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

Mr Diamond

Ouch - its one thing to say 'Its not my fault.'
Quite another to blame it completely on someone else. Is this a serious statement?

(GUBOH - don't you realise that you virtually single handedly caused the Irish recession and the entire Harbour project to fail? What an incredible power to have.)

legrand

Fiachra2 wrote: »

GUBOH contacted all Town Councillors before the last meeting to request that they raise the harbour issue. Below is the reply received from cllr Hayden (Also published in the wicklow times)

Its good to see that we move forward in a spirit of compromise.


To whom it may concern,
I will not be making any representations on behalf of a group that has tried its damnedest to discredit me and undermine my position and that of my electorate at every opportunity. I find it comical to say the least that the signatory of your circular is a calling for ‘completing the Greystones Harbour project’, is this not the same person that, virtually single handedly, delayed this project by instigating scare tactics throughout our community in the planning process? Is it not the same person that lead a group dedicated to causing confusion and spent their time peddling misinformation about the project?
If it were not for the now defunct GPDA protest and objection group the entire community would be enjoying a wonderful, fully finished amenity at Greystones Harbour today.
Yours
Cllr Ciarán Hayden

So it's all your fault F2 !!!

On the subject of the Primary Health Care unit. I think it's safe to assume this is a total red herring now. Whilst such an enterprise may provide a means to re-start the development aspect of the harbour (anchor tenant etc), the reality as I see it is that this will never be built if Government funding is required - it simply cannot be justified based on need as outlined in criteria for such services. For example, there are deprived areas today that will not get a PHC. The idea that Greystones will get one where the main driver is the harbour development versus a heath need just will not fly politically or indeed ethically.

Fiachra2

Mr Diamond wrote: »

Ouch - its one thing to say 'Its not my fault.'
Quite another to blame it completely on someone else. Is this a serious statement?

(GUBOH - don't you realise that you virtually single handedly caused the Irish recession and the entire Harbour project to fail? What an incredible power to have.)

Actually it was just me! All on my own I got 6000 letters of objection lodged to an bord pleananla. Mr Hayden didn't resort to lies and misinformation and was therefore only able to get about 50 submissions in favour of the development!

Interestingly one of the objections which we (by that I mean the now defunct terrorist organisation known as the GPDA) raised in 1996 was that the scale was too big and that a hiccup in the economy could leave Greystones with a white elephant. We had hoped we might be allowed at least one "I told you so" but no not at all it was all our -or indeed my personal-fault.

Mr Diamond

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Interestingly one of the objections which we (by that I mean the now defunct terrorist organisation known as the GPDA) raised in 1996 was that the scale was too big and that a hiccup in the economy could leave Greystones with a white elephant. QUOTE]

Thank goodness that didn't come to pass then.

I'm relatively new to Greystones and the scale of the Harbour project has always mindboggled me. 'What were they thinking??!'

I'm glad to hear that at least 6000 objectors were thinking.

Fiachra2

BTW just to be clear

GUBOH is not the GPDA. GUBOH includes people who were both in favour of and opposed to the development. We are just trying to get together to sort out the mess.

We have in the past and continue to try and maintain a dialogue with all public representatives whether they support our cause or not.

Its not always easy though!

Blanchflower

So Fianna Fail town councillor Mr Hayden blames the GPDA for the white elephant on the harbour. :eek: This totally inappropriate development is yet another example of the hideous progeny of the disastrous Celtic Tiger era which has bankrupted the Irish Nation for generations to come. :mad: The shamed Fianna Fail political party is to blame for this treason on the Irish people. :mad:

Mr Diamond

Fiachra2 wrote: »

BTW just to be clear

GUBOH is not the GPDA. GUBOH includes people who were both in favour of and opposed to the development. We are just trying to get together to sort out the mess.

We have in the past and continue to try and maintain a dialogue with all public representatives whether they support our cause or not.

Its not always easy though!

Don't worry. This is quite clear - its simply unfortunate that they're lumped together in that unhelpful statement... and its all about 'blame'.

I look forward to the day when your proposed solutions are addressed instead. Best wishes.

Langerland

Fiachra2 wrote: »

GUBOH contacted all Town Councillors before the last meeting to request that they raise the harbour issue. Below is the reply received from cllr Hayden (Also published in the wicklow times)

Its good to see that we move forward in a spirit of compromise.


