Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 1 | P a g e
Independent Community Liaison Officer
Sligo East City : Cranmore and Environs and Regeneration Masterplanning
Process
Report
2012 – 2016
Report for HOUSING AGENCY
53 Mount Street Upper
Dublin 2
September 2016
Maeve McCormack
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 2 | P a g e
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The role of the Independent Community Liaison Officer (ICLO) for Sligo East City :
Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Masterplan, was to facilitate interaction and
communication between the local community and the Regeneration Office and
Design Team, for the Masterplanning process between 2011 and 2016. The ICLO
worked independently and confidentially to support, facilitate and empower the local
community throughout each Stage of the Masterplanning process, in the housing
estates of Cranmore, Garavogue Villas, Doorly Park, Martin Savage Terrace,
Riverview, Hazelview; and communities in the town lands of Tonaphubble,
Commons and Cleveragh.
Prior to the appointment of the Regeneration Masterplan Design Team (2013), the
ICLO undertook a series of independent community consultations. The purpose was
to work with the local community (individuals, residents’ groups, community groups
and communities of interest) to support them to articulate their needs and
expectations, in a clear and realistic way, to the Design Team, rather than feel they
were having their needs articulated to them. In this way, whatever vision was
agreed, could be confidently owned and built upon by those who live and work in the
regeneration areas. Ownership of the final plan would be key to its success.
Information gathered at independent consultations were also very useful to the ICLO
when reviewing each draft Stage Report, both with the community and the
Regeneration Office. She was uniquely placed to look at the process impartially,
asking questions about issues, language and processes of all stakeholders, to help
ensure that reports were clear and unambiguous, representing all voices.
Each Masterplan Stage consultation (there were a total of five stages) gathered
momentum. The figures outlined in each stage report show how, as each stage
progressed, the community, in most cases, interacted more and more with the
process. This was the community telling the Design Team what their issues were
and what their vision is for future generations. People turned up to agree, to
disagree, to change their minds or to find out more and make an informed decision.
It was an honest engagement, with consultations reaching a more mature level of
discussion at each progressive Stage.
Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the process was approved by the Stakeholder Leadership
Group. By Stage 3, this was restructured to formal Steering Group, which will
oversee the rollout of this plan over the next 10 years. Four voluntary community
representatives sit on this Steering Group and they have a clearly outlined mandate
from their community. This is supported by a system of accountability to their
residents that allows them to speak on residents’ behalf at these meetings. This
community framework evolved through the Masterplanning process and has a
structured communication and feedback system in the community. Evidence of how
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 3 | P a g e
well this system works, is seen in the concerns raised at Steering Group review of
Stage 3, leading to further refinement of Ideas in Stage 4.
The community had to address a number of issues during this five stage process.
These included consultation fatigue, frustration at delays between Stages and delays
in small works programmes all contributing to delay in putting a final Masterplan in
place. The adjacent communities made it clear that they were unhappy with the
timeline of the Regeneration Plan proposals. The gap between stages was
challenging, as residents waited a long time after consultations to receive summary
and recommendations and to have their feedback heard. With the support of the
ICLO they lobbied for small works projects, estate maintenance programmes and
amendment and refinement of proposals of concern. Structured communication
systems are now agreed and in place to monitor these issues. Communities
benefiting from longer term physical plans are still frustrated at the timescales
outlined. It is noted that while the Eastern Garvogue Bridge and Approach Roads
Project is rolled out separately from the Regeneration Masterplan, it will have
significant impact on the community.
So, what of the roll out of this Regeneration Masterplan? The commitment of the
community to this process and the challenges faced and met, should be
acknowledged. Analysis of the feedback in Stages 3 and 4 indicated high levels of
support for the Regeneration Projects. It is noted that some ideas, in particular the
proposals for a new community services centre, will need further negotiation
agreement on the final detail, requiring a well-planned and partnership based
approach by all stakeholders. In addition, further work needs to be done to ensure
active engagement with the areas to the south of the regeneration area.
Ongoing review and evaluation must form part of the rollout of this plan. Structures
are in place for this and the community have seen feedback mechanisms work. It
cannot be stressed how important ongoing communications between the
Regeneration Office and the community will be at this stage. Open dialogue is
important. Each time the consultation process encountered difficulties, when space
was created for honest discussion and expression, satisfactory solutions were found.
It will be important to maintain the structures, procedures and protocols to continue
this successfully.
In order to make the most of current funding opportunities and plan for future
opportunities, ongoing stakeholder discussions to further refine the ideas outlined in
this document are necessary. The local community, stakeholders and the
Regeneration Executive must continue this work without pause to access funding
efficiently and speedily. Some challenging final decisions will need to be made, but
the process to date clearly demonstrates that the skills, the commitment and vision
needed to make this happen are all there, both on the part of the residents of the
regeneration area and those supporting the delivery of the Regeneration Masterplan.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 4 | P a g e
2. OVERVIEW OF REGENERATION AND ROLE OF ICLO:
The Sligo East City : Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Masterplanning process
set out to put in place a 10 year Regeneration Master to achieve the following vision:
To make the East City area and Cranmore a more attractive place to live with
better, more convenient connections to existing and new facilities, locally and
in the rest of Sligo.
To enable individuals and the communities of the area to avail of
opportunities, with good access to employment, education, health and family
support services.
To see the East City area become a location of choice for future generations,
to live, to work and to visit.
The Design Team was appointed in January 2013 to undertake a 5 stage
Masterplanning process to put in place a 10 year regeneration masterplan for the
Regeneration area. The Masterplanning consultation process is fully documented in
each stage report available on www.sligococo.ie/Services/CranmoreRegeneration.
In 2011, The Minister for Housing requested that the Housing Agency put in place a
Regeneration Community Liaison service to work closely with local residents,
community representatives and stakeholders in progressing the planning and
implementation of the physical, economic and social regeneration of the Eastern
Quadrant of Sligo, including Cranmore Estate. An Independent Community Liaison
Officer to support the planning stage of the regeneration was put in place on a part-
time basis in September 2011, to provide the following services:
Facilitate community involvement in the development of the Masterplan and
regeneration process and encourage active participation of the public.
Effective communication regarding the planning and implementation of the
regeneration programme. Consult and give feedback on issues regarding the
regeneration.
Develop links and effective working relationships with relevant stakeholders:
the local authority, other statutory bodies and the local community regarding
the regeneration programme.
Develop initiatives designed to inform and create awareness of the work of
the regeneration programme.
Report on progress to the Minister for Housing and Planning through the
Housing Agency.
The tender brief for the Regeneration Masterplan, funded under the Department of
the Environment, Community and Local Government’s national regeneration
programme, and framed in the context of the East City of Sligo stated: In advance of
the Consultations by the Masterplanning team, the Independent Community Liaison
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 5 | P a g e
Officer will have worked closely with community groups and representatives to
undertake a detailed consultation within the target communities. It is expected that at
the initial Masterplan consultation meetings, community representatives will be in a
position to present for further exploration a detailed summary of the local needs,
issues and concerns that they have identified. It also stated that a successful
realisation will depend on the engagement and ‘buy-in’ of the stakeholders in
developing the Project. The purpose of this report is to document and evaluate the
work of the ICLO.
