News and views on Greystones harbour and marina [SEE MODERATOR WARNING POST 1187]

F3

Bah humbug...........:D

darter

tennisplayer wrote: »

Hi Guys, How about trying to get into the spirit of the Festive season now that December is here and give up the negative attitude and comments. A truce would be nice at least until after the new year. All your comments upto now have been repeatedly negative and going round and round. Please call it a day for now and get out and enjoy life, don't let Sispar or the Council turn you into sour old men.
Have a happy Christmas everyone.
TP.

It is only through "negative attitude and comments" that there has been ANY movement at all on the harbour. GUBOH has been very successful through continually pushing. I do agree though that whinging on these boards is ineffective - far better to post a message on the GUBOH facebook site.

Fiachra2

I am a great fan of Christmas and while I feel very strongly about the harbour and while it p****s me off righteously to see the state it has been left in I don't let that get in the way of having a good christmas (I wouldn't give WCC the satisfaction!)

However those posting on this thread should have regard to the tone of the debate. We are no longer debating the rights and wrongs of this. The only disagreement- if such exists- is whether what has been done represents a significant concession or not. It is probably best for those who are conscious that there is a lot more to do and that we face significant obstacles to try and explain this to those who somehow feel that everything is ok. The posts that have been described as negative are factually correct and are highlighting some very serious issues. But maybe we need to present them differently.

What would also help would be if people who feel like Tennisplayer does were to ask WCC to stop being so "negative" by their inactivity and to give the people of Greystones a Christmas present of an anouncement of how they will open the whole harbour to the public by next spring. Darter's point is very well made.

micandre

This discussion is now at 77 pages. Would a sub forum be useful dedicated to the harbour?

tennisplayer

Fiachra2 wrote: »

I am a great fan of Christmas and while I feel very strongly about the harbour and while it p****s me off righteously to see the state it has been left in I don't let that get in the way of having a good christmas (I wouldn't give WCC the satisfaction!)

However those posting on this thread should have regard to the tone of the debate. We are no longer debating the rights and wrongs of this. The only disagreement- if such exists- is whether what has been done represents a significant concession or not. It is probably best for those who are conscious that there is a lot more to do and that we face significant obstacles to try and explain this to those who somehow feel that everything is ok. The posts that have been described as negative are factually correct and are highlighting some very serious issues. But maybe we need to present them differently.

What would also help would be if people who feel like Tennisplayer does were to ask WCC to stop being so "negative" by their inactivity and to give the people of Greystones a Christmas present of an anouncement of how they will open the whole harbour to the public by next spring. Darter's point is very well made.

Maybe it is time for GUBOH to come out in the open and have a public meeting so as they can inform the citizens of Greystones and beyond what they want done at this stage. I have made representations to Wicklow County Council in the past on the state of the harbour.

Fiachra2

Thanks Tennisplayer keep at them!

A public meeting would probably not be well attended at this time of year when people aren't that focussed on the harbour. But you are right that we probably do need to remind people of what we are looking for. Our requirements are fairly simple and should meet with most people's approval:

The removal of all fencing around areas on which building will not take place in the near future. (This would mean that the club pens would remain but the fencing would be removed from the other parts of the pier)

The opening of the other (North) pier to the public

The opening of the marina basin to boats

The landscaping of the approach to the harbour along the cliff walk and the removal of ugly fencing.

If the medical center is not to be built (which now seems likely) the landscaping of the area in front of the houses and sailing club and the opening of this area to the public.

A plan to improve the appearance of the whole area with improved railings, toned down lighting etc

The Durutti Column

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Thanks Tennisplayer keep at them!

A public meeting would probably not be well attended at this time of year when people aren't that focussed on the harbour. But you are right that we probably do need to remind people of what we are looking for. Our requirements are fairly simple and should meet with most people's approval:

The removal of all fencing around areas on which building will not take place in the near future. (This would mean that the club pens would remain but the fencing would be removed from the other parts of the pier)

The opening of the other (North) pier to the public

The opening of the marina basin to boats

The landscaping of the approach to the harbour along the cliff walk and the removal of ugly fencing.

If the medical center is not to be built (which now seems likely) the landscaping of the area in front of the houses and sailing club and the opening of this area to the public.

