Greystones Marina

fishdog

Does anyone have any news?? Is this project going ahead??

Like most people from Greystones, I would be against the propossed development!!

Hammiepeters

fishdog wrote:

Does anyone have any news?? Is this project going ahead??

Like most people from Greystones, I would be against the propossed development!!

Oh No! not this again. I will say fish further to my earlier conspiracy theory.
That Sisk are a major player in this one. Their current approach to residential is well known. Expect them to pull out due to the contraversy and for the council to go back to the drawing board. Just a theory.

fishdog

Well in this case I hope you are right!:D

Fancy a pint??

Hammiepeters

fishdog wrote:

Well in this case I hope you are right!:D

Fancy a pint??

Love one. Not tonight though. Send me a PM.

Fiachra2

An Bord Pleanala have this week stated that they wont be making a decision for about three weeks and probably not till August

sportbilly

fishdog wrote:

Like most people from Greystones, I would be against the propossed development!!

That's bit of a generalisation!

Marcais

Fiachra2 wrote:

An Bord Pleanala have this week stated that they wont be making a decision for about three weeks and probably not till August

What's John Gormley, Minister of The Environment's view on this?

dubrunner

Marcais wrote:

What's John Gormley, Minister of The Environment's view on this?

Ask him then.

How come EC has gone so quiet?

Fiachra2

[]

Marcais wrote:

What's John Gormley, Minister of The Environment's view on this?

[/I]

Deirdre De Burca, at the request of the GPDA approached John on this matter. The minister cannot directly interfere at this stage. However the GPDA drew his attention to a number of the wider planning matter involved here. Including:

The sale of the public forshore
The constuction on strutures which would increase erosion
The use of beach nourishment programs which are inhernetly unsustainable
The destruction of a potential archaelogical site
The refusal of a local authority to entertain the concerns of what appears to be the vast majority of residents.

The Bord is required to have regard to the ministers views and Government policy. I think the minister would have radically different views on most of the the above issues to his predecessor and hopefully the Bord will take this into account.

Marcais

Fiachra2 wrote:

[][/I]

Deirdre De Burca, at the request of the GPDA approached John on this matter. The minister cannot directly interfere at this stage. However the GPDA drew his attention to a number of the wider planning matter involved here. Including:

The sale of the public forshore
The constuction on strutures which would increase erosion
The use of beach nourishment programs which are inhernetly unsustainable
The destruction of a potential archaelogical site
The refusal of a local authority to entertain the concerns of what appears to be the vast majority of residents.

The Bord is required to have regard to the ministers views and Government policy. I think the minister would have radically different views on most of the the above issues to his predecessor and hopefully the Bord will take this into account.

Is there any point in sending him an e-mail at this late stage?

fishdog

That's bit of a generalisation!

No that is a fact!

I have lived in the area for long enough and I talked to enough people in the area to know. I also attended many of the public meetings where both sides were invited to air their views.

I had a huge interest in this because I lived 60 metres for the proposed development. I sold my house for fear it would go ahead.

Most people want something done with the harbour, they just have a problem with the scale and design of the project.

Wineman

fishdog wrote:

Does anyone have any news?? Is this project going ahead??

Like most people from Greystones, I would be against the propossed development!![/QUOTE/]


thats an awful lot of people to be speaking for..

Marcais

fishdog wrote:

No that is a fact!

I have lived in the area for long enough and I talked to enough people in the area to know. I also attended many of the public meetings where both sides were invited to air their views.

I had a huge interest in this because I lived 60 metres for the proposed development. I sold my house for fear it would go ahead.

Most people want something done with the harbour, they just have a problem with the scale and design of the project.

Don't know why a poll wasn't done, you would think that 12,500 people could quite easily have been polled especially given that they were sent multiple glossy pamphlets etc.

As far as I know a poll was done along time ago in relation to the harbour area and what should go there.