3. TIMING:
The Masterplanning process had 5 stages:
Stage 1: Socio Economic Review and Appraisal
Stage 2: Review and Appraisal the Physical, Social and Economic Contexts for
Regeneration
Stage 3: Development of Preliminary Masterplan Proposals and Actions
Stage 4: Masterplan Detailed Design Refinement
Stage 5: Compilation of Final Integrated Masterplan Proposals
The Design Team was appointed in January 2013 and the Masterplan was expected
to be completed by March 2014. Details of planned and actual schedule of work are
outlined below
Scheduled start Date/
length of time
Actual Start
Date
Finish Date (presentation
to Stakeholder
Leadership
Group/Steering Group
Stage 1 January 2013 – 8 weeks January 2013 March 2013
Stage 2 March 2013 – 12 weeks April 2013 September 2013
Stage 3 May 2013 – 12 weeks March 2014 April 2015
Stage 4 September 2013 – 14
weeks
July 2015 February 2016
Stage 5 January 2014- 10 weeks April 2016 Presented to Steering
Group July 2016, Adopted
by Sligo County Council
September 2016
The Regeneration Masterplan reports fully document the Masterplan Design
process, including community consultation. Section 5 of this report outlines a
summary of the work the ICLO at each Stage. A more detailed timeline, including
key events and the work schedule of the ICLO is outlined in Appendix A.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 6 | P a g e
4. REGENERATION AREA
The terms of reference for the Sligo Regeneration Masterplan listed four specific
target areas in the Eastern Quadrant of Sligo City.
1. Cranmore Estate (where most of the physical Masterplanning would take
place)
2. Areas to the South of Cranmore Estate (Doorly Park, Martin Savage Terrace
and Garavogue Villas (including Hazelview and Riverview)
3. Areas adjacent to Cranmore (Tonaphubble and surrounds)
4. Communities of Interest
The level of community engagement and the identified needs (social, economic,
physical) varied in each area.
5. SUMMARY OF WORK STAGE BY STAGE WORK OF ICLO
5.1 PREPARATION FOR MASTERPLAN CONSULTATIONS
Prior to the appointment of the Masterplan Design Team the ICLO researched the
local community and independently assessed a baseline network of residents’
associations and community groups in the proposed Regeneration Area and made
contact with these groups. The ICLO then undertook a series of Independent
Community Consultations in the areas between October 2012 and January 2013.
The purpose of the consultations was to provide an independent community forum
where an internal community based independent discussion on the ‘lived experience’
of residents of the area could take place. It set out to facilitate the expression of the
issues, problems and positive or negative changes in each street required to improve
this ‘lived experience’ for all members of each community. This discussion among
residents was intended to prepare them for formal consultation with the
Masterplanners. Up to 170 residents attended these consultations which where
were run in group and one to one formats. The method used was Participatory
Learning and Action (PLA), where participants control the process and record the
comments and feedback. Information was collated at workshops and a feedback
mechanism agreed. This involved each group nominating two people from the
group to read over the final notes, correct any inaccuracies and approve them for
circulating to each house on their particular street. Information was collated,
approved by participants and circulated to residents. Participants raised issues on
which people expressed a range of opinions, as well as issues that had general or
unanimous agreement. This information was then used by residents to inform their
formal consultation with the Regeneration Masterplanners in 2013.
5.2 STAGE 1: January 2013
Social and Economic Appraisal: This set the baseline for the masterplan and
included consultation with community groups and agencies and analysis of census
results. A social and economic profile outlining disadvantage and need in the
regeneration area was published: ‘Building on our past…. Looking to our future –
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 7 | P a g e
Socio Economic Profile of East Sligo City : Cranmore and Environs Regeneration
Masterplan’.
The ICLO reviewed the draft before issue to check if all issues raised at independent
consultations were included and to give independent feedback before issue. Through
these exchanges a further 'watchdog' role evolved for the ICLO. During Stage 1 the
Stakeholder Leadership Group was set up, whose role it would be to review each
Draft Stage of the masterplan. See Section 6 for more details. The ICLO provided
support to residents who volunteered or were targeted as potential community
representatives. With them, she negotiated an increase in the number of community
representatives and substitutes on the basis that volunteers members needed this
support to sit on a committee on equal terms with paid professionals.
5.3 STAGE 2 : April 2013
This undertook a Review and Appraisal the Physical, Social and Economic contexts
for Regeneration. It included consultations with residents, community groups,
agencies and business in the regeneration area identifying areas of need and
opportunity (physical, social, economic).
The ICLO gave an independent briefing to Design Team prior to Stage 2, alerting
them lack of engagement by hard to reach groups, from her experience of
independent community consultations (it should be noted that many of these were
also identified in Stage 1 report). She worked closely with residents associations,
local community groups and the regeneration office to maximise attendance at public
consultation, ensuring that the promotion was well co-ordinated using local on the
ground communication networks. Key to the success of this was ongoing
communication with both parties to ensure that both were well prepared for
engagement. Preparation included monitoring and discussions to ensure venues
were accessible and neutral, information was accessible, publicity was extensive,
resident friendly and welcoming and ensuring residents had the confidence to lead
discussions at workshops.
The ICLO observed/attended/interacted in all community consultation workshops
and workshops for the social plan and a roundtable discussion for the economic
plan, organised by the Regeneration Team. Working with residents who attended
the workshops, she supported them to ensure their input was outlined and recorded.
She also outlined issues on behalf of residents who were not in attendance. It is
noted that in the later stages of the Masterplanning consultation process, the
community representatives took over this role. She was satisfied that all
stakeholders were represented and their input recorded. ICLO reviewed draft reports
of workshops giving a commentary where she felt appropriate regarding ranking of
issues and, cross -referencing of workshop and omission of issues with the original
Independent Consultations to ensure that all issues actions had been brought up by
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 8 | P a g e
participants. The ICLO also organised a fact-finding trip for residents and community
workers to Ballymun and Fatima regeneration projects in Dublin.
5.4 STAGE 3: March 2014
This was about the Development of Preliminary Masterplan Proposals and Actions
with extensive public and stakeholder consultations around social, economic and
physical issues and ideas. It included a public display of regeneration ideas with
questionnaires to gather feedback. The feedback was analysed and results
published in Stage 3 Report. Considerable time was spent doing this, with input
from the ICLO, as the Regeneration Office wished to ensure the process was clear
and transparent and each comment traceable.
The Exhibition of Ideas took place in summer 2014, a full year after the previous
public consultation in summer 2013. It was difficult to keep momentum going in
second half of 2013 and early 2014 as process was between stages. The ICLO
created opportunities to continue interaction with resident and increase their skills
and confidence by providing community skills training e.g. planning support, social
media, communications, setting up a residents group, strategic planning support.
She also ran drop-in information clinics, and regeneration awareness exercises such
as newsletters and acknowledgement of sundry works.
In preparation for the Exhibition of Ideas, the ICLO worked closely with the
Regeneration Office to ensure the exhibition was accessible and easy to understand
and give feedback. She liaised with Cranmore Regeneration and Design Team
regarding community involvement in Stage 3 workshops and how best to approach
this creatively and flexibly to ensure maximum engagement at all levels. This
included looking in detail at consultation presentation format, feedback mechanisms,
location and timing. Using informal local networks, she was in a position to start the
dialogue around the regeneration ideas in advance of the exhibition, so people were
prepared when they saw exhibition of ideas. She also organised a community trip to
give residents and community workers an opportunity to see how similar ideas had
worked in projects in Galway (Ballybane and Tuam).