A plan to improve the appearance of the whole area with improved railings, toned down lighting etc

Fiachra2 is right, and those demands are achievable. Don't forget, there is still a €10m bond in place which, if Sispar does not deliver on the next phase, can be called in and used by WCC to rectify the site and carry out the measures listed.

The €€ might even stretch to basic landscaping of the public park and a much improved plaza/public space at the south end.

But WCC have to realise that the game is up, that Sispar will not or cannot perform, and that they are in breach of contract. The council then has to act as Sispar's employer and invoke the non-performance clauses of the contract.

WCC has been acting solely as Sispar's partner in this so far, not as guardian of the public interest. It has to start turning about now and putting on the public interest hat. Sispar is finished... does WCC want to go with it.

F3

The Durutti Column wrote: »

Fiachra2 is right, and those demands are achievable. Don't forget, there is still a €10m bond in place which, if Sispar does not deliver on the next phase, can be called in and used by WCC to rectify the site and carry out the measures listed.

The €€ might even stretch to basic landscaping of the public park and a much improved plaza/public space at the south end.

But WCC have to realise that the game is up, that Sispar will not or cannot perform, and that they are in breach of contract. The council then has to act as Sispar's employer and invoke the non-performance clauses of the contract.

WCC has been acting solely as Sispar's partner in this so far, not as guardian of the public interest. It has to start turning about now and putting on the public interest hat. Sispar is finished... does WCC want to go with it.

Durutti, technically €10m of a bond should be available to be "called-in" by WCC, but I think the staging has been changed from the orignal agreement. Legitimately, with the Market change Clause operative in the contract. In English, the phase 1 works are complete releasing Sispar's risk of calling the 1st half of the on demand bond, [€5m] leaving only €5 million to be called in if Sispar default. The question I would like answered is whether the asset [the site] belongs to WCC or Sispar? quite often the sale price of commercial property is split between site cost and build cost. Build cost attracting 13.5% VAT site 21%.[i.e. ownership of the reclaimed land may never have left WCC] I'm sure those concerned are reading this thread, so just to let you know in advance, the questions are coming. If Sispar on the off chance liquidates, can the liquidator sell the asset???????? holy s**t !!!

The Durutti Column

F3 wrote: »

Durutti, technically €10m of a bond should be available to be "called-in" by WCC, but I think the staging has been changed from the orignal agreement. Legitimately, with the Market change Clause operative in the contract. In English, the phase 1 works are complete releasing Sispar's risk of calling the 1st half of the on demand bond, [€5m] leaving only €5 million to be called in if Sispar default. The question I would like answered is whether the asset [the site] belongs to WCC or Sispar? quite often the sale price of commercial property is split between site cost and build cost. Build cost attracting 13.5% VAT site 21%.[i.e. ownership of the reclaimed land may never have left WCC] I'm sure those concerned are reading this thread, so just to let you know in advance, the questions are coming. If Sispar on the off chance liquidates, can the liquidator sell the asset???????? holy s**t !!!

You could be right about the staging, F3, but I would question whether Phase 1 is complete. As I understood it, and I'm open to correction on this, Phase 1 included the harbour (finished) and marina (which has not been finished — there are no pontoons and no steps or other access). If that is so and P1 remains to be finished, then the €10m is still available.

It all emphasises the need for TCs and CCs to get an account from the official in charge on what is in the contract WRT this. They should be demanding access. And what about Pollyanna Mitchell? He signed the contract, does he not know what is in the document he signed?

Sispar's accounts for 2010, signed by company and auditors in July, make for disturbing reading. The company is in serious trouble and looks like a goner if Nama has refused funding. I can't see Sisk putting in more — they have a duty to their shareholders not to take on undue risks, which is what putting more cash into this project would be.

Blandpebbles

darter wrote: »

It is only through "negative attitude and comments" that there has been ANY movement at all on the harbour. GUBOH has been very successful through continually pushing. I do agree though that whinging on these boards is ineffective - far better to post a message on the GUBOH facebook site.

Where is your proof to back up these comments?

darter

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Where is your proof to back up these comments?

We were here doing little but whinging for months on this board, and absolutely nothing happened in terms of movement at the harbour. SISPAR was being deliberately evasive, WCC was protecting its "investment", and the previous mayor of Greystones was/is conflicted as the Commodore of the Greystones Motor Yacht Club and was only interested in the opening of the harbour for what he described as the "users" - ie the 5% of Greystones population that own a boat of some form.

