The following is a list of questions submitted to BRL by a resident of Ballymun. So far BRL has NOT SUPPLIED answers to these questions in writing to the resident as requested and indeed seem reluctant to provide answers to these questions.  The questions seek information on the proper holistic planning of the regeneration, including at sub-surface level.  

The purpose of the questions has been added and are given in blue type.  Blue underlined words are links to the respective website pages.

1.	Regarding Drainage (including foul water) and Sewerage removal and Water Supply provisions analyses, what are

i.	names of surveyors, their qualifications and employers or companies,
ii.	current and past data, 
iii.	methodology employed, 
iv.	the locations where measurements were taken,
v.	projections for the increased demand on the respective systems resulting from the increase in population into the area (including projection for the increase in population), 
vi.	detailed statistical analysis of the proposed alternative solutions (if they exist), 
vii.	and BRL’s conclusions (detailed) of these studies.  

(Answers to these questions, if accurate and sufficient, would show that the regeneration recognises the people in ALL OF BALLYMUN are affected by sub-surface conditions such as drainage and sewerage no matter where particular houses are built in Ballymun.  It would also reveal to BRL the problems which require an effective solution now, before building starts, to avoid  problems later which would cost more to correct)

2.	Copies of policy documents formatting the election procedure and appointment of Chairs of the Local Fora, including the names and contact information of the actual appointees. 

( In some cases, residents we spoke to complained that they knew nothing about the Forums or who was on them (In fact some residents didn’t even know what BRL is).  This represents one deficit (at least) in representation.  Contact information would allow residents to correspond with the Forums and at least try to have their voice heard)

3.	The basis upon which it was decided, and the reasons for the decision, to declare Ballymun Housing Task Force Limited as the representatives of the community.  

(This decision was taken without consultation with the community.  It is important to know on what basis this decision was made and what steps are available to ensure the Ballymun Housing Task Force Limited is accountable to the people of Ballymun regarding their role in the regeneration. See Ballymun Housing Task Force Limited).

4.	Full and complete details of each and every soil analysis undertaken of at least four samples from each and every site element of the Masterplan, including maps of the locations where the soil samples were taken.

(This is the first step in any plan to build.  It is important to now what the capacity is of a particular site to withstand construction.  Much of land in Ballymun is marsh (for example, the area behind the Senior Comprehensive School, and Coultry Green) and may not be suitable for construction.

5.	BRL’s detailed analysis of the Masterplan questionnaire answers as reported in Newsletter No.2 (December 1997) but not provided in issue No.3 as promised.  Please include BRL’s plans to meet the wishes of the community as expressed in the questionnaire answers.

(Speaks for itself.  One question asked ‘  I don’t like my kids going to the shopping centre alone  YES/NO’.  We would like to know what the design response is to this.  If it is the neighbourhood centres, then the design response is inadequate since the centres will still be a good distance away from the housing.  There are other similar questions).

6.	Copies of BRL’s documents relating to the design responses given by residents at any and all design meetings including minutes of such meetings.

(These seem to be unavailable.  In fact we have heard complaints that responses were not recorded.  Tenants must be able to see that their input into the design process was actually incorporated, as far as reasonable possible, into the final designs and that the design committees are not just lip-service to consultation).

7.	Copies of any and all variations to the Master Plan to date.

(We are aware on ONE variation in Poppintree regarding the location of a road.  Belclare residents are unhappy with this. We would like to know what other changes are/have been made.  5000 people apparently answered the questionnaire when the Masterplan went on display.  Many of these would have been completed by people not from Ballymun who attended the exhibition.  Therefore a lesser number of Ballymun people accepted the DRAFT Masterplan.  If the Masterplan has been changed, agreement should be sought on the changes).

8.	Similarly for drainage (outlined above), a detailed analysis of the increased demand on the sewerage and water supply in Ballymun resulting from redevelopment and the increase in population into the area.
(This is the original question – now included in question 1 above).

9.	The location, size, dimensions, and design of the attenuation/storage facilities referred to on pages 16 and 55 of the Gateway Housing EIS.

(To cope with the extra water falling on Ballymun, and to ensure it’s proper removal, BRL propose to build what are effectively very large ponds to hold water. We would like to know where these ponds will be located since they do not appear on the Masterplan.  We would like to know the exact size so that the threat to safety can be adequately evaluated.  This will help identify the steps needed to ensure the ponds are safe to children. See Appeals).

10.	A copy of BRL’s Annual Returns and Report for inspection purposes.  

(BRL is a publically funded company and is accountable to Ballymun people for the taxes BRL receives and uses) (see BRL page).

