Please READ: Due by Friday 27th

Marcais

You should be aware of the council's recent rezoning of lands for housing (including 20% affordable housing) behind the southern boundary wall of Charlesland (running parallel to the new road) and for a massive shopping centre beside Seabourne View/Fairways.

The original zoning was for a low level “architecturally sensitive” business and office park, schools, an enterprise centre, a car showroom and light warehousing on the “Jackie Skelly side of the back road.

Please note that the developers are under no commitment as to the type of residential units to be built behind us, only to the size of each lot, and they in fact applied to have this requirement reduced.

Once these lands are rezoned as residential there is no going back and the developer will build whatever they want there. Indeed, if having been rezoned, the developer does not get planning permission to build they can seek compensation from the Council! Charlesland Golf Club is already lost to developers, do you want more and more housing?

The submission below was e-mailed to plandev@wicklowcoco.ie (Wicklow Planning Dept) (interesting to see what Zapi requested in their prior submission re. the Plan e.g. for a higher density for housing, Surprise, Surprise!)

Please read this submission and the points therein. You may or may not agree with some or all of the points, but you only have until Friday to make a submission. I would encourage you to reject the rezoning by sending this or a similar e-mail making sure to include your name and address. I would recommend that you "personalise" the e-mail's introduction and amend as you wish and please forward this e-mail to concerned individuals. Stopping this now will give you time to consider the options.

Seabourne Residents: I was over yesterday and spoke to a couple of residents, they know nothing of the shopping centre to be built beside you. They should be made aware immediately. As I say above, you only have until Friday.

THE SHOPPING CENTRE WITH 24 DISRUPTION AND the HOUSES WILL BE BUILT UNLESS HEAVY PRESSURE IS PUT ON THE GREYSTONES COUNCILLORS, JONES, MITCHELL AND KELLEHER.

If you are e-mailing a submission, copy them in on the submission as below. C'mon I've made it easy for you!

---

To: 'plandev@wicklowcoco.ie'

Cc: 'mitchelld@eircom.net'; 'tomfortune@eircom.net'; 'gjones@georgejones.ie'; 'kk@kathleenkelleher.com'; 'JBehan@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'JByrne@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'JRyan@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'CFox@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'DDeBurca@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'PVance@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'AFerris@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'JOShaugh@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'PCasey@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'ATDoyle@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'FWhittle@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'CKavanagh@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'NKelly@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'VBlake@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'SBourke@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'TCullen@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'JRuttle@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'ETimmins@wicklowcoco.ie'; 'mgtocallaghan@eircom.net'; 'cllrcmaloney@hotmail.com'; 'pat@patkillilea.com'; 'dick.roche@oireachtas.irlgov.ie'; 'liz_mcmanus@oireachtas.irlgov.ie'; 'mildred_fox@oireachtas.irlgov.ie'; 'joe_jacob@oireachtas.irlgov.ie'; 'billy_timmins@oireachtas.irlgov.ie'

Subject: Greystones/Delgany Local Area Plan 2006 Rezoning

Greystones/Delgany Local Area Plan 2006
I am making this submission after my assessment of the impact of the new Local Area Plan the rezoning for Greystones/Delgany 2007-2012 and, in particular, the lands adjacent to Charlesland (E2).

Please confirm receipt.

No forethought appears to have gone into the Council's last minute rezoning of E2 and other areas at the behest of Zapi Properties Ltd. The town planners have absolutely rejected the proposed rezoning. I am astonished at the apparent lack of consideration by County Councillors not only for the opinions of the area residents and the town planners but also for basic "quality of life" issues such as described below.

I am copying local elected officials on this submission as the lack consideration referred to will very much determine how I vote in the upcoming elections. At a meeting with Charlesland residents with Minister Dick Roche in the Burnaby Hotel, the Minister pledged his support for our opposition to the rezoning. I am calling on the Minister to now voice this support.
What prior to rezoning was "Charlesland Business and Office Park" in typical spin by the Mayor of Greystones has now become misrepresented as "Charlesland Industrial Centre" and we have received correspondence from the Mayor telling us that if we do not accept the residential rezoning that the option is "10m high warehousing" including a "Heavy Goods Vehicle loading bay" "backing on to our houses". He is well aware that the Charlesland Business and Office Park complied with the 1999 County Development Plan which stipulated that no high bay buildings would be appropriate in this area. He is also aware that even in the event that a developer were to propose this scale of building and corresponding emissions ("backing onto houses" )to a councillor and (as appears likely) a councillor forward this proposal, this would not be accepted by any planning authority and at odds with Sevesco directive requirements.

The councillors who rushed this rezoning through seem somehow impressed by Zapi Properties' motives. It is not groundbreaking news however that Zapi's motives are to maximise profits without concern for the effect on current or future residents. Zapi Properties Ltd. submission on the Greystones/Delgany Local Area Plan 2006 requested:

- Rezoning from R2 to higher density (35 dwellings per hectare). This would have allowed 326 units above what the 1999 Plan allowed.

- Addition of the following "higher buildings may be permitted where presented as part of a Masterplan proposal".

- Noise standards are too onerous & should be reduced.

