Castletown estate, Celbridge, Land Transfer & Fencing

The Raven.

The large area of woodland that is the green open space of Castletown housing estate is to be transferred to the OPW by Kildare County Council on a 99-year lease, and fenced off against the wishes of local residents. Some of this area is the beautiful landscape in front of a number of Castletown houses and some of it is behind another row of houses. All meetings have been held behind closed doors. The residents are very angry and distressed.

http://www.kildare.ie/community/CatherineMurphy/2010/10/castletown_land_transfer_and_f.html#more

More on this later as I have to go out.

On the fence

The Raven. wrote: »

. All meetings have been held behind closed doors. The residents are very angry and distressed.

http://www.kildare.ie/community/CatherineMurphy/2010/10/castletown_land_transfer_and_f.html#more

“I also pointed out at the meeting, that those residents who are not affiliated to the Residents Association had not been consulted, this I believe needs to occur prior to any decision on fencing or leasing these lands”

More on this later as I have to go out.

Seems Kildare County Council and the CRA have a penchant for closed doors.
Consultation should include all residents of Castletown and not just those affiliated to the residents association.
This probably does not suit the agendas of KCC or CRA, so full marks to Catherine Murphy for trying to bring forward the views of all the residents, on these issues.
Otherwise we might see a repeat of the attempt to dispose of the backlots without full consultation.
It is time the doors were opened by KCC and CRA . People are entitled to know what is happening to the environment that they live in irrespective of wheter they are affilated to an association or not.
The closed door policies of KCC and the CRA are the cause of much distrust amongst the people of Castletown.

Castletown

The proposed transfer of the green open space of Castletown Housing Estate should be brought to the attention of all residents by KCC. They are the legal owners of the land. KCC should issue a notice outlying their proposals to every house and provide a voting slip for all residents. This is not an issue for any association or group. It is a private matter between KCC and individual residents. The onus is on KCC to give ALL the residents all the details so that residents can make an informed decision, not influenced by groups or associations.

On the fence

Castletown wrote: »

The proposed transfer of the green open space of Castletown Housing Estate should be brought to the attention of all residents by KCC. They are the legal owners of the land. KCC should issue a notice outlying their proposals to every house and provide a voting slip for all residents. This is not an issue for any association or group. It is a private matter between KCC and individual residents. The onus is on KCC to give ALL the residents all the details so that residents can make an informed decision, not influenced by groups or associations.

If you are referring to the backlots KCC are not the legal owners of these.

Castletown

I am referring to the green open space which is the subject of the land transfer in question. It is located at the rear of Woodview. It extends to the Walled Gardens. There it opens up in full view from the front of the houses located in this area. It provides a beautiful view.





The section of the woods that is attached to Castletown Housing Estate however is the open green space of the housing estate. This area was previously owned by Mr, Rhatigan, who was the developer involved in building the housing estate. Once the estate was taken in charge this large area was handed over by the developer and designated our open green space. KCC, then became the legal owners of this section of woodland.

The Raven.

I thought you might like to see some pictures of our beautiful cul-de-sac.









The residents of this cul-de-sac have lived here for up to 30 years. They made this their home, and they bought their houses especially because of the magnificent view of Castletown woods, which is now pretty well their only green open space where children safely play in this beautiful landscape.

Now Kildare County Council are planning to hand it over to the OPW to destroy this beauty by putting up an unsightly fence around it, even cutting off sizable parts of the grassy areas. The plans for this development have taken place behind closed doors, by collusion between KCC, the OPW, and the Castletown Residents Association, without any consideration shown to the wishes of the residents, who have been kept in the dark.

When the OPW took over Castletown House, we welcomed them, knowing that they would do a superb job of restoring it, as it has been the pride and joy of the people of Celbridge since it was built. We never knew that they would put up ugly fences to keep the local people out of Castletown, or destroy their view of the woods from the outside. Now the residents are loosing all respect for the OPW, as they are showing none to us.

The Raven.