The consultation in Stage 3 had the largest attendances up to that to date, indicating
increasing engagement with the Regeneration Masterplanning Process. The high
attendance rate indicated a deepening engagement of the community with the
process and the successful on the ground promotion by residents’ groups and the
Regeneration Office, supported by the ICLO. On the recommendation of the ICLO, it
ran for a week, allowing residents to visit and revisit ideas, ask questions and then
asking more questions after discussing issues among themselves. It also provided
an opportunity for further relationship building between Regeneration staff, the
community and agencies; and an opportunity to discuss local issues informally. This
engagement allowed the ICLO to start to take a step back for her facilitative role and
the community took further control of the process.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 9 | P a g e
Following the issue of Stage 3 Draft Report, residents raised concerns around some
of the findings and recommendations based on these. The ICLO attended a
number of residents’ meetings to support chairpersons in disseminating information
to residents about Stage 3 of the Masterplan and to provide independent
clarification/explanation of queries where required. As residents were getting to
understand the process better, they were engaging more with consultations and
discussions. At a heated public meeting, it was requested that the feedback
questionnaire in Stage 3 be re-issued to all households in Cranmore. After
negotiation with community representatives, the ICLO and Regeneration staff, it was
agreed to revise Stage 4 to include further public consultation around the more
controversial ideas.
The ICLO supported the community representatives to disseminate feedback from
their areas and present it at the Steering Committee meeting. It was a challenge for
representatives to feedback a range of conflicting views and concerns from their
residents. She worked with them to put a clear feedback system in place for
residents, based on the experiences of Stage 1 and Stage 2 feedback.
There was difficulty in getting a representative from adjacent areas to attend the
Steering Committee for stage 3. Residents did not meet formally to give feedback to
their representatives. Subsequent to a number of communications with residents,
ICLO raised her concerns with the Regeneration Office who successfully
approached residents directly to sit on the Steering Committee.
During Stage 3, the Stakeholder Leadership Group was reviewed and expanded to a
Steering Group. This is detailed in section 7.
During Stages 3 and 4 the ICLO met with the board of the Cranmore Abbeyquarter
community Centre regarding their vision for the centre in the context of Regeneration
plans for a new community services centre. There was agreement that that while all
were in favour of a new centre, there were different opinions on what to do with the
Abbeyquarter Centre. There are also issues to be addressed regarding the running
of the proposed new centre. The ICLO played a role in opening this dialogue, but at
this point it needs to be led out by senior management and include the three
community centres in the regeneration area (Cranmore Community Co-Operative
Ltd, Cranmore Abbeyquarter Centre Ltd. and Resource House).
5.5 STAGE 4: July 2015
Refining the Regeneration Masterplan and building on feedback from Stage 3:
This stage focused on ideas that raised concerns with residents and discussed
which options were seen as best for the regeneration area and residents. The
feedback was analysed and published in Stage 4 report. The ICLO worked closely
with the Regeneration Office, Design Team and Community representatives to
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 10 | P a g e
ensure all information was presented in a clear accessible manner at the Stage 4
exhibition of refined ideas in September. At this point, there was an extensive
communications system set up by Cranmore Co-Operative Society Ltd. Each
household was contacted face to face by a resident (often accompanied by the
ICLO) to explain the importance of attending Stage 4 Exhibition and giving feedback.
A target of a minimum of 50 % of households to attend was set and reached.
When draft Stage 4 report was issued for review, the same system of review that
had been used by community representatives in Cranmore for Stage 3 was
successfully implemented again. It was more difficult to get the other regeneration
areas to engage, as much of the content of Stage 4 looked development of physical
ideas around the Cranmore area. It is should be noted that all the ideas from Stage
3 were included.
5.6 STAGE 5 – March 2016
Publication of final Regeneration masterplan. The final Regeneration Masterplan
is made up of a series of projects: physical, social and economic. Funding has been
secured for a number of the projects. The plan has been reviewed and approved by
the steering Committee in July 2016 and adopted by Sligo County Council in
September 2016.
The same review process was used by Cranmore community representatives as
used in Stages 3 and 4. The ICLO contacted each community representative to offer
her support, but left it to the Regeneration Office to follow up on the invitation to
Steering Group meeting. At this point the Regeneration Office continued to
communicate directly with each representative on a range of issues. Support from
the ICLO at this point was minimal, the main task being helping community
representatives to prepare agreed text for Steering Group briefing on behalf of their
residents.
6. KEY STAKEHOLDER LEADERSHIP GROUP
The Masterplan Design brief required that a Key Stakeholder Leadership Group
(SLG) review each Draft Stage Report. It was also agreed that a separate briefing
would be held for elected representatives. The brief for SLG (overviewed in
Appendix B) stated: This is a short-term working group which will exist for the life-
span of the Masterplan Development process with anticipated 5 no briefing and
consultation meetings with the Masterplan consultants over a twelve-month period.
The ICLO worked the community and regeneration community wardens and
regeneration office to recruit nominees to the SLG. A number of prospective
candidates were identified from independent consultations too. While the role only
required attending 5 meetings, it had considerable responsibility and each
community nominee was expected to be able to represent the views of their
communities and interact with paid professional representatives from agencies also
on the SLG. Due to the amount of work and the responsibility involved in being the
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 11 | P a g e
community representatives, it was agreed to expand the number community
representatives being put on the group.
The ICLO reviewed the Stage 1 draft report prior to it being viewed by the
Stakeholder Leadership Group. The purpose of this was to ensure that all
stakeholders/voices were represented in the report. She prepared a simple briefing
document on the report, to help community representatives report back to their
communities in clear and simple terms.
She attended stakeholder and elected representatives briefing meetings as an
observer to ensure that all community perspectives that she has been made aware
of during consultations were represented. The ICLO worked with residents to
identify issues around the workings of the SLG after the first meeting. These related
to timeframe of issue of report, timing of meeting, support for dissemination of report
by community representatives to their communities, and timing of public
communications from regeneration office to support the work of community
representatives on the SLG. All issues were resolved and details are in Appendix C.
Between Stages 2 and 3 issues were raised regarding the final masterplan report
and accountability on this. These were related to stage briefings, sign off and
governance of each stage of the Masterplan and the final implementation of the
Masterplan. To address this the Regeneration office reviewed the structure of the
SLG and the ICLO reviewed similar structures in Limerick, Tralee and Derry
regeneration projects. It became clear that there was an issue around accountability
and a need to make decisions and choices around each Stage clearly accountable.
The ICLO identified the following issues:
Lack of a formal system to ensure transparency/accountability on the decision
making process within Cranmore Regeneration Office
Lack of structure on formal system of endorsement for each stage of
Masterplan
Lack of structure to formally include Public Representatives at any level in the
decision making process
The issues were also raised at Sligo County Council Level and the SLG was
replaced by a reconvening and restructuring a previous Cranmore Regeneration
Steering Group.