- That the following uses be made open for consideration: General Industry (i.e. heavy industry to be allowed)

Not requests to be expected from a company whose representative recently declared to Charlesland residents that they reviewed the Local Area Plan with a view to determining a strategy to "meet the needs of Greystones residents" and thus the approach to Councillors for the rezoning of E2 segments as residential and retail (i.e. large scale shopping centre beside Seabourne View/Fairways)

I wish to make the following observations:

Environmental Report · The Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations 2004 states that "Any proposed changes to the draft plan must go through the screening process to evaluate if they would cause significant environmental effects not previously identified or addressed in the Environmental Report. This screening process must be recorded, including any opinions from the Environmental Authorities. If there are material changes to the draft plan, this screening documentation must be made available for inspection during the public display of the proposed amendments to the draft plan" This requirement has not been met.

Consultation · The rezoning had been proposed and accepted by Wicklow County Council without prior consultation with residents of Charlesland. Consultation prior to any rezoning of lands adjacent to Charlesland was specifically requested in submissions made by residents of Charlesland Park and Grove on the Local Area Plan on 14th June 2006, and the submissions were available to all councillors.

Noise Levels · I am concerned about the obvious levels of noise to be generated by the proposed shopping centre from deliveries, consumers etc.

Population · Greystones is substantially ahead of target for residential units and corresponding population growth.
· Under the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004 – 2010, there is no requirement to zone additional lands in Charlesland to meet the population/settlement increase projections.

Business Park · Proper sustainability of this area requires the provision of mixed use facilities, as in those provided in the current planning permission for a business park, not the over-concentration of residential development which will add to the wider problem of Greystones as a dormitory town.

Drainage Issues · The land earmarked for residential rezoning is 2m higher than Charlesland Grove at the South East corner and water runoff to South-facing gardens would increase due to compacted soil if construction were to proceed. Lowering of soil levels in this area may cause significant drainage problems.

· As highlighted in the ‘Proposed Amendments Report’ prepared by Murray O’Laoire Architects September 2006, it is predicted that the environmental impact of this amendment will result in:
“An increase in waste water loading to the Greystones Wastewater Treatment Plant of c.645 p.e. to that provided for in the zoning permission of the draft plan due to the proposed residential development”.

“An increase in potable water demand to service an additional residential population of c.645 persons to that provided for in the draft plan”.

Traffic Impact Assessment · No study was done to assess the impact on traffic of the proposed shopping centre. It would be standard practice that a study is done to assess the impact of traffic for any such development.

· The proposed rezoning of the E2 land for additional residential and retail use will have a negative environmental impact in terms of traffic volumes and air quality, both during construction and operation if the centre is to proceed.

Local Retail Impact · No assessment was made of the impact of the shopping centre on existing retail outlets in Greystones.

· As outlined in the Murray O’Laoire Architects report, the proposed rezoning conflicts with the existing sustainable spatial strategy and conflicts with the fifth objective of the retail planning guide.

Transport · There is currently NO public transport for Charlesland, yet it is proposed to house c.625 more residents in the area

Having considered the Local Area Plan and the rezoning for Greystones/Delgany 2007-2012, this submission rejects the proposal to rezone lands on the basis that the requested consultation was not provided, that the population targets for the area have already been exceeded, and on the basis that the proposed rezoning did not consider basic concerns such as traffic volumes and impact on local retailers.

I will be voting in the upcoming elections based on my opposition to developments such as this and the Greystones Marina, and on the lack of public services and facilities in Charlesland.

Name:

Address: The Glen, Greystones, County Wicklow

anniec

Did anyone receive an acknowledgement from TD's or Councillors when they sent email?

A

Sparks115

I only got one reply....lazy so and sos...what do any of us expect from these politicians and councillers. arghhhhh they make me so mad!!!

Anyway I hope everyone and anyone that is on this forum sends and email or letter ..If all of us have have any intention of living in Greystones in the future we need to be heard now...otherwise I dont want to see this forum in 10 years from now with loads of moaning heads giving out about the way Greystones has become act now people (ah yes I was a french revolutionry in a past life!!)

Well done to Marcias and anyone else involved in getting the letter printed and delivered. Its good to see people making such an effort when its such a thankless job but Me and my family appreciate it and hopefully will make a difference in years to come.:D

ChickenBalls

Appreciate the effort you put into this email for people to send.
I've done my part - now come on everybody else, this cant go ahead!

Maybe make this a sticky till Friday?

dubgirl

just mailed it - come on everybody;)

Mitch Connor

well, the only way i will ever be able to afford somewhere nice to live in greystones is if it is newly built, so the more houses there are the better!

Bertie

Houses are definitely better than industry no matter how light they would still involve H.G.V. doing deliveries and colllections possibly 24/7.
I think its a bit hypocritical being a resident of charlesland buying a house in the last couple of years and then trying to stop anyone else getting the opportunity.
I sense scaremongering going on here A School site a Garda station a shopping centre and some people at a recent meeting saying hundreds of houses rather than 211 all in 18 acres c'mon.
People should be far more concerned with the council taking over their own estates and getting developers off management companies.Look what is happening in stillorgan at the moment the residents kept the developers on the management company the developers just like in charlesland held a majority of votes.
Now they are building apts on what was a designated green area 10 years ago in the planning but the area was rezoned the residents have no say stake or claim as the developer can vote them down legally on the management company

dubgirl

In reading Bertie & Tauren's post - they do have valid points :rolleyes:
I for one was delighted to be able to purchase in Greystones and sure it would be great for others to have the same opportunity. But what really bothers me is the lack of facilities we have for the people already here. Lack of bus service is really annoying me, No bank machine from this week. They are well able to push through plans of this size but can't get to grips on the existing issues that are in Charlesland.