There is an article about the proposed fence and transfer of land on the front page of this week's Liffey Champion entitled 'Behind Closed Doors'. It is worth reading, but they didn't make it clear that the land in question is part of Castletown housing estate, the designated green open space of the residents. It is not part of Castletown House demesne.

convert

The Raven. wrote: »

The residents of this cul-de-sac have lived here for up to 30 years. They made this their home, and they bought their houses especially because of the magnificent view of Castletown woods, which is now pretty well their only green open space where children safely play in this beautiful landscape.

Unfortunately nobody owns the view from their house, and buying property because of the view is something a lot of people base their purchase on, forgetting that they don't own the land they're looking out on, regardless of whether it's held by a county council, OPW or private individual. And to use this as one of the reasons for objecting to the fence going up isn't the best idea.

That said, any arrangements that are being discussed probably should be discussed publicly, but unfortunately that doesn't happen very often in this country.

The Raven.

convert wrote: »

Unfortunately nobody owns the view from their house, and buying property because of the view is something a lot of people base their purchase on, forgetting that they don't own the land they're looking out on, regardless of whether it's held by a county council, OPW or private individual. And to use this as one of the reasons for objecting to the fence going up isn't the best idea.

No, of course they don't 'own' the view unless they own the land within the view. They don't own the pavement in front of their driveway either, but people are not allowed to block it. I have heard it said that one cannot object to planning permission on the grounds that it destroys the view, but I have never seen it written anywhere. The reality is that one can in fact object on these grounds. I have done it twice myself and won the case. I also know of other such cases. The quality of life of the existing residents, and the character and setting of the area are given consideration. There are also such things as protected views in the case of important protected structures.

However, we are talking about a different situation here. The land in question is the designated green open space of a housing estate. People bought their houses in front of it, on the understanding that this was the case, and there would be no development on it. The reason for the local councils taking over the green open spaces is to protect them from further development.

That said, any arrangements that are being discussed probably should be discussed publicly, but unfortunately that doesn't happen very often in this country.

There are one or two honest people who refuse to support this kind of underhand behaviour.

The Raven.

The plans for the fence around Castletown woods include 4 new service gates, 1 on the Mound field, and 3 within Castletown housing estate: 1 at the top of the Avenue, 1 in Woodview, and 1 in the cul-de-sac in The Walled Gardens. That means that there will be OPW service traffic, driving regularly throughout the housing estate, causing noise and pollution, and posing a risk to the health and safety of the children playing outside most of the houses.

My recollection was that they tried to do this in the past through the farmyard gate in Woodview, but were stopped. Now they are planning to do it again on a wider scale. This is an absolute disgrace! What right have the OPW got to this to a housing estate, especially as it is not their land!! This is no way to treat the residents of Celbridge!

For the last three years, many of the Castletown residents worked tirelessly (and spent money), to protect Castletown House and demesne from the negative impact of the Donaghcumper development, with little or no help from the OPW. Now they turn around and repay us in this manner. Shame on them!!

Beruthiel

Is it true that they intend to put up some sort of wooden fence and it will cost about a million to do this?

The Raven.

Beruthiel wrote: »

Is it true that they intend to put up some sort of wooden fence and it will cost about a million to do this?

Beruthial, no it definitely won't be a 'wooden' fence. It will be a tall metal security fence. Someone very aptly referred to it as an 'iron curtain' around Castletown woods, including the designated green open space of Castletown housing estate.

It is important for you to note that one of the service gates is next to the Arch in The Walled Gardens. Who knows what kind of traffic is likely to occur in this area. It could even be used as a parking lot for these vehicles. There is more information on the following link:

http://http://campbells.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1052&page=1

On the fence

I see our "friend and ally" Emmet wants a piece of the action.
http://campbells.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=general&thread=1052&post=28196

Beruthiel

The Raven. wrote: »

It is important for you to note that one of the service gates is next to the Arch in The Walled Gardens.

That area was never used as a service entrance before, I don't see why it needs one now.