The ICLO played a key role in supporting the community representatives in
dissemination, analysing and feeding back information of each Stage to their local
community. She furnished a simplified summary of the report in bullet point format,
to assist Community Representatives report back to their residents Associations for
Stages 1 and 2. In Stages 3 and 4, a member of the Regeneration office staff
briefed the community representatives and chairpersons. The ICLO was available
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 12 | P a g e
to attend Resident Committee Meetings to help the Community Representative relay
the findings to local residents in their area and agree the text of their responses.
7. EASTERN GARVOGUE BRIDGE AND APPROACH ROADS PROJECT -
The role of the ICLO included supporting the public consultation process on the
Eastern Garvogue Bridge and Approach Roads Project (EGB). She worked with the
design team to support promotion and facilitation of two public consultations a
number of resident meetings. This section looks at how this influenced the
regeneration consultation process.
The EGB is a separate project, but because it is inextricably linked to the
Regeneration Masterplan, some residents saw the two projects as one. This was
possibly further confused by the fact that the ICLO was identified with both projects.
Some residents are vehemently opposed to the EGB project and subsequently to
Regeneration too, without realising that that the former is a one off physical project
plan and the latter, a longer term physical, social and economic plan.
Communication for all parties involved, needed to continue the repetition of this
message to support residents in understanding both processes. The lack of clarity
over approach roads to the EGB is still confusing and contentious. While the
Exhibition of Regeneration Ideas included ideas for traffic
management/roads/pathways in the Regeneration linking to existing roads, it is still
unclear how and in what direction the traffic from the new bridge disperse into the
Regeneration Area. Residents are understandably concerned about the lack of
clarity.
Issues around the Eastern Bridge Route in some instances, prompted a very
emotional response and there a considerable about of upset among some residents
of all areas as a result of issues around the Eastern Bridge route. It is an issue that
for some people in the Adjacent Areas led them to opposing any new developments
or refusing to become in involved in any Masterplan development or planning
process.
Each query was systematically answered and at different times, the staking out of
proposed approach roads on the actual land and the display of a three-dimensional
model of the bridge and approach roads proved extremely helpful to residents
physically identify location of proposed roads in relation to their street/house and to
discuss and understand fully the proposals. These physical presentations were a key
turning point in moving forward discussion with the community. The ICLO supported
two public consultation and information days around the detailed design of the
project.
8. LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT VIA THE ICLO
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 13 | P a g e
8.1 Overview
This section looks at multi-directional levels of engagement with the ICLO as a
conduit to engaging in the Masterplanning process. The ICLO continually built up a
network of community contacts (face to face, phone, email, text, social media) during
the consultation process. By Stage 2, the role of the ICLO was firmly established as
an independent conduit of communication between the Regeneration Office /Design
Team and the Community stakeholders. At the same time, it was important to take
the long term view that while this role was important, ultimately the communication
wold best be undertaken directly between parties, without the need for the presence
of the ICLO.
8.2 CRANMORE
Of all the estates in the regeneration area, Cranmore was the most advanced in
terms of community structures when the ICLO commenced work (2011). Most
streets had a residents’ association which worked closely with Cranmore Co-
Operative Society Ltd., a local based community development centre. Outside of
this the two other community centres, Cranmore Abbeyquarter Community Centre
and Resource House (Springboard) Centre used their networks and influence to
support residents and communities of interest to engage.
As each stage progressed, the residents associations became more structured,
working more closely with each other, the community groups in the area and the
regeneration office. The ICLO had a key role in this process. Regular face to face
contact was important to build up trust and exchange information and to build up the
skills and confidence in the community to support their engagement with the
process. Learning was mostly informal through meetings and workshops,
community trips and continually issuing challenges to achieve more and ask more
questions. A clearly accountable system, supported by Cranmore Co-Operative
Society Limited was set up for residents to feedback their comments on each Stage
of the plan as follows:
1. Briefing meeting of chairpersons of each resident’s association in Cranmore
attended by the Cranmore community representatives and the ICLO.
2. Each resident’s association then met themselves to discuss the Draft Stage
Report and agreed what feedback the chairpersons would bring to the next
chairpersons meeting. ICLO attended these meetings as requested to give
support to the chairperson in taking notes and to have a neutral party present
to help deal with contentious issues.
3. Chairpersons met again to bring feedback to the Community Representatives.
A document of all the feedback, question by question was compiled and
circulated to each chairperson. This was then read out by community
representative at the Draft Stage Briefing Meeting.
Current Status: There is a high level of awareness of the Regeneration Plan in the
area, with residents views well represented and documented. Cranmore Co-Op has
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 14 | P a g e
a clear communications structure in place with residents and the Regeneration
Office. It is important that these structures are fully maintained and nurtured from
grassroots to management level by all stakeholders.
8.3 ADJACENT AREAS:
Overall in this area there was no structured residents’ association / co-operative
system in place which made it more difficult to put a consultation process in place
when the ICLO commenced work in 2011. In these Adjacent Areas, residents’
associations structures were less advanced and there is no community building for
meetings in the immediate area. Doorly Park and Martin Savage Terrace
Associations were active and Garavogue Villas was looking to form a new
committee. There was less interest and some antagonism in these areas towards
regeneration due to a history of opposition to the Eastern Garvogue Bridge and
approach roads scheme, which had ultimately led to the inclusion of this area in the
Regeneration masterplan. The issue of the Bridge was divisive, and there may have
been a hesitancy to become involved in a residents association as result. Liaison
with the Community Wardens was a key element here in building relationships
between the local community and the regeneration office, as they addressed
maintenance issues raised at consultation. In addition, it was clear from the outset,
that most of the physical regeneration would take place in Cranmore and residents of
adjacent areas felt this was unfair.
The community wardens were a very important resource here to get word out on
consultations and to make introductions on behalf of the ICLO. Throughout each
stage, engagement and attitudes varied. It became clear that the highest level of
engagement happened when it related to an idea specifically located in an Adjacent
Area. There is considerable disappointment and some anger at the fact that many of
the physical projects outlined in the masterplan for the area have not yet been
funded.
The ICLO instigated many initiatives to support the residents associations in these
areas, to enable them to have a well supported residents association structure.
Residents have resisted this, preferring to come together as the need arises due to
organise community event or address a controversial issue. The community is more
likely to engage with physical projects that are located in their area. Ongoing social
and economic project such as Community Warden Scheme, Cranmore Community
Sports Hub and a community calendar have also seen engagement as they are non-
controversial. Other regular engagement with the community happened when the
ICLO worked with them to bring local maintenance and anti-social behaviour issues
to the attention of the regeneration office.
Current Status: Communities in Adjacent Areas are accepting of Regeneration but
somewhat disinterested in the overall plan, particularly as the physical ideas related
to their areas are seen as long term (6 years or more). The Residents Associations
are not very active in these areas and the most successful engagements have been
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 15 | P a g e
project based. An example is a Community Calendar Project and the East City
Sports Hub.
8.4 AREAS TO THE SOUTH
The main concerns from these areas was traffic management around the Eastern
Garvogue Bridge and approach roads project, and how the regeneration plan would
affect this. The representative residents’ association was well able to articulate their
issues from the outset and raised a number of queries via the ICLO. As time went
on and relationships development, they addressed queries directly to the
Regeneration Office which is what they are doing now.