To whom it may concern,
I will not be making any representations on behalf of a group that has tried its damnedest to discredit me and undermine my position and that of my electorate at every opportunity. I find it comical to say the least that the signatory of your circular is a calling for ‘completing the Greystones Harbour project’, is this not the same person that, virtually single handedly, delayed this project by instigating scare tactics throughout our community in the planning process? Is it not the same person that lead a group dedicated to causing confusion and spent their time peddling misinformation about the project?
If it were not for the now defunct GPDA protest and objection group the entire community would be enjoying a wonderful, fully finished amenity at Greystones Harbour today.
Yours
Cllr Ciarán Hayden

How accurate is that? I am not sure of the time frame for the original proposal that received planning approval, but was it due to be completed prior to the crash in 2008? If not, it is unlikely it would have been finished in any case and very unlikely the units could have been sold to boom prices to make the project profitable for SISPAR.

Fiachra2

Its not accurate at all.

Work commenced in 2007 when the crash had already begun. In fact had it started a year or so earlier things might have been much worse in that we would be looking out at Sandyford style half finished apartment blocks.
It was to be a five year build timescale.

Fiachra2

Press Release from Cllr Tom Fortune

Following a meeting of Greystones Town Council on 25th September, Wicklow County Councillor, Tom Fortune has described the situation at the stalled Greystones Harbour development as ludicrous, “There is utter confusion about the whole project” he said.

“At our May meeting the Town Councillors were advised by Wicklow County Council officials that the Primary Care Centre (PCC) would commence in September and possibly earlier. While we had previously been given other deadlines which had not been met the announcement in May was made in a manner that convinced many Councillors that this time it was really going to happen. We were therefore astonished to be told at the Council meeting last Tuesday that not only would it not happen in September but that there was no possibility of it starting any time soon and that it was hoped that it might start in the spring. What was particularly annoying was that there was no representative of the Council present to explain WHY the deadline had been missed or why the promised landscaping at the harbour area had been started but then abandoned in July. This is most insulting to the people of Greystones and their representatives.

Cllr Fortune says that “It seems clear to me that there is no question of this PCC being built at all. Over the last two years we have been given one start date after another, none of which have been met. Based on past experience we can have a high degree of confidence that this next deadline will not be met either. “

Because of the inclusion of this ‘red herring’ in the harbour development, Greystones is losing out on the double. The PCC has been used as an excuse for leaving the harbour area in the derelict condition in which it has been for several years now. However on top of that it has drawn our attention away from the challenge of providing a PCC for Greystones. The town is not included on the priority list of 35 published by the Department of Health and this is an issue we need to address instead of wasting time waiting for something to happen at the harbour,”

Fortune concluded by stating that the people of Greystones had put up with enough. “We have had a building site at the harbour for 5 years and that is long enough. As there appears to be no plan or timeline of what is happening, it is now time for the Council to look at what bonds are available to restore the harbour as an amenity for the public and to make it available as a haven for yachts and a base for commercial fishermen as well as an attractive amenity for all residents of the town.”

03/10/2012

recedite

Fiachra2 wrote: »

it is now time for the Council to look at what bonds are available to restore the harbour as an amenity

Finally, it looks like Councillors may be starting to face reality....

legrand

To be fair to Tom Fortune - he has been a realist from the beginning. Most of the followers of this thread will be agree with the statement he made (and we know there is nothing new here).

So how is this situation to be progressed? I see little point in arguing over what is a the plain fact of the matter - no PCC will be built. The only way to release the Bond is 1) WCC set about planning to spend that money on the remediation works or 2) a court action is taken (but then who could initiate this ?) to get the Bond released. If either one of these happens we can expect months (years?) of wrangling on what the spend the money will be spent on?

darter

legrand wrote: »

So how is this situation to be progressed? I see little point in arguing over what is a the plain fact of the matter - no PCC will be built. The only way to release the Bond is 1) WCC set about planning to spend that money on the remediation works or 2) a court action is taken (but then who could initiate this ?) to get the Bond released. If either one of these happens we can expect months (years?) of wrangling on what the spend the money will be spent on?

The stumbling block for us common folk in suggesting how to move forward is that we have no idea what was agreed in the PPP contract. I find it absolutely mind-boggling that this contract is not in the public domain. Doesn't one of those P's stand for Public? Are we not the public. So it is not logically a contract with us?

Can we get it through an FoI request? Is there anyone reading this thread with any legal background?

Blandpebbles

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Press Release from Cllr Tom Fortune

Following a meeting of Greystones Town Council on 25th September, Wicklow County Councillor, Tom Fortune has described the situation at the stalled Greystones Harbour development as ludicrous, “There is utter confusion about the whole project” he said.

“At our May meeting the Town Councillors were advised by Wicklow County Council officials that the Primary Care Centre (PCC) would commence in September and possibly earlier. While we had previously been given other deadlines which had not been met the announcement in May was made in a manner that convinced many Councillors that this time it was really going to happen. We were therefore astonished to be told at the Council meeting last Tuesday that not only would it not happen in September but that there was no possibility of it starting any time soon and that it was hoped that it might start in the spring. What was particularly annoying was that there was no representative of the Council present to explain WHY the deadline had been missed or why the promised landscaping at the harbour area had been started but then abandoned in July. This is most insulting to the people of Greystones and their representatives.