Mitch Connor

dubgirl wrote:

In reading Bertie & Tauren's post - they do have valid points :rolleyes:
I for one was delighted to be able to purchase in Greystones and sure it would be great for others to have the same opportunity. But what really bothers me is the lack of facilities we have for the people already here. Lack of bus service is really annoying me, No bank machine from this week. They are well able to push through plans of this size but can't get to grips on the existing issues that are in Charlesland.

Having a massive shopping centre would go some way to providing the facilities required - and as for transport, i thought Dublin Bus were supposed to be re-routing the 184/84 down that way ages ago, what happened?

future_plans

Hi Marcais,

Regarding

"You should be aware of the council's recent rezoning of lands for housing (including 20% affordable housing) behind the southern boundary wall of Charlesland (running parallel to the new road) and for a massive shopping centre beside Seabourne View/Fairways."

I was wondering where you got this information from? Is it on the coco web site? If true, it would of course have serious implications for the area.

Thanks.

Sparks115

Points taken...but the facilities are very bad for the area as it stands so with more developments on the horizon its just going to get worse. No one I think are against more housiing its the planning before hand and the volume that needs to be thought about -thats what the issue is ...instead of having looking for solutions to problems down the road having forthought and foresight to what can be done now is what we all want.

The reason to objecting is to show the council that they cant go ahead regardless of any thought for the locals. The problem is the plans of the developers do not show this, so for those of you who say "Go ahead and build build build cause we got a house" isnt really solving the issue it needs to be very carefully looked and and adjusted to the good of all involved for all our futures...why do you think Dublin is seen as the worst city in Europe for Town planning!!!! Becasue the councillers of old and now made a TOTAL BALLS of it becasue of lack of future planning. Greystones will become another area of example of bad planning if we all sit on our laurels and say nothing. Of Course areas will be rezoned and houses need to be built, that part of life, but dont be NAIVE and think sure its all in good hands othewise rest assured in 10 years u will be moaning and mouthing off about the busy roads and the lack of schools and this and that and u will be on this forum bitching about it all!!!

Plan now for the future... act dont re-act!!

Plenty

Just as an FYI, the deadline is actually October 27th instead of the 20th

dubgirl

Got this reply this morning - think he does make sense actually

Thank you for your comments in relation to the Charlesland zoning changes:

a.. The Charlesland Industrial estate is a very bad design. I objected to
Bord Pleanala in 2002, only one of 2 persons to object to it. Full Planning
Permission was granted on the 2nd December 2002 reference 01/5318. Backing
onto Charlesland houses, on a mostly elevated site, are very large transport
warehouses with a HGV area in between. The lights are 8M+ higher than the
bedrooms of peoples houses. The noise and disruption will be bad as the
higher noise limit (for working hours) is from 0800 to 2200 hours from
Monday to Saturday. I would hate to live next to it. There is NO school
site. From your letter I gather that you are not aware that FULL Planning
Permission has been given.
b.. The rezoning which we have now done has placed a school site near
Superquinn so children can easily walk to it. I am very keen to see a school
up and running for Charlesland children as soon as possible. We have
difficult traffic problems at all our schools. It is important that children
can get independently to school for traffic reasons and also so they get a
sense of independence as soon as possible.
c.. Instead of these warehouses, 210 houses are to be placed on the area
next to the Charlesland Residences. This will be much less disruptive for
Charlesland residents.
d.. I consider that we need a large store in Greystones so people can buy
clothes, schoolchildren’s supplies, washing machines etc without going to
Dundrum or Liffey Valley as at present. The rezoning has placed one next to
the Sports Center well away from existing houses. Council Management wanted
to build the store on the Park n’ Ride site which is too small and could not
cope with the traffic which is why I did not agree with them.
e.. Traffic and Sewerage Studies will be done as part of a detailed
Planning Application and if they are not adequate permission will not be
given.
f.. The developer has agreed to fund;
· The Community center (€3m) which has been talked about for 10+
years,

· Provide a site for a large recycling center (Council officials have
failed to find one in 5 years),

· Build a 60,000sq.ft. Enterprise Center, 25% of which will be given
to the community for start up businesses (we have no other way of getting
this).

· Reserve sites for a school and Garda station, provide funds for a
Heritage center and some for the swimming pool. An excellent Sports Center
has already been provided.

I believe that this change is for the benefit of Charlesland Residents and
the Town as a whole. If you wish to consult further please phone me so we
can meet.



Derek Mitchell

Mayor Greystones

Mitch Connor

All in all, i agree completely with what Derek Mitchell says.

future_plans

In general I would agree with what he says regarding the residential area and school. However, how large is a 'large store'? I will not be losing any sleep if there is no washing machine shop near me!! Anything larger than say the existing Frascati Centre in Blackrock (for example) is too large for the area in my opinion.

On the other points he made, I agree. But politicians often say one thing and mean or do another. So we are better off keeping a very close eye on proceedings....

wicklowdub

I received the same reply from Derck Mitchell today - while there are some points with which we are in agreement i fail to see how they can justify a large scale shopping centre in the middle of a residential area -

Mitch Connor

wicklowdub wrote:

I received the same reply from Derck Mitchell today - while there are some points with which we are in agreement i fail to see how they can justify a large scale shopping centre in the middle of a residential area -

residents of charlesland and the surrounding area need somewhere to shop, and one in greystones, keeping money and jobs local, would be a better idea for Greystones then telling people Dundrum is just down the M50

wicklowdub

Dont kid yourself that a massive retail outlet will bring prosperity to greystones - what it will bring is traffic and congestion, vast majority of outlets are multinational and not local. Also putting a large centre so far in of the main route (N11) doesnt make sense. surely if the area needed a massive retails centre ( i dont agree that it does ) there are better locations !

future_plans

The plans for this large store have more than likely already been drawn up. Is there anyway we could press to see them? Or to get Derek Mitchel to elaborate on the 'large store' comment.