Current Status: The Residents Association here has a good working relationship
with the Regeneration Office and their main interest in Regeneration continues to be
traffic management plans, particularly in the context of the Eastern Garvogue Bridge
and Approach Roads Project.
9. HOW ICLO OBJECTIVES WERE MET AND THE LEARNING AROUND THIS.
9.1. Overview
This section analyses the role of the ICLO in the Regeneration Masterplanning process and what was learned. It looks at what learning can be transferred to the rollout of this Regeneration Masterplan and to other Regeneration Projects. Issues such as consultation fatigue, frustration at delays between Stages and delays
in small works programmes all contributed to delay in getting a final Masterplan in
place. The gap between stages was challenging, as residents waited a long time
after consultations to receive summary and recommendations and to have their
feedback heard. With the support of the ICLO they lobbied for small works projects,
estate maintenance programmes and amendment and refinement of proposals of
concern. Structured communication systems are now agreed and in place to monitor
these issues. Communities benefiting from longer term physical plans are still
unhappy at the timescales outlined. It is noted that while the Eastern Garvogue
Bridge and Approach Roads Project is rolled out separately from the Regeneration
Masterplan, it will have significant impact on the community.
There can be a risk of stakeholders disengaging from the project due to
to delays in the Masterplanning process - consultation fatigue and frustration
at not seeing any work being carried out
a fear that projects will not be funded
negative feeling about the Eastern Garvogue Bridge Project
other personal social, economic or physical circumstances
Not all of these are within the control of the community or the regeneration office, however, good relations and communication between parties can lessen the risks of
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 16 | P a g e
the threats listed above. This applies equally to community residents, community leaders, community development workers and the Regeneration Team. 9.2.1 Role: Facilitate community involvement in the development of the Masterplan and regeneration process and encourage active participation of the public. 9.2.2 Style of consultation- varied: While PLA workshops facilitate people of all
abilities, not all had the resources to attend. This could be because of immobility due
to age or disability, needing a baby sitter, lacking confidence to attend a workshop,
lacking the confidence to speak at a workshop, or being afraid to raise some issues
publicly at a workshop (e.g. illegal money lending or anti-social behaviour). To
address this, one to one confidential clinics were held, communication was made by
phone and email, house calls were made and the network of community wardens
and community workers gained informal feedback and relayed this to the ICLO
confidentially. It is noted that these issues were also raised in social plan workshops
by agencies and outside workers.
9.2.3 Types of Display
A range of public consultations took place with information presented in a community
friendly way. Displays ranges from posters, 3D models, photographs and computer
generated 3D imaging. Workers and community leaders were well briefed before
each display. Presentations and questionnaires were ‘query- proofed’ by local focus
groups in advance of being publicly available.
9.2.4 Barrier: Lack of development community network: Differing needs in
differing areas: There was a clear gap between different areas of the regeneration
areas. Cranmore had a system of residents associations, while in the other areas
this is less formal or structured. Work was needed to support the community
development work in Adjacent Areas with the long term aim of upskilling local
residents’ community development skills to develop a network of community activists
that will positively encourage more community involvement.
9.2.5 Community Trips
During the Masterplanning, the ICLO organised a number of community trips so that
residents and community workers in the regeneration areas could see and learn from
other regeneration projects. Participants were asked to evaluate, discuss and share
their experiences, observations and learning with residents and at public
consultations and meetings. Participants were asked to fill in an evaluation form
after each trip. Their learning was summarised and circulated. As far as possible,
there was a representative from each street on each trip, to allow for dissemination
of information. Residents found it very useful to see physical examples of some of
the proposed ideas for Sligo. These included streetscapes, roads housing stock
improvements. It also got them thinking about practicalities - such as how
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 17 | P a g e
Regeneration will be funded, and what the priorities are and how communities can
negotiate with a Regeneration Team and a Local Authority. Appendix D lists these
trips.
9.2.6 Branding of Individual Community Identities: The first project was called
Cranmore Regeneration and targeted at the Cranmore area only. When the
regeneration area expanded, a more inclusive name would have been helpful, to
send out a clear message to the wider regeneration area that all were included. The
name and the location of the office in Cranmore, was at times a divisive factor.
While the work of the community wardens considerably alleviates this, an official
presence in the adjacent areas would have been positive both as a point of contact
and as a potential place for residents to meet and participate further in the process.
9.2.7 Delays, challenges and early wins: Momentum of the Process: Delivery
time of each Stage:
At the outset of the Masterplanning process a schedule of work was agreed. For
various reasons this was not adhered to. It was important to keep momentum going
within the community, as people buy into the process. Changing or delayed dates
was a challenge to this positive energy. It is useful to note the following:
Small works: short - term ‘distractions’ to engagement with the Masterplan
process. The ability of residents to think in visionary terms was impaired by
smaller physical every day issues in their area that they had been seeking to have
addressed1 for a number of years. Issues around day to day maintenance were
being at regeneration consultation meetings, (they ranged from grass cutting, to
repairing broken steps and pathways (some dating back to 2009). Concern and
anger over this hindered residents in being able to look at longer term
Regeneration plans. It was also eroding their trust in Sligo Regeneration Office as
they were requesting minor works to be done and were not seeing any results.
Re-allocation of 2013 Regeneration budget to these works had a positive effect on
this.
To support the ongoing engagement of the community, the ICLO recommended a
further series of early wins, physical and social for the whole Regeneration Area after
Stage 3. People needed to see something happening in return for their involvement
in an extensive consultation process that was now running 12 months behind. An
'early win' minor programme of physical and social work would be a very positive
way to address the nervousness and lack of engagement resulting in delays in the
process. In October 2014, the ICLO worked with Cranmore Regeneration Office to
look at a programme of stand-alone sundry works and projects, that would provide
this 'early win', similar to the programme undertaken between Stages 2 and 3.
However it was Spring 2016 before any work commenced. This meant that in
1 See letter of 5/9/13 from ICLO to Siofra Kilcullen, Regeneration Office, ref. SMALLER REMEDIAL JOBS TO BE DONE IN REGENERATION AREA
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 18 | P a g e
addition to long delays between stages 2 and 3 and 3 and 4, there were no early
win/small sundry works programme to be see physically on the ground for over a
year. These regular early wins/small works were imperative to maintain community
engagement and will also be required during the rollout of the plan as residents wait
for larger projects to become a reality.
9.2.8 Importance of ongoing social plan initiatives to positively influence
engagement with Masterplanning process.
Prior to the Regeneration Masterplanning Consultation process and all during each
state, the Regeneration Office continued to work with stakeholders in delivering
elements of the regeneration project. In addition to the small works already
mentioned, which gave physical evidence of work, longer term social and economic
projects, were and still are, being undertaken. Socially base projects do excellent on
the ground work from within the community in building confidence and
communication among residents as well as achieving other specific social and
economic aims.
9.2.9 Oversight role of ICLO: The ICLO provided ongoing feedback on the
planning of the Masterplanners Community Consultations and on each Stage draft
report prior to publication. Through these exchanges a further 'watchdog' role
evolved for the ICLO. She was in the unique position of engaging with the
community at a range of levels, which gave her an overview of the consultation
elements of the process that were usefully shared with the Regeneration Team when
planning public consultations.