Is there a plan on exactly where this fence is going to be put down?
IE - as it stands now, since the Arch has been fenced in, the teenagers go back into the woods during the night. That suits me just fine. If this fence is put up right at the road, this means they are back to being a nuisance again. I could do without that.

Altered state of mind

Does anybody know what exacctly the CRA want us to vote on at the EGM. Perhaps this is another example of the lack of awareness that Kevin Byrne and Emmet Stagg are talking about.
I thought we were required to send submissions on the proposal to erect a fence. If the council have already voted in favour of a Section 8 what are we voting on.

The Raven.

Altered state of mind wrote: »

Does anybody know what exacctly the CRA want us to vote on at the EGM. Perhaps this is another example of the lack of awareness that Kevin Byrne and Emmet Stagg are talking about.

The CRA haven't informed the residents what they are expected to vote for or vote against. I presume you got the notice of the EGM. There is no clarification on it, and nothing on their website since before the last EGM. They should inform the residents what this vote is about, well before the forthcoming EGM.

Sorry I can't be of more help. It is a mystery to me also.

I thought we were required to send submissions on the proposal to erect a fence. If the council have already voted in favour of a Section 8 what are we voting on.

The council have voted to launch the Part 8 process. When the plans or on public display, there will be 4 weeks to make submissions to KCC.

Altered state of mind

The Raven. wrote: »

The CRA haven't informed the residents what they are expected to vote for or vote against. I presume you got the notice of the EGM. There is no clarification on it, and nothing on their website since before the last EGM. They should inform the residents what this vote is about, well before the forthcoming EGM.

Sorry I can't be of more help. It is a mystery to me also.



The council have voted to launch the Part 8 process. When the plans or on public display, there will be 4 weeks to make submissions to KCC.

I got the newsletter which left me puzzled. As I far as I understand from Emmet Stagg and Catherine Murphy we will have an opportunity to make the submissions that you refer to.
The CRA claim to have a mandate from the residents. What course of action are the CRA talking about.
If, as is required under planning legislation , submissions by residents are the correct procedure why are the CRA not preparing submissions based on the mandate that they were given.
If the CRA are claiming to represent their members interest, then I have to agree with you , the very least they could do is inform the residents in advance of the meeting.
Thankfully Catherine Murphy puts the information in the public domain as soon as it is available.
Myself and my partner feel it would be wiser to make our own submissions
and not rely on the CRA.
Past experience has shown that the interests of the CRA are not necessarily in the best interests of the residents.
Hopefully the councillors attending the EGM will shed the correct light on the way forward with this Part 8 process

Castletown

This might bring clarity,

Firstly for those who might not know I will try to explain what a part 8 is. I am no expert but the following is my understanding;

It is the term used when a local authority want to apply to themselves for planning permission for certain things including fences on their own property.

It is different to a normal planning application as the council do not have to erect a site notice. They simply first seek the consent of local councillors to proceed with the part 8 process.

This happened on the 19th of October and was agreed by the councillors. So the process has begun.



The next stage is that the plans go on public display in the Library within a certain time frame, perhaps 3 weeks.

Submissions are then invited from the public for a 4 week period.
The planners in the council will read theses, do up a report and present it to the 25 councillors who will have the final vote.


If there are several submissions it will be clear that people have strong views. A submission from a group or an association will have far less impact than several individual submissions. As there may be an election soon local TDs will want to please the people and will take seriously hundreds of submissions which they see as potential votes. They will advise there councillors to vote accordingly.

I understand that CRA will explain at their meeting what has happened to date and ask what people want them to write in their submission on behalf of their members and take a vote on it to give them a madate to proceed . That is what they have explained to me.

On the fence

Quote:
Originally Posted by Altered state of mind
Does anybody know what exacctly the CRA want us to vote on at the EGM. Perhaps this is another example of the lack of awareness that Kevin Byrne and Emmet Stagg are talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Raven.
The CRA haven't informed the residents what they are expected to vote for or vote against. I presume you got the notice of the EGM. There is no clarification on it, and nothing on their website since before the last EGM. They should inform the residents what this vote is about, well before the forthcoming EGM.

