1 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.

2 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.


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 of have, through action are based consultation, before and investigative on any research, been able to reveal and highlight the key issues and areas understanding that required embarking 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

4 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.


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

6 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

7 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.


2. CRITICAL ISSUES Enterprise Actions Ltd. feel it necessary to look at the wider contextual issues regarding the provision of a skate park. 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 These issues are critical in determining the type of park and location that is finally

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

9 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

10 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 PAS30 & 35:2002 are It should protect users and spectators from hazards.

generally the safety codes that are adopted across Europe.

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

11 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

12 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

13 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

14 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

15 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 inline 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

16 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.

17 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,

18 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

19 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

20 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.

21 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 –







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

22 I. INDOOR FACILITY PROS All weather facility allows for gate money and income generation Can be open at night and in the evenings – a popular time for skaters Can be monitored – reducing risk of Anti Social Behaviour Wooden ramps are more feasible – which are more comfortable for skaters, arguably some say a safer surface Easier to supervise – safer for younger skaters More vandal proof More opportunities for marketing and promotional events Franchising opportunities for related activity – shops, youth centre etc. Users are ‘off the streets’ and relatively safe while using the building First aid room can be an option

CONS Costly – large, indoor space needed at least 150sq.m Additional costs include lighting, cleaning, heating, air conditioning, security, and other building maintenance issues Building will need to be staffed Need to ensure enough space within the building to minimise collisions, and smooth transitions between obstacles – difficult in a confined space Noisy Needs air conditioning Finding a suitable venue, and preparing it could use up a lot of time Can become crowded Street skaters prefer outdoor parks Need to charge a fairly hefty entrance fee/membership fee to cover costs



II. OUTDOOR FACILITY - SUPERVISED PROS Usually, more space is available outdoors, leading to bigger park – more popular with skaters, and safer Can be fenced off for security Skate Park designs can be adapted after installation Can use durable, popular, and reasonably safe concrete where necessary Obstacles can be more ‘unique’ leading to greater popularity More realistic ‘street skate’ atmosphere – popular amongst young people Cheaper than an indoor facility Can charge entrance fee/membership fee if the facility is fenced Can be monitored – reducing risk of Anti Social Behaviour

CONS Security can be an issue – needs to be secured when not in use Cannot be used in certain weather conditions Can be a target for vandals Supervision may be difficult logistically Usage limited to daylight hours – unless floodlighting is provided The provision of some sort of covering/shelter may be required to ensure usage


25 PROS Cheap to install Boarders can be supervised by parents and peers if necessary Youth have the opportunity to develop a sense of ‘ownership’ of the park – for them, by them, and supervised by them Does away with the costs associated with supervision No need for membership New relaxed insurance laws make this more of a possibility Skaters can use the facility when they choose to

CONS Unless fenced off, does not comply to European Safety Criteria Target for vandals Can be a focal point for ‘loitering’ and bullying – which could push skaters back on the street Will not be able to charge for use – no income stream Unable to develop a strategic sports profile for Kilkenny As fencing is required, staff will be needed to lock up

IV. MOBILE SKATE PARK PROS Can meet young peoples needs where they are Encourages participation in sports Encourages youth development in a variety of settings Easy to store (in a standard car park space) Is suitable as a starter provision, possibly before a permanent park is considered Is a cost effective provision across a widely spread population Useful where planning permission for a static Skate Park may not be available A mobile park can be ‘shared’ by a variety of groups giving the maximum enjoyment for the minimum cost


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 skill Good opportunity for private/public sector partnership CONS Hard to establish a sense of place/cultural hub around mobile facility Will need to be packed up, driven, erected and dismantled at the end of each session – causing extra expense in terms of staffing Will need careful marketing to ensure skaters know where and when it will be in place Modular design may be limiting Unsuitable for demonstrations Sitings will need to be found on a regular basis – leading to insecurity Cannot be left overnight as it is not vandal proof (unless on guaranteed secure site) Not a particularly popular option with skaters – particularly street skaters Drivers will need training in constructing and dismantling equipment Storage is a key issue Will need regular checking to ensure safety Requires smooth surfaces for placement –and skateability the

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

27 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.

28 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

29 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.


a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.

a. Michael Street Handball Alley area.

31 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 dropoff 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 antisocial 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.

32 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, development must be dealt with sensitively. 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. and therefore any Access may be difficult


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

34 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.

35 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

36 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.


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.


c. .Water Barracks Area 1.

c. .Water Barracks Area 1.


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.


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.

41 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.


d. Water Barracks Area 2

d. Water Barracks Area 2


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

44 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.

45 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.


e. The Closh.

e. The Closh.


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

48 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

49 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


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.




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. 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 Sites should be accessible by

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

52 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: info@bsi-global.com

53 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 preconstructed steel ramps that can be assembled on site by nonprofessionals. 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. skaters. Steel is not a popular choice among

54 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.




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 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. great potential for the future is

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.

56 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

57 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 double its membership, and nights, and music Sports workshops. enabled the project to more than to become a focus for international In February 2003 Rockingham Motor to Corby Wheels Project

skaters and other youth culture events, such as arts projects, band made the decision to provide land

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.


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.


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

60 park and standard steel and laminate ramps. They hope to involve the skaters with the final designs.


APPENDIX 5 . 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:designer@fawns.co.uk Fawns Recreational Services Ltd, Woodcot Court, 2a Woodcot Gardens, Farnborough, Hants GU14 9RD Wooden Delights Ltd (Supplier of Rhino Ramps in Ireland) Mr Christy Hanbury Mincloon, Galway. Tel (091) 525709 info@woodendelights.ie

County and City Councils Waterford Corporation. Ms Jackie Freyne Loais Co Co Donegal Co Co Clare Co Co Louth Co Co Offaly CO CO Ms Anne Marie Maher Ms Aideen Doherty Mr Leonard Cleary Mr Noel Redmond Mr David Minton

62 Wexford Co Co Mr Sean Cooke

Kilkenny Borough Councillors Mr Andrew McGuinness Mr Malcolm Noonan Ms Betty Manning Schools Kieran’s College Presentation Loreto VEC Skate Parks Kiltorcan, Thomastown Ramp City, Dublin Wooden Works, Cork Tramore Surf Centre Corby Wheels Project/ Adrenalin Alley, UK The Edge Skatepark Leicester UK Mr Tony Holland Mr Karl Lennon Natasha Billy Butler Mandy Young ‘Deano’ Fr Kieran Kennedy Mr Cathal Cullen Ms Helen Renehan Mr Roger Curran


Organisations GAA – Kilkenny County Board Scanlon Park O’Loughlin Gaels Dept of Environment Mr Pat Dunphy

Mr Martin Gaffney Mr Joe Malone 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.


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.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful