New hardstand for Ballybane

marklazarcovic

Up beside windsor motors area,east utd.. must be the small field beside where the shop used to be,across from the church/house ... Odd spot for traffic

Mrs OBumble

Links?

I guess you're referring to the field in the middle of this - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.2885191,-9.0081318,241m/data=!3m1!1e3 Not really sure what traffic issues you'd see there.

Maybe you're referring to the potential sites mentioned in this article: http://connachttribune.ie/report-pinponts-sites-for-traveller-housing-201/ But if you click thru to the high (ish!) resolution map provided, it looks like they're suggesting a different field, closer to the intersection.

That said, I think that the field you suggested is probably better for it.

marklazarcovic

Mrs OBumble wrote:

I guess you're referring to the field in the middle of this -

Yes thats the area i meant,behind east utd clubhouse,collegue got a txt about it with a link to a objections page,he was told thats where it was going with the entrance exit beside east utd at the castle park entrance

Mrs OBumble

Why object? Given that more hardstand space is needed, that looks like a good place for it.

ben.schlomo

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Why object? Given that more hardstand space is needed, that looks like a good place for it.

Would you be saying that if it was planned for the former oil tank site in town? You know, in your neighbourhood.

marklazarcovic

Mrs OBumble wrote:

Why object? Given that more hardstand space is needed, that looks like a good place for it.

I think anyone can object,just like any planning application

fergiesfolly

Can't open the galway city councils website at the moment.
What are the current locations for hardstands within the city?

Mrs OBumble

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Would you be saying that if it was planned for the former oil tank site in town? You know, in your neighbourhood.

Not necessarily.

With proper facilities, behaviour should be no worse than what is usual in the city streets.

ben.schlomo

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Not necessarily.

With proper facilities, behaviour should be no worse than what is usual in the city streets.

'should' being the operative word.

fergiesfolly

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Not necessarily.

With proper facilities, behaviour should be no worse than what is usual in the city streets.

What's one got to do with the other?
There are plenty of people living in deprived areas without adequate infrastructure.
They don't necessarily cause trouble or act antisocially.
Or is it, that you know that these hardstands are never good enough for the people who occupy them and they will cause trouble regardless?

Why don't you contact the council and insist that a well designed, accommodating hardstand is located on a suitable site in your neighbourhood. And make sure your fellow residents are aware of your crusade. I'm sure they'll be thrilled.

Mrs OBumble

fergiesfolly wrote: »

What's one got to do with the other?
There are plenty of people living in deprived areas without adequate infrastructure.
They don't necessarily cause trouble or act antisocially.

There are plenty of people living in lovely homes in well resourced neighbourhoods who nevertheless think it's OK to yell, scream, piss, puke and crap in the streets of my neighbourhood. I cannot see that the residents a hardstand would be any worse.

I'm not aware of any demand for Traveller specific accommodation in the inner city.



And I'm still waiting to hear what the issue with the suggested field in Ballybane is, apart from common garden NIMBY-ish.

fergiesfolly

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

There are plenty of people living in lovely homes in well resourced neighbourhoods who nevertheless think it's OK to yell, scream, piss, puke and crap in the streets of my neighbourhood. I cannot see that the residents a hardstand would be any worse.

I'm not aware of any demand for Traveller specific accommodation in the inner city.



And I'm still waiting to hear what the issue with the suggested field in Ballybane is, apart from common garden NIMBY-ish.

Because its always areas like ballybane, doughiska or westside
Hardstand? Sure.Stick of there.
More social housing? Sure. Stick it there.

Where's the hardstand site in Renmore, or Highfield park, or any other middle-class or well to do areas.
Why not city centre?
There's a vacant site down by the docks
Plenty of space.Lots of people live there already
A hardstand has to be a better use of it than an occasional amusement park?
Why not a hardstand for the travelling community right there?

bobbyss

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Would you be saying that if it was planned for the former oil tank site in town? You know, in your neighbourhood.

Where do you stand on the location of Traveller accommodation?

thesandeman

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Not necessarily.

With proper facilities, behaviour should be no worse than what is usual in the city streets.

It would be more like playing catch-up in fairness.

Mrs OBumble

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Because its always areas like ballybane, doughiska or westside
Hardstand? Sure.Stick of there.
More social housing? Sure. Stick it there.

Where's the hardstand site in Renmore, or Highfield park, or any other middle-class or well to do areas.
Why not city centre?
There's a vacant site down by the docks
Plenty of space.Lots of people live there already
A hardstand has to be a better use of it than an occasional amusement park?
Why not a hardstand for the travelling community right there?

Because the land there is expensive.