Castletown wrote: »

I understand that CRA will explain at their meeting what has happened to date and ask what people want them to write in their submission on behalf of their members and take a vote on it to give them a madate to proceed . That is what they have explained to me.

Nice of them to have informed at least one resident. But rather than informing residents on an individual basis could they not update all of us with regular updates on their website. A more detailed newsletter would be another simple way to communicate important issues to residents.



Altered state of mind
Quote:Myself and my partner feel it would be wiser to make our own submissions
and not rely on the CRA.



Castletown Quote: If there are several submissions it will be clear that people have strong views. A submission from a group or an association will have far less impact than several individual submissions.


Taking all of the above into account perhaps it would be wiser and safer to make an individual submission.
At this point in time I don't know (pardon the pun) which side of the fence the CRA are on.

Castletown

I agree completely that all residents should have been notified. Imagine how it must feel to discover that an 8 foot high fence may be attached to your property and nobody took the time to knock on your door to let you know.

This fence has been in the pipeline for several years. There was plenty of time to knock on the doors of residents most affected, but nobody took the time.



This should have happen before any agreement in principle was agreed by CRA , KCC and the OPW.


Not all residents can get out to meetings. On such a serious issue effecting peoples homes, and their everyday way of life, theses residents in particular should have been consulted.

Altered state of mind

Castletown wrote: »

This should have happen before any agreement in principle was agreed by CRA , KCC and the OPW.

There should have been no agreement in principle or otherwise until all residents were consulted. When will KCC and the OPW realise that the CRA do no represent all residents of Castletown Estate.
By choosing to deal with and make agreements with a single organisation KCC and the OPW continue to undermine the rights of individual residents.

The Raven.

Altered state of mind wrote: »

There should have been no agreement in principle or otherwise until all residents were consulted. When will KCC and the OPW realise that the CRA do no represent all residents of Castletown Estate.
By choosing to deal with and make agreements with a single organisation KCC and the OPW continue to undermine the rights of individual residents.

I absolutely agree.

moan a minute

Another CRA bashing I see.....

The Raven.

moan a minute wrote: »

Another CRA bashing I see.....

That is a bit simplistic. People have a right to express their views on this issue, and that involves all elements at the core of this matter. The rights of individuals living in Castletown housing estate, and the erosion of their quality of life, are of very serious concern, and their voices should not be silenced.

It is not surprising that there is anger and frustration on the part of the residents of Castletown, as they have not been properly informed. It would also appear that neither have the councillors, the OPW, or KCC been properly informed, as they seem to have been given the impression that the residents were in favour of the fencing and transfer of the green open space of their housing estate to the OPW, which is obviously untrue.

moan a minute

Yes people do have a right to express their views but how come it always ends in damning the work of a few volunteers?? Granted a little more info on the estate every now and then would be good..but again these people are volunteers...I'm sure they have better things to be doing then reading the crap that is posted here about them...

Do you attend the CRA meetings or have a mole on the committee feeding you information on their secret meetings with the KCC and OPW..from my memory at the last AGM it was voted by the majority of residents that bothered to turn up that a fence was a good idea as long as the OPW agreed to residents right of way and stated gate opening time as apposed to just the usual dawn to dusk times...
It was also agreed that and EGM would be called by the CRA if and when any decisions where to be made...no mole needed, just attend your yearly AGM.
And after all that if you think that the OPW or the KCC really give a rats ass about the views of the residents in this or any other matter then I'd like to live in your world..

The Raven.

moan a minute wrote: »

Yes people do have a right to express their views but how come it always ends in damning the work of a few volunteers??

That is a bit melodramatic, but I think you have answered your own question in the following statement:

Granted a little more info on the estate every now and then would be good..

…but again these people are volunteers...I'm sure they have better things to be doing then reading the crap that is posted here about them...

