield Drive) I think family housing is another way of (?) social affordable housing. Why not build 2 storey bungalows for elderly in the area, there would be no anti-social behaviour Generally good, sports facilities excellent. (St Brendan’s Drive) On proposed site layout plan what do letters ABCDEF represent e.g. surface water drainage – where are sewage lines going to be? (Beechlawn Grove) Maintain the character of the village – houses not apartments TOTAL OBJECTION – no interest in houses or apartments being built in area. No interest in any development here on (?). Total disruption to community living – keep the village as it is and let the village look more like it should be – keep our trees and flowers as is done in every village (Beechpark Court) Overall layout is very good – this will be excellent for the area (Bother Léin, Artane) Apartment block is visually obtrusive – it is about twice the height of all or nearly all existing buildings in the village and could lead to further permissions for higher buildings in the village. Apartment Block 1 also consumes a large amount of green space and impacts on the view to Larkhill House from the village. Loss of the old driveway to Larkhill House impacts on the historical character of Larkhill House and its traditional relationship to the village (St Brendan’s Drive) We have 1 green patch in or otherwise ghost village and I object to houses being built on that – is there no concern for the residents, we have too many houses – could it be greed? I think a green patch and our lovely trees should be saved GREEN CHURCH! Are we supplying the future tenements for those who live here but not those who move on? Very pleased with the layout in this section I think this plan is very good for Coolock Village – best wishes to Chanel GAA (Chanel Grove) No high rise apartments or social houses. Keep housing in line with the village housing. Trees must be safe as they are here over a 100 years (Moatfield Avenue) I live on Chanel Rd – I’m strongly objecting to number 2 Apartment Block. 1) Overlooking 2) noise 3) influx of traffic. I suggest to open up the median and put traffic lights on that junction and take traffic off Chanel Rd (Chanel Rd) The biggest block of apartment’s facing shops in Coolock Village to be reversed. Have the big block where they are putting the road in to get to the GAA hall or in front of that to the other block of apartments up near St Michaels House (Brookville Park) Object to this plan as the ruination of Coolock Village. No need for this housing – Northside over supplied with housing, left empty. Facility for seating in function room & gym for 600+, insufficient parking for this number. Playing fields backing on to 4 roads will be overlooked by 20 lights. Light pollution, Noise pollution. We have more than our quota of social housing already (Chanel Grove) The proposed residential development, especially the 3 storey elements will drastically change the area. At present with the goodwill of Chanel College rear access to our back garden is possible – this will not be possible should the residential development go ahead (Chanel Road) Major worry about large impact of traffic into village. Only one exit currently to Malahide Road from Brookville Park (Brookfield Park) Object to 6 unit apartment building – not enough parking e.g. for Church on Sundays. 12 houses should be extended and apartment block should not exist (Chanel Road) My main concern is walls – are they going to build a wall? (Beechlawn Grove) Surface water drainage concerns from the pitches This field is Z15. It should not be developed for residential purposes. I bought my house in a mature neighbourhood. I believe it was impossible to develop this tract of land. It is a wonderful amenity for the locals and it will be destroyed if this development goes ahead. I can negotiate rear access to my house at present with the Marist fathers when this goes I’ll never again have rear access. 3 and 4 storey developments have no place in Coolock they are completely out of place. Already Chanel Rd is over burdened with traffic from the village. The road is crumbling. This development will make a bad traffic issue intolerable. Car parking in this development has not been properly considered, what facility is there for car parking on match days. Where are the bins in apartment block 2 to go? I am against the residential element because it does not support the prime function of the college (Chanel Road.) Traffic concerns. What type of house/home owners? i.e.: social housing /housing with a mortgage? Is there a need for more housing in Coolock? (Beechlawn Green) Size of bedrooms in houses to maintain long term residency and ownership, i.e. families will become part of community in long term. Why not a swimming pool? (Moatfield ave, St. Brendan’s) I am concerned that there is already overuse of Chanel Rd. It is too narrow to facilitate more traffic; it is highly dangerous for all ages. Also when this development is passed there will a total lack of green in the Coolcok/ Artane/ Hazelwood area. (Chanel Rd) We object to this development as it would increase considerably the traffic which are already a problem. The medical centre is unnecessary as we have already been approved in the Sheaf of Wheat development no guarantee that the proposed house and apartments will be developed as per plan shows, i.e. not built until 2014? Keep the village as a village, proposed facilities for Parnell’s sounds good for Chanel College, etc but has element of greed set in? St. Brendan’s Avenue. Concern over wall being damaged. Traffic entrance next to house, traffic congestion created by apartment