Lissadell House Poll

blackiebest

Without trying to stir up emotions I would love to get an idea of where the Sligo Boardsies stand on the Lissadell house issue, so if OK with mods I would like to just have poll only. I really think it is an important issue and an accountable poll could/would give a fair indication of what people think:)

Not sure if I have phrased question well (25 character limit) so any better suggestions welcome

Jabby

Result should be interesting.

redarmyblues

I won't reply to this, the question is loaded in favour of a Yes answer, I am agnostic on the issue and I think it is a matter for the courts.

guinnessdrinker

redarmyblues wrote: »

I won't reply to this, the question is loaded in favour of a Yes answer, I am agnostic on the issue and I think it is a matter for the courts.

I agree.

Xiney

redarmyblues wrote: »

I won't reply to this, the question is loaded in favour of a Yes answer, I am agnostic on the issue and I think it is a matter for the courts.

poll edited.

il gatto

The clue is in the first two words of the question posed, "Lissadel owners".

slapbangwhallop

Xiney wrote: »

poll edited.

jesus, if the current question is neutral I would love to have seen to original question.

blackiebest

I think Xiney only edited the options by adding an abstention option? Everything else seems to be as I posted I had only a yes / no option. Correct me if i am wrong Xiney:)

blackiebest

redarmyblues wrote: »

I won't reply to this, the question is loaded in favour of a Yes answer, I am agnostic on the issue and I think it is a matter for the courts.

How would you have phrased the question? As stated it is open to alteration. I think it is a fair question and not loaded in any way.

Xiney

blackiebest wrote: »

I think Xiney only edited the options by adding an abstention option? Everything else seems to be as I posted I had only a yes / no option. Correct me if i am wrong Xiney:)

That's correct, I just added an "other" option. The question remains the same.

blackiebest

il gatto wrote: »

The clue is in the first two words of the question posed, "Lissadel owners".

Please suggest reword of you feel it is biased in any way, not the intention!

starbelgrade

I don't know what this poll is about. An explanation would be a help.

jimmmy

redarmyblues wrote: »

I won't reply to this, the question is loaded in favour of a Yes answer, I am agnostic on the issue and I think it is a matter for the courts.

I agree the question is loaded in favour of the family who acquired Lisadell house , and against those who used rights of way for ages.

elshambo

jimmmy wrote: »

I agree the question is loaded in favour of the family who acquired Lisadell house , and against those who used rights of way for ages.

1. Did people use the right of way for ages? did they? really?
2. There is a world of difference between a right of way through some field and a right of way through someones front garden!
3. They were not made fully aware of any right of way when purchasing
4. If they didnt buy the property it would not be much of a sight for the walkers now, would it?
5. Meh!:eek:

Macroom Man

elshambo wrote: »

1. Did people use the right of way for ages? did they? really?
2. There is a world of difference between a right of way through some field and a right of way through someones front garden!
3. They were not made fully aware of any right of way when purchasing
4. If they didnt buy the property it would not be much of a sight for the walkers now, would it?
5. Meh!:eek:

There is a world of difference between a right of way through some field and a right of way through someones front garden!

There is a world of difference between an ordinary front garden and the acres in front of Lissadell House!

elshambo

Macroom Man wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a right of way through some field and a right of way through someones front garden!

There is a world of difference between an ordinary front garden and the acres in front of Lissadell House!

Not to the guy with the big garden!

magnumlady

I think the big problem is that the right of way is straight past their windows and front door.

jimmmy

elshambo wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a right of way through some field and a right of way through someones front garden!

The right of way at Lisadell is neither " a right of way through some field or a right of way through someones front garden!"

elshambo wrote: »

They were not made fully aware of any right of way when purchasing

Everyone used to drive and go for for walks through the estate for years beforehand. Maybe if the purchasers had spent some time in the area they would have known that.

elshambo wrote: »

If they didnt buy the property it would not be much of a sight for the walkers now, would it?

It was more of a sight for walkers when people could at least see the outside of the house .

jimmmy

magnumlady wrote: »

I think the big problem is that the right of way is straight past their windows and front door.

The main floor level is quite elevated, and the living quarters are on the top floor, are they not. I know many new houses which have got planning permission where the road is a lot closer to the front door / windows than at Lissadell.

dardevle

jimmmy wrote: »

The main floor level is quite elevated, and the living quarters are on the top floor, .

.
don't see a problem then as long as the "outsiders" stay on the top floor,
don't look out the windows and don't let the little ones play outside:rolleyes:





.

Xiney

"don't let the little ones outside"

I think that's a bit that the owners of lissadell had a problem with.

T runner

blackiebest wrote: »

Without trying to stir up emotions I would love to get an idea of where the Sligo Boardsies stand on the Lissadell house issue, so if OK with mods I would like to just have poll only. I really think it is an important issue and an accountable poll could/would give a fair indication of what people think:)

Not sure if I have phrased question well (25 character limit) so any better suggestions welcome

Hi Blackiebest,

I think its a good idea to get peoples views. However, people might feel the question is loaded to the yes side because it seems to imply that the only means of keeping it open is that the owners are given the rights.

So anyone wishing that the amenity stays open may vote yes even those people who also believe its a public right of way thus skewing the vote in favour of yes.