The only numbers available are that 50 submissions were made in favour and 10,000 against i.e. between the first submission of the plan and the second submission, accepting of course that many were not aware that submissions could be made and that some submissions were from outside Greystones, but then the area is a natioanl treasure so that is to be expected.

Hammiepeters

Marcais wrote:

What's John Gormley, Minister of The Environment's view on this?

If its anything like any of their other platforms. It woulld have a For Sale sign on it. With Sale Agreed and Sold Out after the coalition agreement.

Fiachra2

Marcais wrote:

Is there any point in sending him an e-mail at this late stage?

Yes there is. It is important to keep reminding him that there are a lot of people down here who care and who are looking to him to do something about this and redress the damage done by his predecessor.

Whether you like the development or not, the proposed harbour in Greystones involves a number of issues of national importance as outlined in my previous post. These are the kind of issues that the Greens will presumably be hoping to deliver on, even in coalition with FF. So if you are contacting him, I suggest you stick with those issues and avoid purely local planning matters (heights of buildings, traffic congestion etc).

fishdog

Don't know why a poll wasn't done, you would think that 12,500 people could quite easily have been polled especially given that they were sent multiple glossy pamphlets etc.

That would have been great.

The only numbers available are that 50 submissions were made in favour and 10,000 against

At least this gives some idea of the opposition.

I remember at one meeting the county manager saying that "a silent majority" was in favour!! I never heard such crap before in my life!!

Marcais

fishdog wrote:

That would have been great.



At least this gives some idea of the opposition.

I remember at one meeting the county manager saying that "a silent majority" was in favour!! I never heard such crap before in my life!!

shhhhh!

sportbilly

Marcais wrote:

The only numbers available are that 50 submissions were made in favour and 10,000 against .

Interestingly I know of some residents who received "Thank You" letters for their support for objecting to the development from the anti-development interest groups even though these people would be for the harbour development and never lodged an objection in the first place.

So who made the objections on these people's behalf?

10,000?

Marcais

Fiachra2 wrote:

Yes there is. It is important to keep reminding him that there are a lot of people down here who care and who are looking to him to do something about this and redress the damage done by his predecessor.

Whether you like the development or not, the proposed harbour in Greystones involves a number of issues of national importance as outlined in my previous post. These are the kind of issues that the Greens will presumably be hoping to deliver on, even in coalition with FF. So if you are contacting him, I suggest you stick with those issues and avoid purely local planning matters (heights of buildings, traffic congestion etc).

Cheers

Fiachra2

sportbilly wrote:

Interestingly I know of some residents who received "Thank You" letters for their support for objecting to the development from the anti-development interest groups even though these people would be for the harbour development and never lodged an objection in the first place.

So who made the objections on these people's behalf?

10,000?

Just for the record.

The "Anti-development" group with which I am involved, the GPDA, did not issue any thank you letters to objectors nor did we lodge objections on anyones behalf.

However if someone has done this in our name, I would be anxious to obtain details. If any of these people you know still have these letters perhaps you would PM me as I would like to see a copy?

Marcais

Fiachra2 wrote:

Just for the record.

The "Anti-development" group with which I am involved, the GPDA, did not issue any thank you letters to objectors nor did we lodge objections on anyones behalf.

However if someone has done this in our name, I would be anxious to obtain details. If any of these people you know still have these letters perhaps you would PM me as I would like to see a copy?

Fiachra, I don't know why you waste your time answering irrelevant suggestions like this. They are generally unsubstantiated and just blowing smoke. You should not expect any supporting documentation:rolleyes:

A whole lot of the pro-Marina orchestarted campaign (of about 25 people!) involved villifying anybody who was campaigning against the 341 apartments, simply because the pro-Marina element had no other case and could not address the issues.

scivvy

Marcais wrote:

Fiachra, I don't know why you waste your time answering irrelevant suggestions like this. They are generally unsubstantiated and just blowing smoke. You should not expect any supporting documentation:rolleyes:

I totally agree ,if anything you Fiachra should have been getting thank you leters for all the effort you,ve put in, I for one thank you.