buildings. Existing wall is very old, will it be damaged? Will ne wall match old stone? What will height of wall be? (Coolock Village) Why the need for apartments behind houses on Chanel Rd? Do not need three storey house, what about impact on existing residents on Chanel on Brookville Park? Please, please, please don’t knock the beautiful trees down, especially the trees at the back of our homes on Chanel Road. I would break our hearts to lose them! The other suggestion we would have is if the buildings could be kept to a two storey level with housing only. No apartments as it would be too much trouble, i.e. the Brookville Apartments (Chanel Rd.) Four block apartments next to Medical centre too high. Rat infestation during construction. (Coolock Village) Concern over boundary wall at back of Beechlawn Grove – height? Ditch there at present, overgrown trees, rats, smells very bad. Will these problems be sorted (Beechlawn Grove) Road system will not work due to over congestion. Not proper parking facility. The church would end up being used as parking. They have new bus area? Buses will come through village (Moatfield Avenue) Apartments are not suitable for a residential area like Coolock with the property market crash there are more housing available then demand. The criteria for the tenants for this housing development is not clear enough. My concern is the type of people who will e allowed to move in when the residents in the area have paid large sums of money for their property I would object to the residential elements of this plan entirely. The local infrastructure will not support this development. (Brookville Park) Bank and adjacent buildings were made to be kept at two storeys. Apartments should be the same to maintain character of the neighbourhood. Boundary wall to be on Chanel side of drainage ditch (St. Brendan’s Terrace) Are these going to be social housing? (After no mor public access) Height of six unit apartment blocks too tall. 59 unit apartment building is too tall. 12 houses should be continued and six unit apartment blocks should not exist (Chanel Rd.) Concerns over height of 12 houses with Dormer windows. Concerns over impact on existing house by impact of3/4 storey apartment buildings. Object six unit apartment building backing up/onto people’s back garden. Height of both apartment buildings, e.g. four storey penthouses- no others in area. Car parking on match day. Traffic concerns overall. (Ardbeg, Pk) Apartments are out of the question. Who wants three and four storey apartments over looking their back gardens? I strongly object to any such developments as it is planned to make another Tallaght (all now vacant) or a Finglas of our village. I have lived here for over forty and have always supported the Marists- not on this one. I would oppose to more apartments been built in the village. I would like further information whether the family homes are council or private? (Moatfield Avenue) Well done! Best of luck for the future (Beechlawn Close) Apartments are out of character with existing two storeys Concerned if trees behind 10 Chanel Rd upwards, will they remain in place or will they be cut down. Would like to know if six unit apartment blocks is two storeys high? Would like to know if ingle family housing is managed by the department of Social and Family Affairs. (Chanel Rd) Maps are at variance. A4 site layout plan at 15/13 boundary shows different boundary than boundary on master plan way. Too much density of housing in Coolock area. (St. Brendan’s Terrace) Apartment block at four storeys is all wrong, when the new development at old garage site is two storeys No drop in centre clinic for Coolock please or anything connected with drugs please. Who’s going to benefit from medical centre, who is going to run it? I am concerned it will be used as a drug treatment centre. (Moatfield Rd.) I have concerns about medical centre, who will run it? Also we in Chanel Road are the only people being overlooked. Put all the houses together and leave a green area beside us. I have lived here for fifty six years. (Chanel Rd) I feel there is no need for a medical centre in our area. We have 8 doctors within walking distance and 8-10 chemists within walking distance. The traffic is our main concern. (Chanel Rd.) Medical needed in the area. Sports clubs and residents will benefit from this. (Bothar Léin, Artane) My main concerns are that we would not know who will be running this medical centre. Will it become a methadone centre? That’s all we would need is this mature area. There seems to be enough medical facilities already on the Northside. Is this not another element of over engineering again!?! (Chanel Rd.) The village has already got permission for a medical centre, how many do we need? I also object to the density of housing, some areas of housing should be left for residents use, recreational use. (St Brendan’s Terrace) We think this is a very good idea, badly needed in the area. I would be very supportive on the medical centre; however I would like to have more information on who will run this. (Moatfield Avenue) Is there a need for a second medical centre in a small village area? Why the need for a medical centre? Why not build some of the apartments over the medical centre? This will cause chaos in a small village traffic-wise (a lot of children and a lot of traffic, not a good combination) (Brookville Pk) Concerns who will run the medical centre. What is the purpose of the medical centre, who will use it? Is it a private clinic or department run? (Chanel Rd.) I have a big concern over who will run over who will run the medical centre. I have concerns that it will be a place for