This is very important. An appropriately sized centre would be very handy and beneficial in terms of local convenience and jobs. However, it is the scale that is worrying me at the moment.

It also worries me that the council would give the go-ahead to such a project even before the new interchange was finished, further adding to worsening traffic congestion.

Possibly you can respond to him Dubgirl and ask him to elaborate on these plans?

Mitch Connor

wicklowdub wrote:

Dont kid yourself that a massive retail outlet will bring prosperity to greystones - what it will bring is traffic and congestion, vast majority of outlets are multinational and not local. Also putting a large centre so far in of the main route (N11) doesnt make sense. surely if the area needed a massive retails centre ( i dont agree that it does ) there are better locations !

who is going to work in it? people from greystones perhaps? is that a good thing? yes!

So far off the N11 - about two minutes! Take the charlseland exit off the n11 and the new centre couldn't be all that far away. its probably a lot closer to the n11 then the dundrum centre is to the m50. What other locations would you suggest, in greystones or the immediate surrounding area.

Its about time people in greystones didn't have to go to bray, dun laoghaire, dundrum or dublin to do any meaningful shopping. It also might provide a few shops that the younger generations could make use of, cause the moment.

loyatemu

it depends on the size of the centre proposed. Mitchell makes it sound like another large supermarket, but there's already a large Tesco in Greystones, and Lidl is about to open.

if we're talking about a shopping centre with multiple units, well the Meridian Point is doing badly, there are vacant units in the Charlesland Centre and the Eden Gate centre hasn't even opened yet. No medium-sized shopping centre would be able to compete with Dundrum or the proposed Bray Town Centre - people from Greystones might shop there but shoppers from Wicklow, Bray, Roundwood etc will go to Dundrum.

his other points are valid - I'd rather have housing than warehousing on the farmhouse site and Charlesland definitely needs a school. My main issue is with the vaguely defined shopping-centre.

Fiachra2

A few points regarding Cllr Mitchells reply you should be aware of.

When the original plan was prepared in 1999. Some people argued that as there was already a significant IDA site zoned for industry, the areas -such as the one in question-that were not zoned for housing should be left green belt/agriculture to add to the ambience of the new development. Derek ARGUED STRONGLY that it should be zoned for industry. In other words he supported the zoning that he now claims he is saving you from.

With regard to the school yes you will be able to walk to it but what he omits to mention is that the town plan includes provision for the change of location of St. Davids school. I'm sure you can guess what will happen next. Once st Davids moves to Charlesland then people in other parts of the town who heretofore have been able to walk to school will now have to drive. (An probably park all over your estates!)

You need to think hard about the shopping centre.
Why did teh professional planners oppose it
Why does Derek know better than them (He is an accountant not a planner)
Why does the retail strategy for the town oppose it.
Will it ever be built
If its so essential why the 200 houses. Where do they fit in?
Is there not a risk that it wont be built and that they will then change the zoning AGAIN to something even less palatable.


Inch's point is well made. This is all piecmeal planning without consultation. Why did they not ask the residents for their views first? Why slip in this amendment? The majority of submissions made on this are likely to oppose this rezoining. Will Derek change his mind if it looks like a majority are against it. I think not.

ChickenBalls

Reply I got from Margaret O'Callaghan


" Thank you for your e-mail regarding your submission to Wicklow Co.Co. on the above proposed development plan, which I have noted. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that as a Member of Greystones Town Council I have no role in such matters as rezoning or the adoption of proposed development plans such as the above mentioned plan. These are matters for the Members of Wicklow Co.Co.

I also have some reservations about the proposed development plan, including some aspects of the proposals insofar as they impact on Charlesland and Greystones. While I would accept that some aspects of the proposed further development of Charlesland is less than what could be described as "proper planning" it is certainly more forward looking than what was provided in the original plan for the development of Charlesland. As you may be aware the original plan for Charlesland, which included 1400 housing units, was approved by An Bord Pleanala against the wishes of the people of Greystones and Wicklow Co.Co. The approval for the development should have been conditional on the provision of many necessary amenities and other needs required by the residents of the town. This proposed development goes some way to addressing these needs e.g. it provides for a new school site, Garda Station, funding to complete the long awaited community centre (it has taken over ten years to s!
ource this funding). I understand that as the proposed housing units will be much larger than those currently available Charlesland will be a more mixed development which will make it possible for residents of the estate to trade up and remain in the estate. As I have mentioned I have reservations about the proposed plan such as, for example, I cannot see where the demand for the proposed retail outlets will come from - Greystones already has a glut of retail outlets for which there has been no uptake (Meridian Centre, Charlesland shopping area) - and of course there will be even more unwanted outlets if the Harbour Development is given the go ahead! I also had some reservations about the proposal in the original plan for large warehouses backing onto houses. I understood that houses would be more aesthetic and preferred by the residents of Charlesland, especially those in close proximity to the warehouses. While I believe that what is proposed is less than perfect it !
does on balance give something back to the people of Greystones.