Cllr Fortune says that “It seems clear to me that there is no question of this PCC being built at all. Over the last two years we have been given one start date after another, none of which have been met. Based on past experience we can have a high degree of confidence that this next deadline will not be met either. “

Because of the inclusion of this ‘red herring’ in the harbour development, Greystones is losing out on the double. The PCC has been used as an excuse for leaving the harbour area in the derelict condition in which it has been for several years now. However on top of that it has drawn our attention away from the challenge of providing a PCC for Greystones. The town is not included on the priority list of 35 published by the Department of Health and this is an issue we need to address instead of wasting time waiting for something to happen at the harbour,”

Fortune concluded by stating that the people of Greystones had put up with enough. “We have had a building site at the harbour for 5 years and that is long enough. As there appears to be no plan or timeline of what is happening, it is now time for the Council to look at what bonds are available to restore the harbour as an amenity for the public and to make it available as a haven for yachts and a base for commercial fishermen as well as an attractive amenity for all residents of the town.”

03/10/2012

Rhetoric nothing more.

Fiachra2

darter wrote: »

The stumbling block for us common folk in suggesting how to move forward is that we have no idea what was agreed in the PPP contract. I find it absolutely mind-boggling that this contract is not in the public domain. Doesn't one of those P's stand for Public? Are we not the public. So it is not logically a contract with us?

Can we get it through an FoI request? Is there anyone reading this thread with any legal background?

Knowing whats in the contract is useful but not essential. We know that all PPP contracts will contain a clause which allows the public party to terminate the contract if the private party is clearly not finishing it. Which is the case here. It is simply a matter of the County councillors compeling the county manager to activate that clause.

Likewise we know that there is a €10M bond in place to cover non-completion. again it is a matter for the councillors to compel the manager to do this. I imagine that this press release is intended to encourage councillors to do just that.

If members of the public want to help then:

1. Write to the councillors asking them specifically to invoke the clause/ bond
2. Use this forum to let everyone know you have done so
3. Let us know the response

Keep an active public campaign of gently agitation going to encoutrage and help the councillors do whats right for the town.

It wont be a speedy process but if we do nothing then nothing will happen.

The Durutti Column

Fiachra2 wrote: »

It was to be a five year build timescale.

No, Fiachra, it was to be a 52 month timescale — it should have been entirely complete, including public square, clubhouses, marina and public park, last March!

Maudi

Blandpebbles wrote: »

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Press Release from Cllr Tom Fortune

Following a meeting of Greystones Town Council on 25th September, Wicklow County Councillor, Tom Fortune has described the situation at the stalled Greystones Harbour development as ludicrous, “There is utter confusion about the whole project” he said.

“At our May meeting the Town Councillors were advised by Wicklow County Council officials that the Primary Care Centre (PCC) would commence in September and possibly earlier. While we had previously been given other deadlines which had not been met the announcement in May was made in a manner that convinced many Councillors that this time it was really going to happen. We were therefore astonished to be told at the Council meeting last Tuesday that not only would it not happen in September but that there was no possibility of it starting any time soon and that it was hoped that it might start in the spring. What was particularly annoying was that there was no representative of the Council present to explain WHY the deadline had been missed or why the promised landscaping at the harbour area had been started but then abandoned in July. This is most insulting to the people of Greystones and their representatives.

Cllr Fortune says that “It seems clear to me that there is no question of this PCC being built at all. Over the last two years we have been given one start date after another, none of which have been met. Based on past experience we can have a high degree of confidence that this next deadline will not be met either. “

Because of the inclusion of this ‘red herring’ in the harbour development, Greystones is losing out on the double. The PCC has been used as an excuse for leaving the harbour area in the derelict condition in which it has been for several years now. However on top of that it has drawn our attention away from the challenge of providing a PCC for Greystones. The town is not included on the priority list of 35 published by the Department of Health and this is an issue we need to address instead of wasting time waiting for something to happen at the harbour,”

Fortune concluded by stating that the people of Greystones had put up with enough. “We have had a building site at the harbour for 5 years and that is long enough. As there appears to be no plan or timeline of what is happening, it is now time for the Council to look at what bonds are available to restore the harbour as an amenity for the public and to make it available as a haven for yachts and a base for commercial fishermen as well as an attractive amenity for all residents of the town.”

03/10/2012

Rhetoric nothing more.

the expression "he speaks out of both sides of his mouth"was made for this man..another thing.. and the whole shady dealings of this mess..whos to say that bond even exists anymore...