methadone treatment! We should have this information now (Ardberg pk.) This is the third medical centre proposed for the village. What does it comprise of and what services will they provide. None of this is specified in any plans. (Chanel Rd.) In the present climate as a concerned group we feel that the clergy should donate land to the front of Chanel College to the people of the Parish as a sign of reconciliation for the past crimes to young children by other clergy. (Concerned people’s group) Sports facilities are very impressive. Are they only for members of Parnell GAA Club? Can residents or students of Chanel College use the facilities? Has noise from the clubhouse been considered? (Chanel Road. Increased traffic volumes on Chanel Road. (Chanel Road.) I think the sports facilities will be good in the Area but I would have concerns about the clubhouse and lights overlooking our houses and the noise level at night. (Chanel Road.) I am thrilled to hear that Parnell’s are building and adding to the area for the younger generation. This will be a huge asset to the area. One suggestion would be that the apartments could be (apt. Block 1 59 units) built where the main pitch is on the plans backing onto football pitch (green area) and the juvenile pitch pit in its place beside the medical centre. This would have a much lesser impact. Sports facilities should be easily available to the public, and should include a swimming pool and a Jacuzzi. (Brookville Park.) Greatly increased noise and light intrusion will result. The clubhouse/sports hall will dominate the skyline behind our house. What access will local residents have, if any to the facilities without becoming club members? What proportion of club members come from the area immediately surrounding the proposed development? (Chanel Road.) The sporting facilities look great and I think this will build up the area and the club itself will be great for families. (Bothar Lein Artane Dublin 5.) Happy with sports facilities and the medical centre. Not happy with apartment block and single family housing. (Moatfield Park.) My suggestion would be if apt. Block 1 was built where the main football pitch is now on plans as this would not have as bad an impact there’s only football pitches (council) at the back then and maybe the main pitch could be put beside the medical centre instead. But it is fantastic to have Parnell’s bring this to our area for the youth. (Chanel Road.) Sports facilities should be about health and sports. Why do they have to have a bar? Let’s put a swimming pool instead. (Moatfield Avenue.) I think the facilities will be great for all children in the area. (Ennel Drive Artane Dublin 5) All looks fantastic (St Brendan’s Avenue) I feel that there has to be a wall erected at the back of St. Brendan Tce. (St Brendan’s Tce Coolock.) Sporting facilities are fantastic, but it’s a pity it has to go in hand in hand with the residential element. (Brookville Park.) I would be very supportive of the plan for the sporting facilities. (Moatfield Ave.) Flooding occurs at times on the site of one of the all-weather pitches. How is this going to be addressed and has professional advice been sought indicating that it can be rectified and will not cause problems elsewhere when the all-weather pitches are built. Concerns re number of parking spaces to facilitate needs when all pitches are in use. Relocation of the clubhouse and the development of the pitches is very good. Access by Chanel College to the facilities would be very important. Drainage on the all weather pitches should be dealt with carefully as the site currently gets waterlogged. The number of parking spaces for Parnell’s seem very high and could lead to traffic jams during events (matches and functions.) (ST Brendan’s Drive.) I do believe that any sports facilities are needed and are an essential element for most communities. But not on this grand scale. The traffic that already exists on Chanel Road is so dangerous our children can’t even cross the road – can you imagine how much more traffic this element will create. Also Ambulances going to Beaumont Hospital use Chanel Road and Ave. and often with so much parking on these side streets they can’t get access- what would it be like on match day. (Chanel Road.) The traffic flow will be a huge step up for local businesses. This development will create jobs that are much I would be very concerned about the traffic impact on our road (Chanel Rd) as we are experiencing a huge volume of traffic already. Maybe something could be done to alleviate this? We have been the first people on Chanel Rd. My concern is the traffic that will be on Chanel Road from the medical centre, the apartments and the houses. Our roads are not able to accommodate the traffic as it is. Since the Malahide Rd entrance was closed. Also I do not want our trees taken down. (Chanel Rd.) Mobility management plan report appears impressive. Page detailing bus service omits two services, no. 128 and 27 (the most frequent on this route). Confidence in other aspects of which I have no information is questioned (St. Brendans Ave, Coolock D5) I would have serious concerns about how the traffic congestion will be handled. Will the median be opened again? Will there be public parking for the village? Increase in sporting activities as a result of these developments will negatively impact on the private residents surrounding the pitch. The proposed club house is also too near to houses on Chanel Rd. The pitch is also close to houses in the surrounding area. The quality of life for these residents will significantly drop due to the noise, extra floodlights. Extra rubbish will be