You also mentioned in your e-mail your concerns about the lack of public transport in Greystones. I have put down a number of motions over the past two years at Greystones Town Council regarding the provision of a bus service to Charlesland by Dublin Bus. As a result of those motions Dublin Bus has been called before the Town Council on a number of occasions to clarify what it proposes to do about the provision of a service. Following the latest meeting with Dublin Bus the company promised to commence a service using the 184 with effect from July of this year and the 84 to commence later this year. As you will be aware there is still no service, however, I will continue to press Dublin Bus to deliver on its promise to provide a service.

You mention your opposition to the Greystones Harbour Development. I am the only member of Greystones Town Council to consistently oppose this development and I voted against it when it was presented to the Town Council. I believe that what is proposed is far too big and completely out of character with the victorian aspect of the current harbour and surrounding area. "

future_plans

For what its worth, the reply from Ms O'Callaghan is encouraging. However, she quickly distances herself from any rezoning etc that might take place.

It seems to be the general consensus that the residential development backing onto Charlesland would be more acceptable than ware houses etc.

Regarding the relocation of Davids, priority in Charlesland is a primary school for the young families. The current location of primary schools in Greystones/Delgany is not convenient for Charlesland residents at all.

I would also like to know more about the proposed affordable housing that was mentioned in the initial post in this thread. Anybody have more information on this? What types of housing? Numbers?

We do have a dilemma. The general vibes coming from our FG reps are that they support the development of the Harbour and now a large shopping centre in Charlesland....whereas Labour seem to be very much against all this development! What to do? What to do?

Marcais

future_plans wrote:

For what its worth, the reply from Ms O'Callaghan is encouraging. However, she quickly distances herself from any rezoning etc that might take place.

It seems to be the general consensus that the residential development backing onto Charlesland would be more acceptable than ware houses etc.

Regarding the relocation of Davids, priority in Charlesland is a primary school for the young families. The current location of primary schools in Greystones/Delgany is not convenient for Charlesland residents at all.

I would also like to know more about the proposed affordable housing that was mentioned in the initial post in this thread. Anybody have more information on this? What types of housing? Numbers?

We do have a dilemma. The general vibes coming from our FG reps are that they support the development of the Harbour and now a large shopping centre in Charlesland....whereas Labour seem to be very much against all this development! What to do? What to do?

NOTE: SUBMISSION DATE IS EXTENDED TO 27TH OCTOBER i.e. Friday next Eoin etc. If you read this, could you change the Topic heading?

The representaive for the developer would not be drawn on the issue of where the affordable housing would be situated.

Another couple of points:

The Wicklow County Plan (2004 - 2010*) states clearly that NO residential rezoning is to occur until pre-existing resdiential estates are self-sufficient i.e. local employment is available to such an extent that commuting to work is not necessary. Now unless Godfathers' Pizzeria is about to expand hugely and take on 1,500 skilled employees, this requirement most certainly is nowhere near to being met.

2,000 "residential units" are to be built on Charlesland Golf Club. If the Shopping Center goes ahead, there will initially be green areas surrounding it. However, it will only be a matter of time, and you can be sure of this, before these areas are also built on, with Greystones then meeting up with Kilcoole.
And if anybody sees this going any other way, I think they are deluding themselves.

Heaping pressure on the councillors now and hopefully givng them pause woudl surely be in our best interests no matter what way you see this. Let them then come back with something reasonable to discuss with us.

*Given the futuristic plans for Greystones Marina, councillors may not be aware that we are still within the 2004 - 2010 range. They are of course light years ahead of the the rest of us simple peasants. :rolleyes:

Jonege

I feel its time I join the new world and take part in the discussion currently taking place on proposals contained in the Draft LAP for Greystones /Delgany.
To explain my background I was born in Greystones and have represented Greystones on Wicklow County Council since and Greystones Town Council since inception in 1984.
I have no horns and have tried for the past twenty seven years to bring about real improvements in Greystones some with success but with other work to be completed. As you will gather from my user name I am George Jones and I hope my input will help discuusions.

In relation to suggestion that you all write to us and submit the proforma submission on the plan I welcome the interest shown but as I mentioned to anyone that has written to me I would be very happy to go through the proposals for Charlesland in a face to face meeting where I can put in context the reasons for proposing changes, I have also mentioned that some of the information in the letter seems odd , ie comments on Ministers say, spin by the Mayor and voting intentions in next elections.
Also some information is incorrect ie nothing done at behest of Zapi, no last minute rezoning (we are still in draft stage) I would go on , but in view of my first notice on this board I will finish.
I do look forward to meeting with residents very shortly.

anniec

Does anyone know when the local elections are being held and how Greystones Mayor is elected??

Jonege

Some quick replies to Fiachra 2
The School Site proposed in Charlesland is a Primary School not suggested for St Davids (as you know is second level)
Why did planners object to Shopping because they want to put it on Council land at Park & Ride yes a massive Dunnes or M & S. The same planners who destroyed Meridian Centre with planning restrictions and refused Lidl because it was out of town, Bord Pleanala granted it. Tesco expect to increase business by 25% when Lidl open.... competition Why should the people of this community always have to travel to Liffey Valley ,Dundrum ....

Fiachra2

This is not the place for Geroge an I to engage in public debate however I will reply on this occasion because he has (quite appropriately) corrected me in the matter of the school, which is indeed primary. Presumably it is the site in Blacklion -with associated housing in a Green Belt area-that is earmarked for St. Davids.
He is also correct that the Council did have proposals for shopping facilities near the park and ride. (Although I dont think the site would accomodate anything very large)This was in line with the retail strategy prepared by professionals for the town and presumably therefore something that should be considered.
He is also correct that the Lidl development was refused. Again this was in line with the same retail strategy because it was out of town centre. Like the one in Charlesland which would further damage the viability of places like the Meridian centre.