I believe myself its a public right of way by its usage. Another fact I hope the county manager knows is that Sligo Co Co funded the resurfacing of the road in the late 70's early 80's. This seems to be proof that all parties viewed it as a public right of way a that time.

blackiebest

T runner wrote: »

Hi Blackiebest,

I think its a good idea to get peoples views. However, people might feel the question is loaded to the yes side because it seems to imply that the only means of keeping it open is that the owners are given the rights.

So anyone wishing that the amenity stays open may vote yes even those people who also believe its a public right of way thus skewing the vote in favour of yes.

I believe myself its a public right of way by its usage. Another fact I hope the county manager knows is that Sligo Co Co funded the resurfacing of the road in the late 70's early 80's. This seems to be proof that all parties viewed it as a public right of way a that time.

Hey T Runner,

Fair point however unless I am missing somthing onlythe owners will decide if the tourist attraction will or will not open again. I really do not know if a right of way exists or not in Law but understand that this will be decided later this month. There were many passionate opinions about this expressed on the previously locked thread. I only wanted to get an idea of where people stood as to the black and white issue, is conceding control of access to the estate in order to keep the amenity open worth it?

I personally feel that the closure is a terrible loss to Sligo and recently had a very disappointed relative here and ended up touring Arigna mines, (excellent btw) with her. All money spent in Leitrim! Being familiar with the original 'closed' road which passes Lissadell house I understand why anyone living there would want to control when cars/people use it. All told I think it is a typical Sligo problem, having such a super restored amenity, closed, possibly for good and the reason it is closed is because some people wanted to use a road, which they now can not use as it is also closed, end result is everything is closed, no one can use anything, and tourists flock straight through to other counties.

Typical of a Sligo solution and reminds me of the Retail Park, chamber of commerce, Argos debacle.

fmcc

As said above Sligo CoCo is off to court againest two barristers wonder what way it will go.
I'm guessing they have a fair idea of what way the decision will go or know how to drag the process out for enough years for it not to matter.

elmaco01

Reading through the posts a thought suddenly came to me about a not too dissimilar right, remember Drumcree and the Garvaghey Road " The Orange Order insists that it should be allowed to march its traditional route to-and-from Drumcree Church (see map). It has marched this route since 1807". Sometimes it can be a good thing to put the past behind and look to the future. Cant help thinking that one access road to the beach would have been enough, to expect open access to what is a private estate is a bit much. seeing how the rights of way have been established now how easy would it be to extinguish some of them and leave one (not the one passing the house).

red sean

Even the problems in Northern Ireland were eventually solved around a table. Likewise with the long running industrial strikes of the 70's and 80's. The owners of Lissadell should have adopted this much less expensive route, and would no doubt, have found the locals and the Co.Co more facilitive in the process. But instead theydecided to go down the legal road.

brianthebard

red sean wrote: »

Even the problems in Northern Ireland were eventually solved around a table. Likewise with the long running industrial strikes of the 70's and 80's. The owners of Lissadell should have adopted this much less expensive route, and would no doubt, have found the locals and the Co.Co more facilitive in the process. But instead theydecided to go down the legal road.

Well they are solicitors what do you expect? Ps, interesting vamp...

Essexboy

brianthebard wrote: »

Well they are solicitors what do you expect? Ps, interesting vamp...

No, they are barristers.
What is the difference? lots more money for a start!

red sean

Would'nt be inclined to hire either of them after the very learned advice they gave themselves!!!

T runner

blackiebest wrote: »

Without trying to stir up emotions I would love to get an idea of where the Sligo Boardsies stand on the Lissadell house issue, so if OK with mods I would like to just have poll only. I really think it is an important issue and an accountable poll could/would give a fair indication of what people think:)

Not sure if I have phrased question well (25 character limit) so any better suggestions welcome

Sorry Blackiebeast but that question is totally leading. You are implying that control of access to that road has a direct affect on keeping the amenity open.

Si if you want the public to have a right of way you are effectively voting to close that amenity.

That is not the case. It is the owners decision alone to close the amenity. It is their choice and is independent of whether that road has public access or not.

They tried to create this correlation by implied that the councils objective was to "close teh amenity" rather than to uphold the laws of the land.

A more realistic question would be:

"Should the owners of Lissadell be allowed to break the Laws of the land as a perecondition for their opening this amenity.
"

Or even:


"Should rich people be allowed to break the laws of the land."

You will get quite different results on a poll to tehse questions.


Even though the owners are barristers and presumably very familiar with teh Law, they chose to fight the case through the emotive media campaign, trying to blame the council for losing local jobs.

This tells us they had a fair idea of teh legal position, and were quite prepared to use outside pressure to try and corece Sligo Co-Council to back down on enforcing our Laws.

Not a great attitude for Barristers eh?


(wont be voting in the poll)

red sean wrote: »

Would'nt be inclined to hire either of them after the very learned advice they gave themselves!!!

Good one! I reckon they knew the position though thats why they wanted the case decided in the newspapers and not the courts.

Wonder is Shellyriver still digesting her/his hat?

CityMan2010

There was never an issue when the previous (English) owners resided there. A hundred thousand were welcomed, literally...;)

And we Irish say...Cead Mile Failte...Ker':rolleyes:Ching