Strange how these ‘few volunteers’ could find the time to cause so much trouble and distress as they have recently. Do you think that residents haven’t better things to do than having to spend time defending their rights to retain their designated green open space, and the quality of their environment?

…from my memory at the last AGM it was voted by the majority of residents that bothered to turn up that a fence was a good idea as long as the OPW agreed to residents right of way and stated gate opening time as apposed to just the usual dawn to dusk times...

In that case, your memory appears to be deceiving you. A majority out of less than 50 residents voted, by a show of hands, for the CRA to negotiate with KCC and the OPW – not to vote ‘that a fence was a good idea’ as you claim. The impression the residents were given was that a fence was being erected regardless of the wishes of the residents, and that the CRA were negotiating to have access points open from dawn to dusk. Residents were never informed of any transfer of land or any leasing agreement.

It was also agreed that and EGM would be called by the CRA if and when any decisions where to be made...no mole needed, just attend your yearly AGM.

An EGM was called on the 25th May 2010, to deal with ‘Back-lots and Open/Green Areas in Castletown’ housing estate. The largest green open space, which includes a section of the woods, was listed as number 1 in the CRA newsletter, and inaccurately described. This designated green open space was not open for discussion, and residents were informed that it ‘will be subject to a separate ‘Part 8’ Planning Process’. This was not properly explained to the residents.

And after all that if you think that the OPW or the KCC really give a rats ass about the views of the residents in this or any other matter then I'd like to live in your world..

No I do not think that. I would have thought it was obvious from my posts.

Disgruntled Dan

This disgraceful treatment of the residents of Castletown by KCC is unbelieveable. But even worse than this is the fact that the CRA seem to be working hand in hand with the county council in taking away the green open spaces which we believed were part of Castletown estate.
The county council which is funded by taxpayers and the residents association funded by residents subscriptions would appear to have scant regard for the wishes or rights of the people who fund them.
It seem neither organisation will be happy until there is no green open space left in Castletown estate.
How can The CRA be in discussion with the OPW with regard to transferring land to the OPW whilst KCC are in receipt of in excess of 2000 submissions relating to rights of way over this land. The CRA claim to have a mandate based on a show of hands from approximately 50 people.

Since the last EGM we have heard nothing about the disposal of the backlots. Am I to presume we will hear nothing about this until after they have been privatised?

Surely the transfer of green open spaces against the wishes of residents and the erosion of individuals
rights needs to be addressed. Could this matter be referred to John Gormleys department?

Castletown

Consider the following:
KCC had always intended transferring this land to the OPW. This was explained by a county official at a CRA Meeting. KCC could have ploughed ahead with this and perhaps given one access point to the residents. As KCC are the owners of the open green space they are only legally required to inform the residents through notification in a local paper and invite submissions. Nobody would have even seen the notice in the local papers. This is how the system operates, which I agree is very wrong.

However because we had a residents association who took the time to deal with these people who were intent on transferring the land, 5 access points into the open green space have been negotiated. Without CRA this would not have been achieved. KCC would have had a free go at erecting the fence and transferring the land.

Of course CRA members who liaised with the OPW, should have circulated regular notices highlighting the importance of what was going on, and should have sought a wider mandate and represented all the various views of the residents who pay their subscriptions, before agreeing in principle to anything. But had they not have been there at all I think that KCC would have only included one access point for residents.


Leaving all that aside, the only way to get your view across will be to write your submission when the time comes and lobby your local politicians to act on your behalf. The system is very wrong . Individuals should be informed and each resident should have a say on the transfer of open green spaces within Housing Estates. This should not be negotiated with one or two members of the residents association. Local authorities should be required to consult each property owner, who bought a home within the estate. The current system is wrong. Perhaps CRA should have insisted that KCC contact all residents. It is easy to be wise looking back.

Disgruntled Dan

Castletown wrote: »

Nobody would have even seen the notice in the local papers.
However because we had a residents association who took the time to deal with these people who were intent on transferring the land, 5 access points into the open green space have been negotiated.
Without CRA this would not have been achieved. KCC would have had a free go at erecting the fence and transferring the land.

