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

Fiachra2

Press release from Stephen donnelly

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/donnelly-calls-for-public-access-to-vacant-harbour-land/

Stephen Donnelly, Independent TD for Wicklow and East Carlow, has welcomed recent developments with regard to the landscaping of the Greystones Harbour site, and has called for the landscaped area to be reopened to public use as soon as it has been landscaped.

“This land, north of the Harbour, is one of the most important assets for the community in Greystones. The entire community has always enjoyed direct access to the sea for the full length of the North beach.

“There was a very clear understanding that this access would only be blocked off temporarily, while the site was being developed. Now, in the absence of any immediate building, it is critical that this access be restored.

“I’ve been working closely with NAMA to ensure that a satisfactory resolution is achieved for Greystones Harbour. The announcement that the site is to be grassed over is good news, and will greatly improve the attractiveness of the area, which is important both for the community and for visitors – particularly as this is the first thing they see when arriving by Dart.

“But what the community really wants is to have access to the sea and to that land fully restored to them. I will continue to work with the various stakeholders to pursue this."

Alan_P

There's nothing particularly new in it, but today's Irish Times has an article about the harbour :-

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0531/1224316989532.html

It does have a quote from Sispar about the total spend so far :- €70 million, 14 million provided by Sispar directly, the rest bank lending.

Which equates to requiring an average sale price of c. €190,000 per residential property just to recover what they've sent so far.

These would be the residential properties they haven't built, whose construction costs aren't included in the €70 million.

Maudi

Alan_P wrote: »

There's nothing particularly new in it, but today's Irish Times has an article about the harbour :-

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0531/1224316989532.html

It does have a quote from Sispar about the total spend so far :- €70 million, 14 million provided by Sispar directly, the rest bank lending.

Which equates to requiring an average sale price of c. €190,000 per residential property just to recover what they've sent so far.

These would be the residential properties they haven't built, whose construction costs aren't included in the €70 million.

re. the image in the above paper.what an eyesore...shudder to think how even more horrendous its going to be with the proposed number of houses and whatever else they are adding...reminds me of episode of the simpsons where the con man talks the town into building a monorail they dont want or need then he ends up doing a runner with the money as the monorail falls to bits..

Jimjay

It makes me laugh the words landscaping and grassing over in the same sentence. Is grassing over really classed as landscaping?

thecommander

Jimjay wrote: »

Is grassing over really classed as landscaping?

Yes.

Fiachra2

thecommander wrote: »

Yes.

Not everyone agrees with you!

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/seeding-harbour-site-a-complete-waste-of-money/


Cllr Ciarán Hayden has said that seeding the harbour site is a complete waste of money and that these resources should be put to better use. Sispar announced at the Town Council meeting that they are to grass the entire area north of the Primary Care Centre site.

The local Councillor said after the meeting “I pressed Sispar for the figures on this job which they did not have available. I believe these works are costing in excess of €100,000 and if that is true this is nonsense. That money could be better spent on a marina or accommodation for the two local fishing boats for example. We need tourist facilities at the harbour not wild grass put there for the sole purpose of appeasing the antagonists of the project. We have motor homes visiting every night and boats waiting for facilities to berth – that is a financial benefit to the town, a bit of unmanageable grass will do nothing.”

Sispar starting importing sub soil to their site late last week and they intend to plant a wild grass that will grow two feet in height and will not be cut or maintained.

Cllr Hayden went on to say “I would like to thank Sispar and the Director of Services for attending our meeting and for reaffirming their commitment to the project. However the actions of the local anti-harbour protest group GUBOH have a lot to be desired and their treatment of the Council/Sispar officials as they left the meeting can only be described as despicable. I totally condemn this type of bully boy tactics from this group. These people have no place at the democratic table and I will do everything I can to keep them away from it in future.”

recedite

These people have no place at the democratic table and I will do everything I can to keep them away from it in future

An oxymoron, or a moronic ox?