This brings us back to my last few points:
1. Why were these proposals and other rezoings proposed by councillors not put to the public during the statutory consultation process?
2.If a majority of public opinion (as expressed by way of submissions) is opposed to the propopsals will they be dropped by the councillors who put them forward?

Lastly I would urge residents to take up the offer of a meeting. However I would respectfully suggest that it should not simply be about "putting in context the reasons for proposing changes" It should be a two way dialogue to inform the councillors of the feelings of the community whom they are-in the first instance-supposed to represent.

gstonesmx5

so can we take it that from now on there will be not political debates between party reps on this site ?
i for one dont want to see this turning into a he said you said we said thread.
people reading this thread need to realise that more information is avaliable in the genaral public or through residents committess and i would think it important that decisions/oppinions are not fully formed based ion this thread or site only.
i would also urge people to consider information before posting it in relation to its source, its validity and their right to publish it. an example of this is that (and it was said in the public domain but not on this site) "some of the industrial units will be 30m high". this statment is real but the info is false but was belived by some to be true.
every one is entitled to an opinion but it should be based on fact and not fiction.

thanks for reading if you read to the end.

future_plans

I agree gstonesmx5. However, when the information posted is done so responsibly, then this is an important channel for the residents of Charlesland and surrounding areas. Quite a few residents in the area are not in the locality for 12 or more hours a day. This is one way of keeping in tune to what is going on in their area. So I would encourage people to continue posting accurate information, opinions and meeting minutes etc on this site.

Would it be possible for a public meeting to be organised for the residents of Charlesland where we can meet with all the local councillors, mayor, town planner and developers so we can get an accurate picture of what is planned for the area. In my opinion, much of what is said here can be scaremongering. This would also allow residents to have their voice heard.

Marcais

future_plans wrote:

I agree gstonesmx5. However, when the information posted is done so responsibly, then this is an important channel for the residents of Charlesland and surrounding areas. Quite a few residents in the area are not in the locality for 12 or more hours a day. This is one way of keeping in tune to what is going on in their area. So I would encourage people to continue posting accurate information, opinions and meeting minutes etc on this site.

Would it be possible for a public meeting to be organised for the residents of Charlesland where we can meet with all the local councillors, mayor, town planner and developers so we can get an accurate picture of what is planned for the area. In my opinion, much of what is said here can be scaremongering. This would also allow residents to have their voice heard.

That is what should have been done i.e. with representatives for and against. This should also have been done for the Marina:( instead of invitations for individuals and small groups of people to meet with individual councillors.

As residents, although some may have experience in these matters, any group can tell us anything they want and unless we have individuals who are au fait with the background to local planning developments/proposals we can't make informed choices.

The first post on this topic contains some content which has been described as odd and I would agree that it should not form part of a submission i.e. re "spin" and re. Dick Roche's support. This was addressed to the councillors and Minister who were copied in and not inteneded as part of the submission. It would have been more appropriate to keep this separate from the submission but again put that down to a learning curve.

The many issues raised however should all be addressed at not just cherry picked so I would call on anybody responding to do so, but this may not be the place for it as pointed out above. The place for it should be a PUBLIC meeting where I would assume that anybody who would consider themselves a member of the public would feel welcome to attend and not expect a written invitation.

Issues like this are much more far reaching than buses, ATMs, fees etc. and we should all be notified by mail of any proposals. We all receive plenty of circulars from politicians telling us how good a job they are doing, surely we should also expect to be consulted before such big decisions are made and given at least a few months to discuss the proposals.

Marcais

Anyone reading the Bray People or Wicklow times won't be surprised to see that the Councillors are still telling us what we need built beside us and what is for the good of Charlesland. Absolutely no mention of the letters of objections (I would say at least 100) that were submitted by Charlesland Residents and committees. I can guarantee that if these submissions were in favour of the residential zoning, they would have been highlighted.

Bring on the replies "well we did ask you to come around to our houses and we'd discuss the issues with you" !! We know what the issues are, we don't like being patronised and we don't like being told what we need. We said they would not heed our objections and again we were proven correct.

AGAIN..THEY ARE NOT LISTENING.

The only guarantee is that Zapi wil be given permission to build more houses. They are rezoning an area earmarked for employment for residential and scaremongering with "well you don't want 10m high warehousing now do ya!" Nothing short of blackmail. If they can rezone as residential they can just as well rezone for something we may actually want behind our houses.

By the way, Rumsfeld lost what he thought was a very secure position yesterday as did many US Republicans.

future_plans

Indeed the silence has been very notable since the suggestion that all interested parties and stakeholders in the area of Charlesland/Greystones meet to openly discuss the area's future. This is of paramount importance. One only has to look at the overbuilding that has occurred in West Dublin, Kildare and Meath over the last few years. The congestion is horrendous, also the lack of facilities, lack of schools, etc. The government will be playing "catch up" to the much of the non-existent or careless planning in those areas for years to come in these areas.