The system is very wrong . Individuals should be informed and each resident should have a say on the transfer of open green spaces within Housing Estates. This should not be negotiated with one or two members of the residents association.

In response to the invitation for submissions on the CDP the county council received a total of 6550 submissions. Of that 6550 a total of 6195 were in relation to Castletown/Donaghcumper. This hardly constitutes nobody, it would seem that local people do read the notices and respond accordingly.

KCC would not have had a free go because there are plenty of indivuals and other groups who have a stake in this issue. Some of our councillors are actively working on behalf of these concerned residents.

Catherine Murphy and Emmet Stagg have made it very clear that there needs to be full disclosure of all the relevant information to all the residents. The CRA EGM is in 11 days and we still don't know what it is we are expected to vote on. The CRA have been in discussions/negotiations for years , yet we will only be given a short summary and report on the night . Then we will be allowed approximately one hour to discuss all this and make up our minds and vote.We still don't know what we are expected to vote on. This is grossly unfair on the part of the CRA.

Disgruntled Dan

The Raven. wrote: »

It would also appear that neither have the councillors, the OPW, or KCC been properly informed, as they seem to have been given the impression that the residents were in favour of the fencing and transfer of the green open space of their housing estate to the OPW, which is obviously untrue.

It is a sad day for the residents of Castletown if a show of 50 hands at an AGM is taken to be a true representation of the views of all the residents of Castletown.

The Raven.

Disgruntled Dan wrote: »

This disgraceful treatment of the residents of Castletown by KCC is unbelieveable. But even worse than this is the fact that the CRA seem to be working hand in hand with the county council in taking away the green open spaces which we believed were part of Castletown estate.

I absolutely agree. They are our green open spaces and the large wooded area, the subject of this thread, is the only significant designated green open space left since the CRA facilitated the privatization of the backlots. It would appear that they have given the impression to KCC that the residents are happy to hand over their only remaining green open space to the OPW. This is indeed disgraceful.

The county council which is funded by taxpayers and the residents association funded by residents subscriptions would appear to have scant regard for the wishes or rights of the people who fund them. It seem neither organisation will be happy until there is no green open space left in Castletown estate.

That is correct. KCC are indeed funded by the taxpayers, and the CRA are funded by the residents, yet both appear to forget this ‘minor detail’ when they make decisions, adversely affecting the residents and taxpayers, behind closed doors.

How can The CRA be in discussion with the OPW with regard to transferring land to the OPW whilst KCC are in receipt of in excess of 2000 submissions relating to rights of way over this land. The CRA claim to have a mandate based on a show of hands from approximately 50 people.

My understanding is that the 2,000 submissions to KCC relate to the rights of way from Castletown Gates along the river Liffey through the Batty Langley Lodge gates. Do these rights of way also relate to the woods?

It is not surprising that less than 50 residents turned up to the AGM, given the disillusionment with the CRA on the part of residents. There are also the residents, property owners in the estate, who are not affiliated to the CRA, whose rights have been ignored.

Since the last EGM we have heard nothing about the disposal of the backlots. Am I to presume we will hear nothing about this until after they have been privatised?

There has been no information from the CRA on the back-lots issue since the EGM. However, it would appear that this situation has not been finalized, as there are some residents who do not want to extend their gardens into the green open space. There is an interesting thread on the back-lots issue, but there are no posts since the 3rd of June 2010. See KCC/Castletown backlots.

Surely the transfer of green open spaces against the wishes of residents and the erosion of individuals rights needs to be addressed. Could this matter be referred to John Gormleys department?

It is hard to tell what John Gormley’s attitude might be on this issue. The OPW have been doing such good PR on their ‘restoration and preservation of the House [Castletown] and its historic demesne’, by which Gormley could easily be misled. They neglected to mention their intended land grab from Castletown Housing Estate, but I doubt if that would bother Mr. G. (See this week’s Liffey Champion page 8.)