Along came the GUBOH crowd, and they have been hugely successful. I credit them - as do most of us in Greystones including those who are much more intimately involved and know far more than I - with being instrumental in opening up the harbour for our use. Read all of the posts on this thread and on the fb site for facts and evidence to back up my comments.

Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Or are you being purposely argumentative... lost one battle, so you've opened a new front...

F3

darter wrote: »

We were here doing little but whinging for months on this board, and absolutely nothing happened in terms of movement at the harbour. SISPAR was being deliberately evasive, WCC was protecting its "investment", and the previous mayor of Greystones was/is conflicted as the Commodore of the Greystones Motor Yacht Club and was only interested in the opening of the harbour for what he described as the "users" - ie the 5% of Greystones population that own a boat of some form.

Along came the GUBOH crowd, and they have been hugely successful. I credit them - as do most of us in Greystones including those who are much more intimately involved and know far more than I - with being instrumental in opening up the harbour for our use. Read all of the posts on this thread and on the fb site for facts and evidence to back up my comments.

Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Or are you being purposely argumentative... lost one battle, so you've opened a new front...

Well done Darter, I think you are absoloutely 100% correct. I am ashamed to say that all I do is talk about the problem as well, while those 'Greystones Finest' GUBOH chaps have taken actions beyond their civic duty. We Should ask those lads to go in and sort out dail eireann then perhaps Europe!

pixbyjohn

At 21.32 on a July evening, Greystones Harbour 2007 by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

The Durutti Column

F3 wrote: »

Well done Darter, I think you are absoloutely 100% correct. I am ashamed to say that all I do is talk about the problem as well, while those 'Greystones Finest' GUBOH chaps have taken actions beyond their civic duty. We Should ask those lads to go in and sort out dail eireann then perhaps Europe!

Just practice on the local elections in 2014!

F3

Actually, I put value on my soul, and its not for sale. That seems to be the general prerequisite to be a local public representative.

The Durutti Column

HAPPY NEW YEAR, you all out there.

Let's hope this harbour issue gets sorted out finally this year. This now the fourth year of activity down there and no end in sight. What is it, 30 months behind schedule now?

loyatemu

The Durutti Column wrote: »

HAPPY NEW YEAR, you all out there.

Let's hope this harbour issue gets sorted out finally this year. This now the fourth year of activity down there and no end in sight. What is it, 30 months behind schedule now?

I suspect whats there now is what will be there on Dec 31st (with maybe a few boats in the boatpens)

one thing it could use is a few bins, included poop-scoop bins, there are none whatsoever there at the moment

Blanchflower

loyatemu wrote: »

I suspect whats there now is what will be there on Dec 31st (with maybe a few boats in the boatpens)

one thing it could use is a few bins, included poop-scoop bins, there are none whatsoever there at the moment

It will be some "world class marina" - what with some nice shiny world class poop-scoop bins and all that!! Perhaps we should look for a dig out from the local politicians and their generous benefactors to help fund the acquisition of the poop-scoop bins.

pixbyjohn

Greystones Harbour 7th. October 2007 by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

loyatemu

Blanchflower wrote: »

It will be some "world class marina" - what with some nice shiny world class poop-scoop bins and all that!! Perhaps we should look for a dig out from the local politicians and their generous benefactors to help fund the acquisition of the poop-scoop bins.

do you have any mode other than :rolleyes:?

pixbyjohn

100_4496 by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

pixbyjohn

DSCF1252 by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

Blanchflower

loyatemu wrote: »

do you have any mode other than :rolleyes:?

Nothing is more discouraging than unappreciated sarcasm, thanks mate!:cool:

darter

pixbyjohn, your photos are great and I'd love to learn from you, but what point is there in putting on this thread photos of the old harbour? We can't get it back. We have what we have, and need to move forward with the present reality.

If you want to post them, and I hope you continue to do so, my view is that you post them instead in the sticky that is dedicated to photos.

Posting photos here of issues with the current harbour/marina is of course very appropriate and relevant, in my view!

The Durutti Column

darter wrote: »

pixbyjohn, your photos are great and I'd love to learn from you, but what point is there in putting on this thread photos of the old harbour? We can't get it back. We have what we have, and need to move forward with the present reality.

If you want to post them, and I hope you continue to do so, post them in the sticky that is dedicated to photos.