11.	An explanation why there is no representative of the local educational providers on the Board of BRL.

(Obvious)

12.	A detailed account of how BRL plans to meet its educational provisions as outlined in the Masterplan.

(see Education)

13.	Information on the consultation process employed (there does not appear to be one) in the decision to choose/recommend Green Properties as the developer of the Business and Technology Park and the basis of the actual decision to appoint Green Properties.

(This will be the single, largest element of the regeneration.  It will consume 100 acres of land and most of our football pitches and green space.  We know of NO consultation with the Ballymun Community regarding this development.  Perhaps BRL can tell, adequately, us otherwise.  See Business and Technology Park).

14.	The process of consultation between the GAA and the FAI about the loss of playing fields in the area of the proposed Business and Technology Park and their views on the matter.

(as above)

15.	The process of consultation between BRL and the IDA concerning the development of the Business and Technology Park; the IDA’s views on why BRL did not consider the Poppintree Industrial suitable and BRL’s conclusion on why it was preferable to consume large areas of green space for the Business and Technology Park rather than make use of the existing Industrial Estate at Poppintree.

(Speaks for itself)

16.	The brief forwarded to potential contractors in response to the advertisement for tenders for the Business and Technology Park stating the criteria for the competition.

(The company chosen to build the Business and Technology Park were required to have land WITHIN 5Km of Ballymun to replace SOME of the pitches and green space lost.  We have waited 2 months for BRL reply to this and still BRL has not said if the developer has the required land).

17.	An explanation of the tendering and decision making process employed in appointing Lisney as estate agents.
(Speaks for itself)

18.	Names of the Companies that tendered for the estate agent position.
(Ditto)

19.	The basis upon which one company was selected.
(Ditto)

20.	An explanation why, despite the design constraints provided to Architects, the Ballymun Gateway Housing site includes a 9 storey and an 11 storey tower.

(Speaks for itself)

21.	In light of the fact that planning permission is sought for 129 units on the ‘Stonehenge’ site (Gateway Housing Site 3A), but only 95 units appear on the map, I request a statement detailing how the extra 34 units will be accommodated (3 Storey, 4 Storey, 5 Storey, 6 Storey units?) on this site.

22.	An explanation of why planning permission has been sought for 159 units on Gateway Housing Sites A and B, but only 151 are accounted for on the table detailing Number of Bedrooms (105 Apartments plus 46 Houses).  And an explanation of what has happened to the missing 8 units.

(See Housing - Housing Page 2 and Appeals regarding Gateway Housing)

23.	A plan and analysis detailing the exact location, size and demographic threshold of the playgrounds proposed in Ballymun as indicated in the Masterplan together with budgetary allowances.

(See Playgrounds)

24.	A plan and analysis detailing the location, size and demographic threshold of the proposed neighbourhood centres together with budgets for the construction of these centres.

(The budgets will determine the number of units actually built in the centres and therefore the number of shops etc.  The location determines who the centres serve and whether they are close enough for people.  The size determines how much space they occupy and other associated issues.  The demographic threshold determines whether the centres will be adequate to ensure enough demand to attract sustainable business).

25.	An explanation and design documentation explaining how the planned 9 and 11 storey student resident towers (Gateway Housing scheme) ‘responds to the surrounding environment’ and how it ‘integrates with the existing two-storey housing’.

(We feel they don’t ‘fit in’. We are new towers being built when BRL are demolishing towers?)

26.	Plans and elevations of all house designs prior to ‘consultation’ with sections of tenants of Ballymun and plans and elevations of all house designs after such ‘consultation’.

(To ensure that the responses of flat dwellers who are getting houses have been taken into account)

27.	The precise quantity of public land in Ballymun which will be offer for sale to private developers of owner-occupier houses and the total amount of public land in Ballymun which will be offered for sale to private developers for all purposes.

(The sale of land will generate profits which should be pumped back into Ballymun.  This should be publically and openly accounted for).

28.	The maximum number of owner-occupier houses to be built by private developers in Ballymun.

(This will help estimate the increase in population and the resultant demand on all services, as well as account for the amount of lost open space and final housing density).

29.	Detailed accounts of the sums of money or benefits-in-kind which will be generated by the sale of public land to private developers and a detailed account of how these sums will be reinvested in Ballymun.

(see Q. 27 – this is to help ensure proper accountability in the sale of public land inBallymun).

30.	The number of new building units which will be made available for use by community groups including youth clubs.

(So far most community groups are unhappy with the fact that they have NOT been properly consulted nor have their accommodation needs been fully accounted for yet in the regeneration.  We would liketo know BRL plans to help retain community groups).

31.	Detailed plans of the number of natural-surface football and GAA pitches which will remain in Ballymun after regeneration.