Bertie

Get a grip futureplans nobody is under any obligation to meet or get together this is a freemarket democracy we live in.If industrial units were going in you guys would object to this too because they were an inch too high.The Harbour, Charlesland,phone masts, The meridian centre you and fiachra were probably up at the glen of the downs but I saw no protest for the s.a.r. or Eden wood planning was up last year no hubub not a word was said. This represents a a move towards development towards kilcoole and if it continues along the Kilcoole road eventually and not too distantly we'll see a conurbation of Kilcoole, Eden Gate ,Charlesland GC, Charlesland and Greystones.Not an objection in sight.All I see from the negative side is developments being objected to as they arise and no long term vision from you or fiachra if you have lets hear about it.I suppose you both missed the planning for 3 houses on bray head up the Cliff road between and below a certain musician who is currently in the charts house and Cliff Manor. Bet u any money this has set a precedent. Yet our Green saviours were focussing on Charlesland and the harbour which like it or not are going to end up with some type of development instead at looking at other green field sites and trying to ringfence their preservation.

Question for both Fiachra and marcais have either of you seen Three trouts stream as it fronts charlesland Wood There must be about 20 truckfulls of builders rubble scaffolding and piping in the river itself. It has since attracted more dumping old dishwashers washing machines etc. which have not come from Charlesland as all the stuff is spanking new there.The council have conceeded that its bad and have agreed to provide a truck for a number of days to help remove it and want residents to remove it some of the material is hazardous insulation and fibreglass where are you guys on this issueResidents clean up a river thats on council property and contains an illegal dump

tomflynn

I have to disagree with some of the 'objections' that are now arising in response to development proposals in Charlesland. You can't have a veto over every development proposal if you don't like it. When those properties originally got planning permission, the entire area (with the exception of the Golf Course) had been zoned for development i.e. the property rights had been allocated to the landowners with those areas earmarked for development.

The right to consultation enshrined in legislation does not provide for a private meeting with every objector and for every objectors wishes to be complied with. It provides that each submission, observation, objection to each proposal is considered and a response provided by the county manager (assisted by planners). The councillors consider all that information and make a decision - that is all that is provided for in statutory consultation. But once the statutory processes have been property proceeded through you cannot go on to claim, as some posters suggest, that there have been irregularities in the system. The fact that you don not like the decision does not make it wrong but the decision was more than likely made for all the right reasons. (Perhaps it may ultimately be shown to be a poor decision but you could get 100 experts and each may have a different view - economists, retail managers, planners, sociologists, archaeologists etc.)

Furthermore, everyone is again consulted every local election and make a choice. Again you don't necessarily get who you want as your preference may not be elected but that is a further opportunity to give your preferred choice a mandate.

With regard to the shopping centre proposal, I would argue that a major shopping centre is welcome in the Greystones area. I would have prefer it not to be located so far from the main town centre as it may have a detrimental effect on the vitality and 'community spirit' of the existing town centre by creating two town centres instead of one. My 'personal preference' would be for the shopping centre to be located at the park and ride, old sewerage works or IDA lands - ie as close as possible to a contiguous main street as possible. But everyone can't be kept happy and if Charlesland is the only site suitable for the scale of shopping centre neccesary to attract major anchor tenants and deliver the critical mass of shops necessary to retain residants and attract additional shoppers to
the town then so be it. Any suggestion that existing shops will all go bust and it will be bad for existing community groups in terms of sponsorship (as suggested by some councillors, see Bray People/Wicklow Times) is misguided. The councillors role is not to prevent competition but to assist in its regulation. In my opinion, the town and environs would benefit from additional shopping facilities. The town is no longer a village. It has a resident population of 16,000 people with a very significant spending power. This spending power should be retained in Greystones where its benefits could be maximised.

future_plans

Bertie wrote:

Get a grip futureplans nobody is under any obligation to meet or get together this is a freemarket democracy we live in.If industrial units were going in you guys would object to this too because they were an inch too high.

Relax there Bertie. My God you are active on here this lunch time! I have a perfect grip on things. I did not state that I was pro or anti development in the post you refer to. As any project manager would tell you, the consultation of all stakeholders (including local community) involved during the planning is vital to the end success of the project. This is also applicable to development (residential or insutrial) projects. In fact, I have stated before on these discussions that I am very much in favour of development in the area. But there must be a proper and transparent planning process.

Of course, as you thankfully pointed out, we live in a "freemarket democracy" and this type of process normally does not take place because developers in the past have wanted to get in, make the money and get out asap without putting proper structures & facilities for that new community. This has had a profound affect on the areas I mentioned above. Take Newbridge for example - No primary school places left....

That's all I'm saying.....

Bertie

Well said Tom Flynn Hear Hear A person with rational commonsense who lives on the planet:D

Sparks

tomflynn wrote:

With regard to the shopping centre proposal, I would argue that a major shopping centre is welcome in the Greystones area.

There's Tesco and Supervalu and the new centre up near the Royal Park; and Woodies and DID out by the southern cross. What need would such a fourth/fifth shopping center serve, realistically?,

My 'personal preference' would be for the shopping centre to be located at the park and ride

Have you actually looked into the P&R carpark during the day? Greystones is a dormitory town, with most of it's population working in Dublin. Eliminate that carpark and you'll put an extra hundred or two cars on the N11 every morning. How does that fit in with support for public transport?

the critical mass of shops necessary to retain residants

Not to be insulting, but the residents are there to sleep in between working in Dublin, for the most part. The shops would be handy, but frankly that need is served already by shops within a two minute stroll from the train station for those on foot and by a heck of a lot more for those using cars.
Greystones has certainly gotten larger in the past ten years; I just don't think the population has the same needs as they would have had ten years ago. When I first got here ('84-85), it was a retirement town. You came here (forgive the bluntness) to while away your last years in a quiet place. The demographics have changed since, dramatically. Thinking that people will live here, as opposed to sleeping here during the week... I don't think it's quite accurate enough.