9.3.1 Role: Effective communication regarding the planning and
implementation of the regeneration programme. Consult and give feedback on
issues regarding the regeneration. It cannot be stressed how important ongoing
communications between the Regeneration Office and the community. Open
dialogue is important. Each time the consultation process encountered difficulties,
when space was created for honest discussion and expression, satisfactory solutions
were found.
9.3.2 Communications: Continued communication from Regeneration Office
to the community - It is important that the community and stakeholders are kept
informed of the status of the Masterplanning process, to help them understand
reasons for delays and keep their confidence in the process long term. Of use here
were the following:
Ongoing advice to Regeneration office on how to disseminate information
Use local communication networks e.g. newsletter and church notes and local
newspaper notes.
Building up database of text messaging and email
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 19 | P a g e
Pre-agreeing the process for review, dissemination and timing of circulation of
draft stage reports
Specific support for community representatives on the Steering Group, giving
them the language, confidence and understanding to relay the regeneration
messages their communities.
The importance of accurate information and a clear communications system must be
emphasised. Exchange of information was an issue at times. There is a need for a
high level of communication between stakeholders bodies such as Regeneration
Office, Masterplanners and local authority planners and to ensure that accurate and
timely information is disseminated to the community at all levels and to keep the
Community Liaison up to date to on developments. Regular communications from
the Regeneration Office/Masterplanners will also help keep the positive elements of
momentum going in the community, built up during the consultation period.
Production of regular newsletter for the whole of the East Quadrant to keep residents
updated on Masterplan Developments related issues and begin to outline issues
common to all communities is recommended.
9.3.3 Putting in the groundwork: Advance knowledge of issues coming up –
briefing before public meetings:
Researching and anticipating potential controversial issues in advance of public
consultations was invaluable at these events to help listen to and understand the
range of feedback, positive and negative. The process of running the Independent
Community Consultation was valuable for gauging the level of community
development skills, identifying outside issues or consultation process issues that
could affect the Masterplanning Process. Information gathered was useful for
gauging the level of knowledge of, interested in, and issues of concern, for residents
around the Masterplan. This research gave the Masterplanners an opportunity to
take these into account before they started work. The independent community
consultation was useful for exploring and building community based networks at a
range of levels. Each street had a comprehensive document of issues and
questions that was used for briefing documents for the Masterplanning Consultation
Process.
9.4.1 Role: Develop links and effective working relationships with relevant
stakeholders: the local authority, other statutory bodies and the local
community regarding the regeneration programme.
9.4.2 Managing Change Sensitively : Regeneration is about people, and making
changes in these peoples’ communities. This change needs to be managed openly
and sensitively2, as change can be upsetting for communities. An open door policy
to the community, welcoming feedback and comment in any format, confidentially
2 The process... creates turmoil in residents lives - quote from Introduction to Stage 2 Residents Consultation report
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 20 | P a g e
and publicly is vital. Open communication and transparency was very important as
relationships were tested Regeneration Masterplanning process, when discussions
looked to reach consensus at each stage.
9.4.3 Regular dissemination of information: Lack of information led to knowledge
gaps and speculation and in the community, many of which were addressed during
the consultation process. People ask questions ranging from ‘Is there going to be
Masterplan?’ to ‘Is the bridge going ahead?’ The workshops marked a starting point
for engagement with the new Masterplan for the wider area.
9.4.4 Relationship between ICLO and Regeneration Office It was important that
the Regeneration office kept the ICLO has been kept informed of their work allowing
her to give feedback on community aspects. This included
discussion on how best to promote consultations and exhibitions
how to present exhibition of ideas
extensive discussion on the most user friendly format reports
raising issues around Stakeholder Leadership Group
raising issues around the oversight of the Masterplanning process and the
final Masterplan
9.4.5 Contentious Issues: In larger groups sensitive/controversial issues that
affect the community, may not be raised, and it was important that these issues were
kept on the agenda both by the Regeneration Office and the ICLO. In seeking to
ensure to listen to all voices and perspectives from the community, a number of
dissenting voices were heard. In situations where the parties did not to wish to deal
directly with the Regeneration Office, the ICLO operated as an intermediary.
9.4.6 Feedback Mechanisms: A feedback mechanism is in place between
Regeneration Office and all residents associations. They have worked closely with
residents and ICLO and set up and agreed clear and accountable lines of
communications for their office with Residents Associations(two-way), between
residents, Residents Associations and Regeneration Office staff (three-way). This
needed to be continually reviewed.
9.4.7 Changing job descriptions and staff: Key to successful engagement with
any community groups, is good professional working relationships with local
agencies. During the period 2012 – 2016, due to retirement and other outside
factors, a number of key roles and staff were changed. While work continued,
community groups had to get used to new faces and new roles. A more structured
communications and reporting system would have eased the way. By Stage 5
however, there is a clear line of communication.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 21 | P a g e
9.5.1 Role: Develop initiatives designed to inform and create awareness of the
work of the regeneration programme.
9.5.2 Alerts and updates: The ICLO set up a blog, Facebook page and email and
text alerts, with contacts continually updated.
9.5.3 Capacity building: This had a direct effect on engagement. For example,
where a group got involved with a capacity building programme they engaged more
fully with the Regeneration Consultation. An example this is the TAPPED
programme for unemployed young men.
9.5.4 Community Development Training: In order to empower residents to fully
engage with the regeneration Masterplanning process, they needed to have a
specific skillset, at a range of levels. Community stakeholders and representatives
needed to develop their skills further to empower them to fully engage with the
regeneration process. While some offers of formal training were taken up (for
example, Social Media Training with the Abbeyquarter Mens’ Group) the most
popular form of delivery was informal. Many opportunities arose for the ICLO to
give formal workshop or just a supportive meeting to help guide a group through a
particular issue. ICLO provided guidance in the following areas:
Using Social Media (Facebook, twitter, blog, linked google calendars)
Preparing for a meeting (agreeing agenda, taking minutes, agreeing follow
ups)
Setting up a residents association
Strategic planning
Problem solving – identifying solutions as well as problems
How to write a press release
Communication structures – internal and external
How to collate feedback and present it to a group
Importance of communication regular and clearly with your community /
community group
This skill sets gained strengthened the ability of the community to further engage
with the regeneration process. The ICLO undertook regular informal review of
learning with residents to remind them of the skills they had acquired and to
encourage them to build on these. This gave them confidence to take engage
further with regeneration consultations.
9.5.5 Community Trips: During the Masterplan regeneration process the ICLO
organised 4 community trips, open to all residents of Sligo: East City and Environs
Regeneration Area and community development workers. Between 15 and 30
residents went and community workers went on each trip to Fatima United and
Ballymun Regeneration Limited, Ballybane and Tuam Co Galway and to Mitchells
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 22 | P a g e
Boherbree Regeneration Tralee Regeneration in Co Kerry. The purpose of the trips
was to go to visit Community venues and groups in other areas and bring home
ideas around developments and projects residents felt would be good for
Regeneration in Sligo and to use this information to help inform engagement with the
masterplan. It was also an opportunity to encourage residents from different parts of
the Sligo regeneration areas to spend time together and build relationships and
hopefully realising the benefits of areas working closely together on the
Regeneration Masterplan. More details are outlined in Appendix D. The timing of
the trips coincided with public consultations in Stage 2, Stage 3 and Stage 4 and
were useful for maximising engagement.