(see Sport and Recreation)

32.	Detailed plans of the number, size and location of proposed artificial surface sports facilities together with budgets for their construction.

(Obvious)

33.	The quantity of land to be made available to horse owners in the community including details of the construction of, or funding for associated buildings.

(Ballymun Horse Owners Co-Op has done invaluable work for our children and this should be properly funded to ensure it’s survival within the regeneration).

34.	An explanation why a health and Safety Officer has only just been appointed (Newsletter No.15 Feb/March 2000) and why such an officer was not appointed during the initial design phase where health and safety threats should have been identified by a qualified practitioner.

(Obvious.  We would like to know what threats to safety have been identified and what steps are being taken to ensure proper safety throughout the perios of the regeneration).

35.	Copies of all any and all supporting documentation for any and all plans including the Masterplan (3 vols.).

(Obvious)

36.	 A categorical and explicit statement that there are no conflicts of interest concerning the redevelopment of Ballymun between any and all persons, the Local Fora, the Ballymun Housing Task Force, bodies corporate and local, municipal and government authorities including membership and/or shareholdings in any of the above involved in the regeneration.  Please include details of any or all memberships and/or shareholdings held by any such parties.

(Obvious)

37.	How does BRL define ‘consultation’, and ‘consultation process’ ?

(No one seems to have defined what consultation actually means.  However BNCDG has placed proposals on the website.  It is important to have an idea of what consultation is in order to provide it and to take part in it properly.  Afterall, if one doesn’t know what consultation is, how does one know if one is consulting or has been consulted? See Consultation).

38.	On the architectural drawings for apartments on the Santry Lane site (0434/99) it states that the floors between apartments will be wooden floors.  Can you confirm this for me?  Can you also confirm if this is the standard to be applied to all other apartment constructions in Ballymun, including maisonettes?

(Obvious)

All of the above questions were submitted in March 200 and have not yet been answered.
The questions below were submitted in May 2000.  ‘You’ in each question refers to the Managing Director of BRL to whom the questions were addressed.

39.	In BRL’s last newsletter (Feb/March 2000, issue 15) it stated that BRL will install 12 playgrounds in Ballymun, the first of which was due to be available by summer 2000.  Can you tell me

a.	If 12 is the total number of playgrounds to be installed,
b.	If not 12, how many more (or less) will be installed,
c.	Where the 12 playgrounds will be located, 
d.	If residents adjoining the playgrounds have been consulted about the exact location of the playgrounds,
e.	The demographic threshold for each playground,
f.	Whether or not there will be a charge on using the playground,
g.	Annual estimates for the upkeep of the playgrounds, and
h.	Who will pay for the annual upkeep of the playgrounds?
(Obvious)

40.	Can you tell me what actions are being taken or will be being taken to ensure that the asbestos contained in the flats will be safely removed and disposed?

(The possiblity of the presence of asbestos was pointed out to us.  This is material is a fire retardant and is highly damaging to the human respiratory system if inhaled.  We want to know what steps are in place to ensure people are not harmed by it’s removal).

41.	Can you also tell me if residents of the flats and all other adjacent residents have been informed of the dangers of this asbestos and of BRL’s measures, if any, to ensure no one is harmed as a result of it’s removal, the manner in which they have been informed, when they were informed and their responses to this?

(Speaks for itself)

42.	Following community rumours that the flats will not be demolished, can you confirm that ALL the flats (15 storey towers, 8 Storey spines and 4 storey blocks, including the recently refurbished flats) actually will be demolished?

(Speaks for itself)
43.	Can you tell me if planning application(s) have been submitted for the demolition of the flats, and if not, when it will be submitted?

(Ditto)

44.	If ALL the flats are being demolished, can you tell me whether BRL has decided to implode or dismantle in sections the flats and what that decision is?

(Obvious)

45.	Can you tell me what precautions are or will be taken to ensure that the construction of the Community Arts and Resource Centre will not undermine the foundations and structural integrity of McDonagh Tower before residents of that tower are re-housed?

(Obvious)

46.	Can you tell me what precautions are being taken to ensure that the removal of McDonagh Tower will not adversely affect or destroy all or any of the work already undertaken on the European Union funded Community Arts and Resource Centre?

(Obvious)

47.	Can you tell me why the private lands owned by Bovale developments was included on the Masterplan and why this section of the Masterplan contains 7 playing fields when BRL has no control over how these private lands are developed?

(Obvious).

Ballymun New Century Development Group wants the proper regeneration of Ballymun.  Our main concern is for the provision of adequate, comfortable and affordable housing for the residents of Ballymun in a healthy environment serviced properly with adequate infrastructure, services and amenities.  Home Page