Cheeky Chops

However the actions of the local anti-harbour protest group GUBOH have a lot to be desired and their treatment of the Council/Sispar officials as they left the meeting can only be described as despicable. I totally condemn this type of bully boy tactics from this group. These people have no place at the democratic table and I will do everything I can to keep them away from it in future.”[/QUOTE]

What did those nasty mean GUBOH people do?

Mr Diamond

To talk about the Democratic table... hmmm.

Of all the people who live in Greystones, I wonder how many REALLY object to grassing over the wasteland North of Greystones? Its true that the Marina COULD be advanced with some of that money, but I suspect the sum touted would be swallowed up instantly with very little effect.

A solution? No.
An Improvement? Certainly!

A little life is preferable to a barren pit.

LifeBeginsAt40

Mr Diamond wrote: »

To talk about the Democratic table... hmmm.

Of all the people who live in Greystones, I wonder how many REALLY object to grassing over the wasteland North of Greystones? Its true that the Marina COULD be advanced with some of that money, but I suspect the sum touted would be swallowed up instantly with very little effect.

A solution? No.
An Improvement? Certainly!

A little life is preferable to a barren pit.

Perfectly said. Does anyone have the millions needed to finish the project in a timely manner, probably not.

Is grassing over the wasteland the right thing to do in the interim, in my opinion yes. No one will want to moor up in a harbour surrounded by barren land.

I've visited a lot of harbour developments in the UK and the 'selling' point to the amateur sailor is the surroundings in which to spend some R&R time. So I really do think the 'landscaping' of the area is a step in the right direction to providing a harbour that can be enjoyed by ALL.

A private gated development surrounded by waste land is not going to improve Greystones in the tourism list, trust me.

Fiachra2

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

However the actions of the local anti-harbour protest group GUBOH have a lot to be desired and their treatment of the Council/Sispar officials as they left the meeting can only be described as despicable. I totally condemn this type of bully boy tactics from this group. These people have no place at the democratic table and I will do everything I can to keep them away from it in future.”

What did those nasty mean GUBOH people do?[/QUOTE]

I understand there was a "frank" exchange of views between a council official and a member of GUBOH outside the offices. The version I was told was that the council offical behaved in an extremely agressive manner. However given the nature of the incident its probably best not discussed in a speculative manner here.

Fiachra2

Mr Diamond wrote: »

Its true that the Marina COULD be advanced with some of that money, but I suspect the sum touted would be swallowed up instantly with very little effect.

.

It is important to understand the following with regard to this:

The marina could have been started 18 months ago if WCC wanted to. All the planning and design was done in 2007. It wasnt completed because they dont want to do it for the simple reason that (on their own admission) it will loose money.

It is not shortage of funds that is holding up the marina. It is the absence of will on the part of the council and the devlopers to finish it out.

loobylou

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Not everyone agrees with you!

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/seeding-harbour-site-a-complete-waste-of-money/


Cllr Ciarán Hayden has said that seeding the harbour site is a complete waste of money and that these resources should be put to better use. Sispar announced at the Town Council meeting that they are to grass the entire area north of the Primary Care Centre site.

The local Councillor said after the meeting “I pressed Sispar for the figures on this job which they did not have available. I believe these works are costing in excess of €100,000 and if that is true this is nonsense. That money could be better spent on a marina or accommodation for the two local fishing boats for example. We need tourist facilities at the harbour not wild grass put there for the sole purpose of appeasing the antagonists of the project. We have motor homes visiting every night and boats waiting for facilities to berth – that is a financial benefit to the town, a bit of unmanageable grass will do nothing.”

Sispar starting importing sub soil to their site late last week and they intend to plant a wild grass that will grow two feet in height and will not be cut or maintained.

Unfortunately, its in the FF DNA to consider concrete beautiful and green spaces ugly.
Largely the reason the country is in the mess it is.

Tabnabs

Fiachra2 wrote: »

It is important to understand the following with regard to this:

The marina could have been started 18 months ago if WCC wanted to. All the planning and design was done in 2007. It wasnt completed because they dont want to do it for the simple reason that (on their own admission) it will loose money.