Some text removed due to unsubstantiated allegations

Blanchflower

The time is fast approaching when the people of Greystones retake possession of the harbour site from this delinquent developer, Sispar. Too many broken promises have evaporated any trust the people had with this cowboy outfit. With the motto “Many hands make light work” the people of Greystones can landscape the place and remediate it.

The Durutti Column

Blanchflower wrote: »

The time is fast approaching when the people of Greystones retake possession of the harbour site from this delinquent developer, Sispar. Too many broken promises have evaporated any trust the people had with this cowboy outfit. With the motto “Many hands make light work” the people of Greystones can landscape the place and remediate it.

I'm for that. First thing needed is a demolition squad to remove those awful hoardings fronting the car park. Any muscular young people volunteering? Suitable tools can be found.

Annasopra

Posts moved and links fixed

The Durutti Column

Residents of The Grove and surroundings have now been deprived of direct access to the North Beach since last April's gales, during which rapid erosion of the cliffs destroyed the ramp down onto the beach and have made access difficult for all but the most nimble — and dangerous for anyone.

They have started a petition to get the developers' friend, Wicklow County Council, and Sisk/Sispar, to restore public access to the beach via The Grove. This would be in line with the Local Area Plan and the planning permission for the harbour project, both of which refer to the provision of several points of access to the North Beach from the Cliff Walk and the future public park (Darcy's Field).

You can sign their petition here:

http://www.petitiononline.ie/petition/reach-for-the-beach/1537

Fiachra2

Appears to be some progress on the marina. Given that this is not coming from the usual sources it can be given some credibility.
That said how they propose to build a marina in 3 months beats me.

At least with this open this will pile pressure on WCC to sort out the rest of the mess.


http://afloat.ie/port-news/greystones-harbour/item/20511-greystones-harbour-marina-to-open-next-april-with-100-berths

Tabnabs

Have they received planning for the marina already? Couldn't find anything on the WCC website?

The Durutti Column

Tabnabs wrote: »

Have they received planning for the marina already? Couldn't find anything on the WCC website?

Marina is part of Phase 1 of the development along with the clubhouses and has had planning approval since the second Bord Pleanala hearing. Notice the report in Afloat mag is hedged with conditions and probables, and starting with a less than half-size job with completion to the permitted 230 berths only a possible depending on future demand.

Don't hold your breath on the clubhouses. Unless Sisk can lay off the risk, as they have laid off the marina risk onto BJ Marine, they won't be built.

Tabnabs

The Durutti Column wrote: »

Don't hold your breath on the clubhouses. Unless Sisk can lay off the risk, as they have laid off the marina risk onto BJ Marine, they won't be built.

That's an interesting assumption you're making there...

The Durutti Column

Tabnabs wrote: »

That's an interesting assumption you're making there...

I think it is reasonable to draw the conclusion from the Afloat story that most, if not all, of the risk has been laid off, given the wording of the story:

BJ Marinas Ltd will be responsible for the installation of the marina. The marina furniture and piling will be 100% Irish built and supplied, according to Gallagher.

Berths will eventually reach 230, a major bonus for the east coast boating scene.

Tabnabs

I read that wording in a very different manner and can't share your conclusion I'm afraid.

The Durutti Column

Tabnabs wrote: »

I read that wording in a very different manner and can't share your conclusion I'm afraid.

I'm taking into account the fact that, according to Paraic Keogh of Sisk many moons ago, the failure to build and open the marina in 2012 was because of legal action by BJ Marine Ltd, which claimed to have some rights to build and operate the marina, even though the concession for same was supposed to go to Sisk/Sispar in the PPP contract.

My best guess is that the settlement acceded to BJ's rights but also gave them the responsibility to build. I think the Afloat wording fits with this.

And bear in mind the cheapskate attitude Sisk have taken to any attempt to get them to improve the wasteland they have left us — rubbish soil dumped, some wild grass seed thrown here and there, all the rubbish left in the middle of it, and continued beach starvation at the north cliffs accelerating the erosion of the coast.

I don't think they'd invest in so much as a mooring ring if they could get someone else to pay for it.

Fiachra2

I note that Cllr Derek Mitchell has stated that the opening of the marina will provide a "major boost to the town" and that his fellow counsellor Kathleen Kelleher has stated that the opening is evidence "of the commitment of all concerned to progress the development to a successful completion”

Pehaps now they will join the other town and county cousellors in pressing Wicklow County Council to open up the rest of the harbour to the public and properly landscape the site including the removal of builders rubble and rusting machinery.
Such an action would undoubtedly contribute to to the success of the marina as well as provinding a "major boost" to the residents of the town who have to endure the eyesore.

pixbyjohn

Greystones Harbour 2005 by pixbyjohn, on Flickr