Marcais

Sparks wrote:

There's Tesco and Supervalu and the new centre up near the Royal Park; and Woodies and DID out by the southern cross. What need would such a fourth/fifth shopping center serve, realistically?,


Have you actually looked into the P&R carpark during the day? Greystones is a dormitory town, with most of it's population working in Dublin. Eliminate that carpark and you'll put an extra hundred or two cars on the N11 every morning. How does that fit in with support for public transport?


Not to be insulting, but the residents are there to sleep in between working in Dublin, for the most part. The shops would be handy, but frankly that need is served already by shops within a two minute stroll from the train station for those on foot and by a heck of a lot more for those using cars.
Greystones has certainly gotten larger in the past ten years; I just don't think the population has the same needs as they would have had ten years ago. When I first got here ('84-85), it was a retirement town. You came here (forgive the bluntness) to while away your last years in a quiet place. The demographics have changed since, dramatically. Thinking that people will live here, as opposed to sleeping here during the week... I don't think it's quite accurate enough.

Absolutely Sparks, makes perfect sense and the previous "you can't object to everything" statement is not even worth addressing. Putting in bluntly but appropriately so in this case "who the hell do you think you are telling us what we can and can't object to?"

Charlesland residents have purchased houses backing on to what was supposed to be an area for employment, the people who are most directly effected by these plans are the ones who are objecting. THE TOWN PLANNERS ARE OPPOSED TO THIS REZONING, why have town planners in place trying to put some control on greedy developers who would build a Casino in the Vatican if they were let, when Councillors completely ignore their recommendations to allow developers build houses where ever they wish? Charlesland Residents Committee had the foresight to support their views of those most directly affected and you would hope that all Charlesland Residents would do so, remembering that their are a lot of pockets around Charlesland which could be targeted next and you may need our support someday.

If you NEED a shopping centre for the good of Greystones then build it in IDA lands, anybody I spoke to in Seabourne View (more blow-ins of course) who were aware of the plans for a Shopping centre of this scale beside their residences are appalled and the ones who were not aware are more appalled because they were not made aware.

As to Bertie’s attack on “Future Plans” and rambling rant full of illogical leaps the only part of it making sense is “and not too distantly we'll see a conurbation of Kilcoole, Eden Gate ,Charlesland GC, Charlesland and Greystones. Not an objection in sight” What do you think this objection is about?!!! If we allow them rezone E2 for housing, this will be the start and your prediction will come to pass. You are asking for objections to everything whilst at the same time saying “you can object to everything” “get a grip” indeed.

Fiachra2

you and fiachra were probably up at the glen of the downs but I saw no protest for the s.a.r. or Eden wood


I cant speak for Marcais but I wasnt in the Glen of the Downs. There is actually a reasonable school of thought that to some extent supports those protestors -take look at the Al Gore film if you want an explanation. However its not an area I want to get in to.

With regard to the SAR and Eden Wood I did indeed object to both as the were in breach of the National Spatial Strategy.

With regard to the long term view. As a town councillor several years ago along with Evelyn Cawley, we tried to put in train a process to ensure that the 2006 plan would reflect the communitie's views. This involved a process of public meetings and meetings with interest groups (Clubs, chamber of commerce, landowners etc) to try and arrive at a consensus of the future of the town. The other members of the Council refused to help us, refused to endorse the initative and refused to allow us to use council facilities or resources. Their justification was that this "was not the way to do things" When we pressed ahead with the initiative without their blessing they attacked us in the media.

With regard to the Harbour we have also prepared a small scale plan which the Councilors has refused to consider.

With regard to the houses on Bray head that aplication has been in the pipline for years. As a member of the Bray based Save Our Head organisation I campaigned against those houses for exactly your reason. That they set a dangerous precedent. Unfortunately SOHO ran out of steam and I dint have the energy to do it all myself. However if you would like to organise an objection I would be more than willing to help.

Im not sure what you mean about the rubbish in the stream. I certainly think its utterly wrong. I am also aware that WCC has an appaling record with regard to illegal dumping. However I am not a public representative so there is little I can do.

I think your criticism of Marcais and myself as "objectors to everything" is unfair.
Firstly there is a presumption that all these proposals are the result of careful planning. In most cases they are not. Indeed As I have mentioned above they are often in Breach of national guidlines. The initiative in most cases comes from commercial developers. Personally I dont believe that peoples lives should not be dominated by comercial interests. I believe it is the function of public representatives to curb the demands of developers in the interest of ensuring the quality of life of the electorate.

Secondly as I also mentioned above, the public are rarely if ever afforded the opportunity to put forward a proposal that really benefits themselves. If this werre to happen then I am sure Marcais and myself would support them (eg communiy center, swimming pool)

So for these reasons we frequently find ourselves objecting to construction projects. I think we are perfectly in order to defend out interests. Just as the builders have a right to try and make money out of construction.

Annasopra

Is there any update on this as to what is actually planned or zoned beside Seabourne view - I'm thinking of buying an apartment there

I've looked at the local area plan but I'm not greaton figuring out maps

future_plans

There is a shopping centre in the pipeline for the land between the Fairways and the Gym. However, that is probably a few years away yet.

Marcais

future_plans wrote:

There is a shopping centre in the pipeline for the land between the Fairways and the Gym. However, that is probably a few years away yet.

You reckon