It is not shortage of funds that is holding up the marina. It is the absence of will on the part of the council and the devlopers to finish it out.

This is interesting and is at odds with what SISPAR said at their last marina information meeting earlier this year. My understanding based on their information is that any marina will be entirely under the concession of SISPAR, i.e. it has nothing whatsoever to do with WCC (or any other local councillors). A difficulty in funding, along with the threatened legal action which was also mentioned that night, is indeed what's holding up the installation.

And the €100k the FF councillor mentions wouldn't get very far at all when marina structure, furniture and ancillary equipment are taken into account. Still, it might just be enough to house his fleet of boats currently in Wicklow and on various trailers around the locality. Then at least he'd have achieved his goal...

Mr Diamond

Fiachra2 wrote: »

It is important to understand the following with regard to this:

The marina could have been started 18 months ago if WCC wanted to. All the planning and design was done in 2007. It wasnt completed because they dont want to do it for the simple reason that (on their own admission) it will loose money.

It is not shortage of funds that is holding up the marina. It is the absence of will on the part of the council and the devlopers to finish it out.

That's pretty clear. And that's why the suggestion that grassing the area is a 'waste of money' seems rather pointless and churlish.
100k is not going to finish the Marina. Its a drop in the ocean. (Literally.)
It will make the wasteland look (a bit) more pleasant, however, so I don't see the reasoning behind objecting to it.

Fiachra2

Another attack on GUBOH from Ciaran Hayden

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/scaremongers-trying-to-undermine-primary-care-centre/

Scaremongers trying to undermine Primary Care Centre

Cllr Ciarán Hayden has criticised a small local protest group for showing ‘sheer ignorance to fact’ in relation to the Primary Care Centre planning status at Greystones Harbour. The local Councillor made his comments after a small possy of GUBOH members followed a council official out of Greystones Town Council meeting into a car park and accused him of lying in relation to the Part 8 planning decision granted for the PCC in September 2010.

Cllr Hayden said “at last these people have been found out and it is now widely known that their sole objective is to undermine the PCC and the greater harbour project – their roots are firmly planted in the old defunct objection group – the GPDA. I had asked Wicklow County Council in the proper democratic forum, not a dark car park with no witnesses, what was the planning status on this building. It was confirmed on two separate occasions during that meeting that the PCC had full planning and work could commence within two weeks if so desired. Our friends in GUBOH could not accept this and ran out into the night whinging at officials. Their behaviour is comical and their ignorance of fact is quite unbelievable. Let’s be very clear here the Primary Care Centre at Greystones Harbour has full, unopposed, 100% planning permission”

In September 2010 Wicklow County Councillors voted 18 in favour and none against to a Part 8 planning application to allow the Primary Care Centre proceed. This decision was not the subject of a legal challenge nor did it contravene any previous rulings from An Bord Pleanala.

Cllr Hayden finished by saying “ The PCC, at this location, enjoys widespread support among the community and stakeholders alike – it is a terrible pity that this tiny group of petty objectors are trying to thwart this marvellous facility for the people of Greystones”

Annasopra

Folks - a cautious warning about this. It's probably better if people do not speculate on what may or may not have happened in the carpark.

Alan_P

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Another attack on GUBOH from Ciaran Hayden

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/scaremongers-trying-to-undermine-primary-care-centre/

Scaremongers trying to undermine Primary Care Centre

Cllr Ciarán Hayden has criticised a small local protest group for showing ‘sheer ignorance to fact’ in relation to the Primary Care Centre planning status at Greystones Harbour. The local Councillor made his comments after a small possy of GUBOH members followed a council official out of Greystones Town Council meeting into a car park and accused him of lying in relation to the Part 8 planning decision granted for the PCC in September 2010.