Posting photos here of issues with the current harbour/marina is of course very appropriate and relevant.

Don't agree. It's useful to be able to compare, and to refresh memories which are fading. We all know now that we have what we have — many obviously think, more's the pity — and it seems to me that in order to achieve the objective of a true community harbour with something of the charm and range of uses of the old harbour, we need to continue to be reminded of what its peculiar charms consisted of. There is no way to replicate those, but we should strive to make what we have got as good as it can possibly be.

So, John, please don't confine your pix to a separate thread. Who switches threads to compare photos, anyhow? You would just be ghettoising them.

John has stuck firmly to his role of chronicling what has happened here in town in pictures, with very little interjection of his opinions or views. I for one very much appreciate the fine job he is doing in this regard, and I think we all should be expressing our thanks. Let him post his pix where he thinks appropriate. Fair focks, PixbyJohn...

darter

The Durutti Column wrote: »

Don't agree. It's useful to be able to compare, and to refresh memories which are fading. We all know now that we have what we have — many obviously think, more's the pity — and it seems to me that in order to achieve the objective of a true community harbour with something of the charm and range of uses of the old harbour, we need to continue to be reminded of what its peculiar charms consisted of. There is no way to replicate those, but we should strive to make what we have got as good as it can possibly be.

So, John, please don't confine your pix to a separate thread. Who switches threads to compare photos, anyhow? You would just be ghettoising them.

John has stuck firmly to his role of chronicling what has happened here in town in pictures, with very little interjection of his opinions or views. I for one very much appreciate the fine job he is doing in this regard, and I think we all should be expressing our thanks. Let him post his pix where he thinks appropriate. Fair focks, PixbyJohn...

"Charm"??? As Frank Zappa said:
It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice. There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia.

What is the point of comparing what we have now to that old, decaying, dangerous derelict edifice laughingly called a "harbour"? Let's be sensible and make the new harbour/marina the very best it can be, instead of continually harping on about how good we had it before.

However, with your handle of "Durutti Column" (the correct spelling is actually Durruti - if you are going to live in the past, at least get it right), you obviously wish we were all back in the caves starting fires by rubbing sticks together...

And I hope pixbyjohn understands just how appreciative we all are for his historical perspective, but I repeat again there is a more appropriate thread for that.

Greystoned

I don't want to "gang up" on Darter, but I have to disagree as well. As a Greystoner (Greystonian?) who grew up close to the harbour, now living abroad, I absolutely love John's new and old photos and look forward to seeing the latest ones. I think the harbour did have a peculiar charm as Durutti Column puts it, and linked to this was how different it looked in different weathers. That last photo (dscf1252) by PixbyJohn really captures it on a dull, calm and peaceful day. It is relevant to news and views on the harbour.

Speaking of relevance... his photo raises a question: was the bollard (if that's the word, it's right behind the chains and halfways between the no-parking cones) reinstated in the new harbour? I believe some bits and pieces such as that were to be used somewhere on the new piers.

Anyhow, keep on posting John (and the other photographers)! You're keeping this exile in touch.

darter

Greystoned wrote: »

I don't want to "gang up" on Darter,

Not at all a problem Greystoned. This is a real democracy where all of us can give our views, within the constrains imposed by the mods that is. I am giving my view, and at least one other person likes it, whereas two of you are giving opposing views. Fine by me.

I'm actually not all that bothered really - it just seems to me to be filling this thread up with unnecessary photos that are completely irrelevant to the issue of the harbour/marina development and serve only to rattle the cages of those who were opposed and wish to turn time back.

(P.S. I was opposed, but live in today, not yesteryear.)

Tabnabs

As I look out the window in the depths of January, I can't help but wonder if John has any pictures of Greystones Harbour in less than perfect summer weather

The Bishop Basher

Greystoned wrote: »

Speaking of relevance... his photo raises a question: was the bollard (if that's the word, it's right behind the chains and halfways between the no-parking cones) reinstated in the new harbour? I believe some bits and pieces such as that were to be used somewhere on the new piers.

Anyhow, keep on posting John (and the other photographers)! You're keeping this exile in touch.

Exactly my thoughts when I saw that pic. Those bollards had a real nostalgia about them, as if to remind you that it was once a vibrant working fishing harbour. It would be great to see them reinstated in places. Can't say i've noticed them anytime i've been down there.