9.5.6 Community venues: There is a gap in facilities between Cranmore and
Adjacent Areas, with the latter having no community venue and there was no central
spot to hold meetings for residents. This lack of a free accessible space, was a
barrier to the natural development of a community momentum.
9.6 Role: Report on progress to the Minister for Housing and Planning
through the Housing Agency.
The ICLO reported on a monthly basis to Minister for Housing and Planning through
the Housing Agency. In this way the work of the ICLO was regularly reviewed and
evaluated. As an independent officer, the ICLO made recommendations at key
times regarding early wins and community trips which complemented the
Regeneration Office Plans and applications to the DoE.
10. RECOMMENDATIONS:
10.1 Overview
The position of ICLO was put in place for the duration of the Masterplanning process,
with the view that once the plan was complete, there would be structures built into
the delivery of these to ensure ongoing review, consultation and engagement with
the community. The launch of the 10 year Masterplan saw the conclusion of the work
of the ICLO. A steering committee is in place, as part of the delivery structure (see
Appendix B for objectives) making the oversight of the rollout of the plan fully
accountable to the community. The commitment of the community to this process
and the challenges faced and met, should be acknowledged. Analysis of the
feedback in Stages 3 and 4 indicated high levels of support for the Regeneration
Projects. It is noted that some ideas, in particular the proposals for a new
community services centre, will need further negotiation agreement on the final
detail, requiring a well-planned and partnership approach by all stakeholders. In
addition, further work needs to be done to ensure active engagement with the areas
to the south of the regeneration area. Eleven recommendations, each applicable to
some or all stakeholders are made.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 23 | P a g e
10.2 Recommendations
1. Regular early wins/small works to maintain community engagement.
Significant capital projects are part of the plan, but these will take a number of
years to complete. The rollout of the plan is over a 10 year period, and to
keep them engaged, residents need to see some immediate smaller projects
on the ground, as they wait for larger projects to become a reality.
2. Ensure a strong communication structure is in place and constantly
reviewed independently by all parties. Keep communicating with other
parties, no matter where you are in the plan. It cannot be stressed how
important ongoing communications between the Regeneration Office and the
community will be at this stage. Open dialogue is important. Each time the
consultation process encountered difficulties, when space was created for
honest discussion and expression, satisfactory solutions were found.
Communication should be open, flexible and moving from being process
based, to outcome based. This Regeneration Masterplan, led by Sligo
Council and other partners with an extensive level of community
engagement , needs to continually clarify a clear understanding of roles
and mutual respect and trust.
3. Ongoing review and evaluation will be part of the rollout of this plan. The
Cranmore Regeneration Project Office will coordinate, manage and report to
the Regeneration Steering Group on the implementing the various elements
of the Masterplan, including setting up Oversight Groups for various elements.
The terms of reference of the Steering Group should examined and
adequate mentoring and administrative support put in place to allow this
to happen.
4. In the delivery of this Plan, ensure that the structures, procedures and
protocols are clearly established in order to maximise the strengths of
stakeholders and agents, and address issues as they arise, giving maximum
benefit to all involved
5. Put in place independent support for community representatives on the
Steering Group (current terms of reference state that ‘A minimum of 3 no.
ordinary meeting will be held each year for the duration of the project’). To
date the role has been to review the plan and this is now changing to delivery
of the plan, so further support may be needed.
6. Continue to support the empowerment and upskilling of community groups.
Be sure that expectations around what community groups can deliver
are properly supported.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 24 | P a g e
7. Code of Conduct for Consultations and meetings: Ensure that all
stakeholders take responsibility to be properly prepared when taking part in
consultation meetings. This includes being properly briefed, ready to ask and
answer questions, read to listen to others viewpoints and discuss these, seek
clarifications and faithfully feed information back to communities and
organisation they represent.
8. Leadership – the need for a champion. While the resident community of
the regeneration area have shown a clear commitment to engaging with the
process, some of the larger ideas proposed need clear leadership. In
particular, the flagship, (potentially a significant capital development), Idea
A1 (Provide quality spaces for delivery of services and community activities)
needs a ‘champion’ to lead out on this project and work with the three existing
centres as well as the wider community in agreeing a brief for this and how
existing centres are part of this brief. Strong leadership is needed to move
this idea forward at management level, particularly from the perspective of
dialogue and exploration of options between Cranmore Co-Operative Ltd,
Cranmore Abbeyquarter Centre Ltd and Resource House.
9. Further consultation is planned for Idea E1 (Joe McDonnell Pedestrian /
Bicycle Link to Chapel Hill). Residents have indicated that they would like
independent support for this process and such system needs to be put
place.
10. Information dissemination: Provide regular updates (via newsletter, local
media, social media) on the progress of the Regeneration plan, including an
acknowledgment of achievements to date, challenges being met and the
overall workplan. ‘Query proof’ all documentation and presentations before
issue. Issue information in a regular structured manner, including
newsletters and using community networks. Remember the importance of
regular reminders of the work to date and work planned in the
Regeneration Area.
11. Expand the working brief of Community Wardens to Adjacent Areas to
continue to develop and maintain community relations and build up
representative residents associations.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 25 | P a g e
Appendix A : Timeline /Key Events of 5 Stages and work of ICLO:
September 2011
ICLO appointed. Establishes baseline of community networks. Agrees independent community consultation workshops (PLA) format (124 individuals attend). October 2012: Replacement ICLO is briefed and commences work.
October 2012 - February 2013
Independent Community Consultations undertaken by ICLO (25 consultations attended by 160 people). Separate one to one clinics also take place.
January 2013
Design Team Appointed. Stage 1 commences: Socio Economic Review and Appraisal
March 2013
Stakeholder Leadership Group established
March 2013
Stage 1 complete. Issue of Stage 1 report ‘Building on our past…. Looking to our future’ – Socio Economic Profile of East Sligo City : Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Masterplan Sets social and economic baseline for Masterplan Stage 2:
April 2013 Stage 2 commences
May 2013 ICLO hosts Community trip to Fatima and Ballymun Regeneration projects in Dublin
June 2013 Stage 2 Public consultation – First public consultation between Design Team and residents (182 individuals attend) ICLO recommends programme of sundry works/early wins to Regeneration Office after high level of resident dissatisfaction expressed by residents at pace of physical work
August 2013
Public Meeting to discuss design of Eastern Garvogue Bridge and approach roads project
September 2013
Draft Stage 2 Report presented to Stakeholder Leadership Group
October 2013
Cranmore Regeneration apply for funding or sundry works/early wins. Application includes report and recommendations from ICLO on benefits and necessity for these. Application is successful
March 2014
Stage 3 starts Masterplan presentation of ideas for consultation and report on same
May 2014 New Project Leader appointed to Cranmore Regeneration
May 2014 Community Trip to Ballybane community centre in Galway and Parkmore Estate, community crèche and community allotments in Tuam, Co Galway.
July 2014 Stage 3 Exhibition of ideas (social, economic and physical) runs for 1 week (335 individuals attend).