Cllr Hayden said “at last these people have been found out and it is now widely known that their sole objective is to undermine the PCC and the greater harbour project – their roots are firmly planted in the old defunct objection group – the GPDA. I had asked Wicklow County Council in the proper democratic forum, not a dark car park with no witnesses, what was the planning status on this building. It was confirmed on two separate occasions during that meeting that the PCC had full planning and work could commence within two weeks if so desired. Our friends in GUBOH could not accept this and ran out into the night whinging at officials. Their behaviour is comical and their ignorance of fact is quite unbelievable. Let’s be very clear here the Primary Care Centre at Greystones Harbour has full, unopposed, 100% planning permission”

In September 2010 Wicklow County Councillors voted 18 in favour and none against to a Part 8 planning application to allow the Primary Care Centre proceed. This decision was not the subject of a legal challenge nor did it contravene any previous rulings from An Bord Pleanala.

Cllr Hayden finished by saying “ The PCC, at this location, enjoys widespread support among the community and stakeholders alike – it is a terrible pity that this tiny group of petty objectors are trying to thwart this marvellous facility for the people of Greystones”

As a matter of interest, is he right about the planning status of the PCC ? My understanding was that WCC thought they could give themselves planning permission for the PCC, Pleanála said they couldn't, and that this :-

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/JA0029.htm

is effectively the as yet undecided Pleanála case on whether the PCC can go ahead.

pixbyjohn

http://www.wicklow.ie/eplan41/FileRefDetails.aspx?file_number=102462&LASiteID=0


http://www.wicklow.ie/eplan41/FileRefDetails.aspx?file_number=102808&LASiteID=0

Alan_P

pixbyjohn wrote: »

http://www.wicklow.ie/eplan41/FileRefDetails.aspx?file_number=102462&LASiteID=0


http://www.wicklow.ie/eplan41/FileRefDetails.aspx?file_number=102808&LASiteID=0

Those are just Wicklow County Council's own decisions on their own applications :- if Pleanála subsequently decided that WCC wasn't entitled to make those decisions,then those planning grants are literally not worth the paper they're written on.

pixbyjohn

Alan_P wrote: »

Those are just Wicklow County Council's own decisions on their own applications :- if Pleanála subsequently decided that WCC wasn't entitled to make those decisions,then those planning grants are literally not worth the paper they're written on.

Yes indeed you could be right, but is there a time limit on the planning appeals board to receive an application after the date of Wicklow County Council granting permission ? Was the time limit exceeded ?
Does anyone know ?

Blanchflower

Alan_P wrote: »

Those are just Wicklow County Council's own decisions on their own applications :- if Pleanála subsequently decided that WCC wasn't entitled to make those decisions,then those planning grants are literally not worth the paper they're written on.

The EIS dated August 2011 addressed all the proposed changes and revisions to the scheme (when compared to the 2007 ABP Permission), including the Primary Care Centre "PCC".

For example the EIS stated that "The provision of the PCC has the effect of diminishing the quantum of space available for non residential including retail /commercial development." In justifying the PCC it is was also stated in the EIS that "The PCC will generate employment and activity as well as providing modern health care facilities in line with public policy."

In describing the development subject to the EIS it states that "A detailed description of the development is presented elsewhere. Briefly, it can be noted that the proposed development includes 375 residential units and a total of 6245 sq m of other space in the form of the PCC and retail / commercial space."

The PCC is a major change to the original 2007 plan and is referenced in the EIS submitted to ABP. Bord Pleanala has not yet approved the changes set out in the EIS. It would seem therefore that the developer is still awaiting approval from Bord Pleanala before starting build of the PCC.

recedite

Do we know how long An Bord Pleanala has been considering the matter, and whether there is any deadline or timescale for their decision?

Fiachra2

They have been considering it for I think about 10 months. There is no time limit but they say they will make a decision in mid june.

Jimjay

Fiachra2 wrote: »

They have been considering it for I think about 10 months. There is no time limit but they say they will make a decision in mid june.

Hopefully there is no legal action and it will actually be built. It will be a great addition for Greystones and the harbour.

