• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

The Hole at Oranhill


EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,629
Two young sisters from Oranmore Co. Galway have made a video about a large excavated hole in their estate. Apparently the hole was intended to be the foundations of a commercial block housing a shop, doctor's surgery and creche etc.

[video=youtube;8z5trkPXC0c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z5trkPXC0c[/video]

According to the video, they have been in contact with Galway County Council on multiple occasions in writing and in person, with the Council stating it is none of their concern as it is private land.

What the girls ask in their video is this: "Why can no-one fix the hole and make it go away?"

I think that's a very good question. According to Citizen's Information:

All local authorities in Ireland are responsible for dealing with derelict sites and dangerous structures in their area. The Derelict Sites Act, 1990 and the Local Government (Sanitary Services) Act, 1964 can be used by local authorities to force owners to clean up these sites. Both acts allow local authorities to prosecute owners who do not comply with notices served, to keep registers of all derelict sites and dangerous structures, to purchase land compulsorily and to carry out necessary work themselves and charge the owners for the cost.
Derelict sites and dangerous structures

From the Derelict Sites Act itself, Section 3:

3.—In this section “derelict site” means any land (in this section referred to as “the land in question”) which detracts, or is likely to detract, to a material degree from the amenity, character or appearance of land in the neighbourhood of the land in question because of—

(a) the existence on the land in question of structures which are in a ruinous, derelict or dangerous condition, or

(b) the neglected, unsightly or objectionable condition of the land or any structures on the land in question, or

(c) the presence, deposit or collection on the land in question of any litter, rubbish, debris or waste, except where the presence, deposit or collection of such litter, rubbish, debris or waste results from the exercise of a right conferred by statute or by common law.
This ginormous hole is clearly within the definition of a derelict site. In my opinion, based on the video, the site meets all three sub-clauses of the definition in Section 3.

Under Section 10 of the Act, the Council have a duty to take steps, including the use of statutory powers, to remedy the situation.

So, why is our legislative system failing miserably to address this large hole and indeed all the other large holes around the country?
 


Astral Peaks

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
25,982
Did the developer lodge a completion bond with the council?

My understanding is that that was a requirement from about 2005 onwards, those monies were designed to address this type of situation.

Of course, I may be wrong......
 

Civic_critic2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
4,904
The Irish are still acting as if they can't do anything without the permission of the landlord or constabulary. They can't move, are paralysed. Apparently the 'adults' in that area are worried that a child might fall in and drown in that hole so they spend 3 years writing letters hoping someone will come along and fix it.

Get off your holes and take control, fix it yourselves as far as possible to make it safer, for your children. It's your life, your area, your country.
 

Bobcolebrooke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
610
Is there a hoarding licence for the hoarding?

Ask the Council to take enforcement action to either complete the development or restore the land to its original condition!
 

EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,629
Did the developer lodge a completion bond with the council?

My understanding is that that was a requirement from about 2005 onwards, those monies were designed to address this type of situation.

Of course, I may be wrong......
I've no clue on the bond situation Astral. The houses were built in 2002 but the hole was excavated in 2007 I think.

This matter was raised in the Seanad in May 2012. According to Fidelma Healy Eames, a commitment was received to have the hole surveyed and filled in. First time I ever heard of a hole requiring a survey.

UNFINISHED HOLE IN ORANMORE ESTATE TO BE SURVEYED | Galway Bay FM | galwaynews.ie

Serious case of beating about the bush methinks.
 

EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,629
The Irish are still acting as if they can't do anything without the permission of the landlord or constabulary. They can't move, are paralysed. Apparently the 'adults' in that area are worried that a child might fall in and drown in that hole so they spend 3 years writing letters hoping someone will come along and fix it.

Get off your holes and take control, fix it yourselves as far as possible to make it safer, for your children. It's your life, your area, your country.
I would be of the same opinion. At least the locals could make a start clearing up some of the rubble. That in itself would highlight the issue and possibly embarrass the council into doing their statutory duty.
 

galwaytt

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
310
I would be of the same opinion. At least the locals could make a start clearing up some of the rubble. That in itself would highlight the issue and possibly embarrass the council into doing their statutory duty.
Yes, from a practical point of view, and for safety, that makes sense.

However, the downside is that the likes of the owner and developer are being, effectively, 'bailed out', AGAIN, by the public. And they'll just sit back and laugh at (us).