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 26 | P a g e
October 2014
ICLO reports on need for further set of sundry works/early wins following Stage 3 report
Nov 2014 Stakeholder leadership group / Steering group for Regeneration discussed at Sligo County Council Meeting.
March 2015
Steering Committee established and replaces Stakeholder Leadership Group
March 2015
Issue Draft Stage 3 Report. Public meeting of Cranmore residents regarding concerns around Draft Stage 3 report. Concerns raised about some of the ideas and the feedback recorded on same. After discussions and consultations with community representatives and ICLO, the Regeneration revised Stage 4 consultation process to address this, by including a further Exhibition of Ideas.
April 2015 EGB information meeting – discussion around detailed design of bridge using a 3D model.
April 2015 Presentation of Draft Stage 3 Report to newly established Steering Committee
May 2015 Community trip to Tralee Regeneration
July 2015 Issue of directory of community groups by ICLO
July 2015 Stage 4 commences: Masterplan presentation of selection of revised ideas from Stage 3
September 2015
Exhibition of physical, social, economic ideas (including revised physical ideas (3 days)). 409 individuals attend , 70% are from Cranmore and represent 55% of households in Cranmore.
March 2016
Report presented on Masterplanning stages to date to Sligo County Council. Public Information day requested.
June 2016 Public Information days on Stage 4 (2 days)
June 2016 New Project Leader appointed to Cranmore Regeneration
July 2016 Draft Stage 4 presented to Steering Committee
September 2016
Stage 5: Final Masterplan blueprint with timeline and costings presented to Sligo County Council and adopted unanimously
Appendix B: Purpose of Key Stakeholder Leadership group/Steering Group
The purpose of the Key Stakeholder Leadership Group is to enable senior
representatives of stakeholder agencies and community representatives to:
Share high level information about participating agencies potential to
contribute to an effective regeneration process, within the realistic context of
existing resource and policy constraints
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 27 | P a g e
Be briefed on the socio-economic and physical context and on the
regeneration community’s lived experience of action areas that fall within the
remit of agencies
Contribute to the emerging vision for an effective regeneration process and be
briefed on the ongoing progress of the Masterplanning process
Direct the active participation of relevant agency staff in the ongoing
consultation, problem posing and action planning process
Promote and encourage effective interagency co-operation and co-ordination
in the development of sustainable regeneration proposals
Agree priority action areas that emerge from the Masterplanning process, to
enable their agency to contribute to an effective and collaborative
regeneration process
Sign off on their agency’s commitment to the regeneration process and to the
dedication for resources for agreed priority Masterplan actions
This is a short-term working group which will exist for the life-span of the Masterplan
Development process with anticipated 5 no briefing and consultation meetings with
the Masterplan consultants over a twelve-month period.
The objectives of the Steering Group are as follows (adopted March 2015):
Share high level information about participating agencies potential to
contribute to an effective regeneration process, within the realistic context of
existing resource and policy constraints
Be briefed on the socio-economic and physical context and on the regeneration community’s lived experience of action areas that fall within the remit of agencies
Contribute to the emerging vision for an effective regeneration process and be briefed on the ongoing progress of the Master-planning process
Direct the active participation of relevant agency staff in the ongoing consultation, problem posing, and action planning process
Promote and encourage effective interagency co-operation and co-ordination in the development of sustainable regeneration proposals
Agree priority action areas that emerge from the Master-planning process, to enable their agency to contribute to an effective and collaborative regeneration process
Sign off on their agency’s commitment to the regeneration process and to the dedication of resources for agreed priority Masterplan actions
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 28 | P a g e
Appendix C: Issues that arose after first meeting of Stakeholder Leadership
group and solution agreed.
ISSUE SOLUTION AGREED
Timeframe of putting out information
- all residents have requested more
time
Draft Stage Reports would be circulated 3 -
4 weeks in advance of Stakeholder briefing.
Agreed.
Timing. Feedback indicated that
Friday afternoon at 4pm did not suit
many members
Day changed [ICLO notes that 4pm was
previously agreed in recognition of
representatives work and other
commitments] . Agreed
Groups looking for individual briefing
from Design Team: The rationale
behind the Stakeholder Leadership
Group was that all the stakeholders
meet together for joint discussion
and feedback overall Draft Stage of
Masterplan. Individual meetings
would not facilitate this.
An extra briefing session for all residents
representatives and chairpersons of
residents association by ICLO and
Regeneration Office staff, in advance of
community representatives attending the
Stakeholder Leadership Group Meeting,
would be helpful to keep residents informed
and provide an opportunity for residents to
read and discuss the Draft Report. The
ICLO would be attend residents association
meetings. Agreed.
Regeneration Newsletter outlining
Stage 2 Stakeholder Leadership
Group Briefing Process was sent out
a few days before the Briefing
meeting. It needed to go at the
same time as the draft report, so
that all residents were informed of
the process.
Issue Regeneration Newsletter at same
time as Draft reports. Agreed.
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 29 | P a g e
Appendix D – List of Community trips
1. Ballymun Regeneration
2. Fatima Regeneration
3. Parkmore, Galway
4. Ballybane Community Centre, Galway
5. Tralee Regeneration
Trips included opportunities to see:
Ideas on the development of smaller community centres /meeting rooms in
the community
How small outdoor spaces have been used
Community enterprise projects
Community education projects
Community projects targeted at specific groups e.g. older people
Community based primary health care centre
How changing infrastructure ( e.g. new road) affects a Regeneration area
leisure facilities, community centres, sports facilities for themselves and
others (children, older people). +
Community venues and groups in other areas and bring home ideas around
developments and projects
Community resource centres.
New housing development ( family, sheltered, single tenant)
At each centre a briefing was given by regeneration/community staff who gave an
overview of all aspects of the work the group This ranged from physical, social and
economic development, to consultation processes at all levels. There was good
dialogue with many questions from both sides. who then tour each are and got an
opportunity to interact with workers and residents to hear about their experiences
and learning from physical, social and economic generation initiatives in their areas.
Participants were asked to fill in an evaluation form after each trip. Their learning
was summarised and circulated. As far as possible, there was a representative from
each street on each trip, to allow for dissemination of information. Residents found it
very useful to see physical examples of some of the proposed ideas for Sligo. These
included streetscapes, roads housing stock improvements. It also got them thinking
about practicalities - such as how Regeneration will be funded, and what the
priorities are and how communities can negotiate with a Regeneration Team and a
Independent Community Liaison Officer : Sligo East City: Cranmore and Environs Regeneration Consultation 30 | P a g e
Local Authority. The trips broadened the regeneration horizons of all who attended,
and the report was issued to each residents association to facilitate further dialogue
around the ideas seen. The timing of the trips coincided with public consultations in
Stage 2, Stage 3 and Stage 4 and were useful for maximising engagement.
Appendix E:
Further information on the work of the ICLO 2012- 2016 is available at
https://sligoregeneration.wordpress.com/
Appendix F:
The ICLO would like to thank every single resident of the Regeneration Area who
took time to come to workshops, meetings and consultations; who took time to stop
to talk on the street to raise issues, agree and disagree with ideas; who gave their
time to talk, listen and discuss issues and ideas within and outside their community,
prior to and during the Regeneration Masterplan Consultation process. Thanks too,
to the volunteers and staff of all the local groups who took part in this process.