Fiachra2

Press release from Tom fortune

http://www.greystonesguide.ie/landscaping-welcome-but-not-sufficient/


Mayor of Greystones Tom Fortune has welcomed the announcement by Sispar that they intend to landscape the derelict area north of Greystones harbour but he expressed dissatisfaction with other aspects Sispar’s presentation to a recent Town Council meeting.

“The proposal on landscaping is to be welcomed” said Fortune “as it will improve the appearance of the area as you approach from the Cliff walk. However it is only one of four requests forwarded to Sispar by the Town Council. These included opening the north pier, removal of unnecessary fencing and opening the harbour for the use of visiting yachts and fishing boats. I am most dissatisfied that Sispar did not even address these issues in their presentation.”

Fortune went on to criticise the update on the Primary Care Center. “Sispar advised us that they were awaiting a response from Nama on funding and that they “hoped” to be in a position to start work in September. This is unsatisfactory in two regards.

Firstly it is yet another in a series of deadlines that Sispar have issued since January 2011 on which they “hoped” to commence work. All previous deadlines have been missed and they have given us not one single reason to believe that this one will be any different.

Secondly, in a press release on 8th February 2012 Deputy Simon Harris, who has been in contact with Nama announced that Nama had communicated its decision on the harbour funding to Sispar and were awaiting their response. The statement from Sispar to the town council is completely at variance with this.”

Councillor Fortune confirmed that he would be writing to Sispar expressing his concerns and seeking clarifications as it is important that the community have a clear picture of what is planned and a definite timeline for same.

Honestly!

Derek Mitchell delighted as the developer's original plan he rigourously campaigned for is approved: 373 residential units and 1,002 Car Parking spaces.

There is NO stipulation or expectation that this will expedite the project, only that Fine Gael's developer friends will make more profit if it does go ahead and that there will be more concrete!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0703/breaking59.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

recedite

That's nice for Sispar. They still won't come back for a decade or so, though.

F3

Well they now have permission to go ahead with the PCC,

A bit of honesty prior to now would have stopped people becoming infuriated

Fiachra2

It may be of interest to note that the inspector on this case very robustly recomended refusal both for the additional houses and the medical centre.
(For those unfamiliar with the process what happens is that a planning professional-the inspector-reviews that application and any submissions thereon and makes a reccomendation. The Board proper which consists of a set of essentially government appointees then makes a final ruling. They do not give reasons for disagreeing with the inspector)

I have included an extract from the inspectors report which makes interesting reading especially the very last sentence.


The Inspectors' report is available at:
: http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/JA0029.htm



8.0 RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that approval is refused for the proposed amendments to the scheme. It is wholly unsustainable to be seeking to increase the quantum of development on this site at this time and the proposed uses have not been justified. I do not consider that there is any merit in selecting parts of the proposed alterations and de-selecting others when the mix and balance of development previously permitted by the Board is being so materially distorted.

I recommend approval is refused as follows:
1. Having regard to the previous approval under An Bord Pleanála Ref. PL27.EF2016, the proposed significant increase in the quantum of residential development, and the lack of any justification for the introduction of a large-scale primary care centre, it is considered that the proposed development would constitute over-intensification of development on the site, would result in an unacceptable quantum of overall development and would significantly undermine the quality and quantity of public open space previously committed to which forms an integral component of the public realm within the scheme. In addition, it is considered that the primary care centre would comprise a significantly oversized facility that is not in compliance with the requirements of the Greystones Harbour & North Beach Action Plan for these lands. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed development of the residential component comprising Terrace 12 and the development of surface car parking adjacent to Block D would result in a significant intrusion into, and erosion of, the scheme’s important parkland area and the civic amenity space in the vicinity of Block D, thus constituting a substantial reduction in the amenity value of the public spaces within the overall scheme. The proposed development would, therefore, constitute overdevelopment of the site, would seriously injure the amenities of the area, would produce an unviable mixed use scheme at a time when the quantum of development is not merited, and would, thereby, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
________________________
Kevin Moore
Senior Planning Inspector
March, 2012