How much do you think it would cost for a field in Ballybane (possibly even already in council ownership) vs a privately owned piece of strategically located land in a central city location?

Would you be first or second in the queue to complain about council mis-management of fund if they did this?

fergiesfolly

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Because the land there is expensive.

How much do you think it would cost for a field in Ballybane (possibly even already in council ownership) vs a privately owned piece of strategically located land in a central city location?

Would you be first or second in the queue to complain about council mis-management of fund if they did this?

For this. No, not at all.
So, basically, that site is too good to be used as a home for travellers.
Is that what you're saying?

Mrs OBumble

fergiesfolly wrote: »

For this. No, not at all.
So, basically, that site is too good to be used as a home for travellers.
Is that what you're saying?

No.

I'm saying it would be seen by the majority as not good use of public money to pay a high rate for land used for social housing for any group of people, Traveller or otherwise.

youngrun

Where's the hardstand site in Renmore, or Highfield park, or any other middle-class or well to do areas.
Why not city centre?

Higgins yard in Shantalla ideal for hardstand and or indoor market surely

fergiesfolly

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

No.

I'm saying it would be seen by the majority as not good use of public money to pay a high rate for land used for social housing for any group of people, Traveller or otherwise.

There's been much greater waste of public funds in this city over the last 10-15 years.
Maybe, buying this site could be seen as a sign of a more inclusive and accepting attitude towards the travelling community.

bobbyss

youngrun wrote: »

Where's the hardstand site in Renmore, or Highfield park, or any other middle-class or well to do areas.
Why not city centre?

Higgins yard in Shantalla ideal for hardstand and or indoor market surely

There is one in Lw Salthill, although admittedly donated by Bishop I think. There is no space in Highfield Park I am thinking.
Of there are those huge playing fields in Renmore but again if they are CC run, then they would be part of general recreational amenities for everyone , including Travellers.

fergiesfolly

fergiesfolly wrote: »

There's been much greater waste of public funds in this city over the last 10-15 years.
Maybe, buying this site could be seen as a sign of a more inclusive and accepting attitude towards the travelling community.

When ever has building a dedicated and exclusive site a sign of inclusiveness.

My view is there shouldn't be any hardstands paid for with public money.

If travellers want to live on sites, they are more than welcome to, if they can afford to buy them with their own money.

If they need housing they should join the housing list with the people in the inclusive society already do.

biko

That travellers would be put on that hardstand is still an unknown.
It's an assumption that it's one of the plots from the article.

marklazarcovic

from what ive heard (the op was not a text from the council it was from the residents assc) there will be two hardstands going up there,one in the area i confirmed and another down at rocklands ave,in a field that had been taken over by travellers who were housed nearby ..they were keeping horses and machinery there ..

each one for one group of family members

Mrs OBumble

gilberto_eire wrote: »

If they need housing they should join the housing list with the people in the inclusive society already do.

Sigh.

They are on the list.

Why does everyone have to live in the same sort of housing? Social housing includes houses for families, apartments for old people, adapted housing for disabled people - why not hardstands for Travelling people?



Also - some were suggesting to use the former oil tanks site in the city centre. Thinking about it some more - that would be a great place for child-free households. But the city centre sucks as a place for kids, and virtually all Traveller households have kids as far as I can see.

FYI, there is already a fairly large eldery/disabled social housing complex in the area From what I can see, the council struggles to keep places there filled - I'd guess because of the amount of street noise and general anti-social behaviour. I have no idea how people on the ground floor of it manage to sleep with all the buffoonery going on outside their windows.

marklazarcovic

personally i think its a bit much for them to get preferential housing for their families all in one area ,its not like if someone moves out someone else on the housing list will get it,its preferential and to me thats wrong,they will be housed before others on the housing lists and with their families next door,nobody else oh the housing list gets that treatment,unfair.

the hardstands become a private estate paid for by taxpayers ,and the units will not be sold to non travellers,again unfair.

the rules for our citizens should be equal,not preferential

fergiesfolly

There was a meeting held in Flannerys hotel this evening primarily about the proposed hardata nd.
There were roughly 25-30 people there from the east side of the city with 5 local councillors on attendance.
The council seem to have have had little or no input into the decision on these sites and it seems the city manager will have final say on the matter. There is a lot of opposition to a hardstand being built in the area while other areas of the city are not being asked to accommodate the traveller community at all.
There were also requests for better infrastructure in the ballybane area.
There is a proposal (from East United, I think ) for extended clubhouse, running track etc, on one of the proposed hardstand sites.
Available funding and pressure from residents will tell if that goes ahead.
Interesting times ahead.