This is why we have the legislation mentioned above, and the legislators and councillors - it's THEIR job to enforce the relevant Acts and work FOR the public. The removal of the footpath alone is an act of destruction of public property.

I would suggest everyone in Oranhill tell their council - and councillors as well as TD's & Senators - that they will withold their property tax until the situation is resolved.
 

galwaytt

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
310
I would be of the same opinion. At least the locals could make a start clearing up some of the rubble. That in itself would highlight the issue and possibly embarrass the council into doing their statutory duty.
Yes, from a practical point of view, and for safety, that makes sense.

However, the downside is that the likes of the owner and developer are being, effectively, 'bailed out', AGAIN, by the public. And they'll just sit back and laugh at (us).

This is why we have the legislation mentioned above, and the legislators and councillors - it's THEIR job to enforce the relevant Acts and work FOR the public. The removal of the footpath alone is an act of destruction of public property.

I would suggest everyone in Oranhill tell their council - and councillors as well as TD's & Senators - that they will withold their property tax until the situation is resolved.
 

im axeled

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2010
Messages
29,638
Get off your holes and take control, fix it yourselves as far as possible to make it safer, for your children. It's your life, your area, your country.[/QUOTE]

this takes a redicilous answer to the extreme, is there any necissety to use the language used in the first sentence, no siree there is not,have you read what you have written op, first the cost, it will take some moxey to fill it, if they tried the council would be on top of them quicker than flies on schit, then they would be responsible for the lot, for which the council would be delighted, as it would have the responsibility off of them, i could list some more but...............
 

Civic_critic2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
4,904
this takes a redicilous answer to the extreme, is there any necissety to use the language used in the first sentence, no siree there is not,have you read what you have written op, first the cost, it will take some moxey to fill it, if they tried the council would be on top of them quicker than flies on schit, then they would be responsible for the lot, for which the council would be delighted, as it would have the responsibility off of them, i could list some more but...............
Stop being such a pussy. Children's lives are in danger, the 'adults' should move without delay to secure the area. If the council interferes without fixing it then brick the council out of it as they are a clear and present danger to the lives of the children in the area.

Take control of your country and stop being inhibited by third-rate fukwits who are endangering the lives of your children and destroying the quality of your area.
 

EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,629
Yes, from a practical point of view, and for safety, that makes sense.

However, the downside is that the likes of the owner and developer are being, effectively, 'bailed out', AGAIN, by the public. And they'll just sit back and laugh at (us).

This is why we have the legislation mentioned above, and the legislators and councillors - it's THEIR job to enforce the relevant Acts and work FOR the public. The removal of the footpath alone is an act of destruction of public property.

I would suggest everyone in Oranhill tell their council - and councillors as well as TD's & Senators - that they will withold their property tax until the situation is resolved.
I think this is one of the major points in this matter. Either the Council are unaware of their statutory duty regarding this site or they are simply unwilling to execute their powers. I don't understand this. Stating that this is a matter for the land owner as it is private land is a pile of crap.

The council have statutory powers all the way up to and including enforcement and prosecution. And yet they just absolve themselves of responsibility?
 

EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,629
this takes a redicilous answer to the extreme, is there any necissety to use the language used in the first sentence, no siree there is not,have you read what you have written op, first the cost, it will take some moxey to fill it, if they tried the council would be on top of them quicker than flies on schit, then they would be responsible for the lot, for which the council would be delighted, as it would have the responsibility off of them, i could list some more but...............
It will take money, it's a rather large hole. The suggestion is merely that the locals clear some of the rubble on the other side of the road, if even just to get it into one pile. Having the council descend on them like flies on schit would be general idea if it were my estate.

There are no circumstances under which the locals trying to improve their lot could be used by the council to absolve themselves of responsibility.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6
The suggestion is merely that the locals clear some of the rubble on the other side of the road, if even just to get it into one pile.
Not sure where they'd get the machines for that... have you seen the extent of it? Most of that material could not be moved by hand.
Certainly wouldn't fancy manhandling it + probably needing a tetanus shot after it.
 

Civic_critic2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
4,904
Not sure where they'd get the machines for that... have you seen the extent of it? Most of that material could not be moved by hand.
Certainly wouldn't fancy manhandling it + probably needing a tetanus shot after it.
You're right. Better let the children die instead. It's all just so difficult.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top