dumped. Encourage a ‘hang out’ for local youths in a negative way. I do not feel that enough thought has been given to the traffic that will be generated on Chanel Rd and Ave, also the parking on these roads at present is horrendous I can’t imagine what it would be like with this development. At present our neighbours and children find it difficult to cross these roads (Chanel Rd.) I cannot understand why 77 residential units are required in this area- apartments blocks on the area cannot be sold or rented currently. I would object to the development as Chanel Rd already takes all the traffic coming from Coolock Village – now it would have to take cars from 77 additional homes. The trees should be preserved. Is social housing necessary (Chanel Rd) Already too much traffic through the Village without this development and Sheaf of Wheat development ( The volume of traffic will increase hugely as at present it is hard to get through the village at times. The median on Malahide Road should be reopened to take the extra traffic and to stop the use of roads in the area for cars. The infrastructure is atrocious at present (Chanel Rd.) The traffic flow should be smooth and with the increased flow it will hwlp out other businesses in the area Chanel Rd and Avenue cannot take traffic at the moment, let alone increased traffic. Will you re-open the median? Left only turn from new houses and Chanel College/through village. Would the residents association ask the Dublin Transport Authority to carry out a traffic impact study? With existing traffic patterns Chanel Rd/Ave has already become the main exit/access route for traffic into/out of, through Coolock Village. The property development likely to greatly worsen an already unacceptable traffic volume on Chanel Rd/Ave ( Chanel Rd.) I would have concerns about the volume of traffic on Chanel Rd and surrounding roads which is already a serious Concerned about whether enough room for car parking on Match days at Parnells (Moatfield Rd) I am unsure Coolock Village can handle the volume of traffic envisaged. There are very few exits from the village. (Chanel Avenue.) Remove 6 unit apartment block and increase size of 12 Houses instead. Reverse the apartment block (59 Units) to become internal not external in shape. (Chanel Road.) Very worried about the effects of road traffic congestion and very concerned about volumes throughout Chanel Road and Village. (Chanel Road.) While all-weather pitches are a great idea and would be an amenity to the community I do object to the residential housing and apartment aspects of this plan would be opposed a number of grounds to letting planning permission be granted for this development. The infrastructure in Coolock Village would not be able to support such a plan. (Brookville Park.) Plans seem OK. Would worry about the apartments being left empty. Also the look of them in the village if people don’t keep them right. Happy about sports. Concerns about the number of residences and the traffic it would cause in particular and the overflow into adjacent roads (also with respect to sports day) (Brookville Park.) No apartments keep Coolock Village a village. Broader access to a wider range of facilities to the public would be favourable rather than restricted membership. Security could be a major issue, especially in the underground car park. (Brookville Park.) I object to the development per say –the idea that such a development could take place in an area surrounded with homes is just “out of court”. (Chanel Road.) This is zoned Z15 institutional lands – not for building apartments but for the public good and use –when it’s gone –it’s gone – preserve it for public use say swimming pools, sports use. Do not allow it into developer’s hands. If developers own it much taller blocks will be built and the area will be lost to all Coolock Residents Sports OK. Concerns about traffic and parking. I would be concerned about the trees, bushes and hedgerow behind the homes on Chanel Road that they would remain untouched regardless of age or height. (Chanel Road.) I agree in general with the development but would have concerns of traffic and whether housing is private or council. (Moatfield Avenue.) The Chanel College/ Parnell Development is being promoted as a community asset (See An Cumann Parnell CLg, Brochure Pg 2 –Enormous benefit to the residents. The best supported community based club in the country.) To portray it as a community development is misleading. Whereas it provides an excellent facility for residents of the locality wishing to participate in club activities, the rules binding on the club restrict use of the grounds to games of the association. For example certain sports which are part of the community games could not be facilitated even at local level. At present if a member of the parish approached the Rev. Superior of Chanel College to seek use of a soccer pitch for a local match, it is possible such a request would be granted. The college could provide such a facility to the community whereas the Parnell Development would be out of bounds. Any such restrictions only the possibility of this brings a (?)Community Development for all. (St. Brendan’s Ave.) Would like to see green area retained and maintained as a park. Would like to see corporation owned area behind Kilmore retained as park. Coolock Residents Association Management Committee We would like to thank those residents who volunteered to help out on the day. We would also like to thank all those people who turned up to the consultation and made a contribution.

Source: http://www.andrewmontague.com/documents/Coolock%20Residents%20Assoc%20Consultation%20Report.pdf