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

Jimjay · 19-04-2011 7:57am

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Thanks. Will see if that can be made more active.

I think its a bit late to save the victorian harbour.
Maybe the name needs changing to "save greystones marina" although its hard to save something we havnt got.

I would suggest a new group but looking at the link above which had over 600 members and failed in what it tried to achieve i am not sure how a group at this stage would work.

Huntthe · 19-04-2011 9:56am

Perhaps someone could set me straight on this ?

The Lord Mayor/Wicklow CoCo. angle is that the hoardings will stay up as long as people object to changes to the development plans for the harbour. These people are 'mischief makers'

The hoardings will come down if people stop objecting and Sispar/Wicklow CoCo are allowed do what they like ?

Essentially Sispar/ Hayden and Co are holding the harbour hostage from the people until they get permission to do what they like and the pesky public stop objecting to something they don't want ?

I'm just trying to get my head around the 'spin' at the moment.

_____________________________________________________

People might be interested to know what one local prominient business man who's family have been here for generations thinks. He posted this on a public forum so it is on the record.

I would be interested to know how many of "old Greystones", who watched the pier disappear over the years and the harbour silt up and become unusable, are actually complaining about the new harbour

The implication being that people who object to the current situation are 'blow ins' and aren't really entitled to an opinion.My parents aren't from here they've only lived here for 37 years and me my whole life I wonder are we entitled to an opinion or how many generations does it take ?

Cheeky Chops · 19-04-2011 10:16am

I suggested a FB page to organise a protest. It would be effective for spreading the message. If whoever is organising the protest creates an event page it can then be posted on the existing pages and on our own pages. I for one would attend and I would be delighted to pass it to all my contacts. There is a huge media presence in Greystones so the chances are good for publicity.

Shame them I say.

I find the comments on Ciaran Hayden's public FB page appalling.

Huntthe · 19-04-2011 10:52am

Like this.

the two recent contributors to the Greystones Guide are not from the area, one is not even from this country. Its the 'runners in' that have all the opinions.

Fiachra2 · 19-04-2011 12:56pm

While the Mayors comments are off the wall we did agree to keep this thread on topic. I would urge anyone who has an issue wioth the Concillors opinions to contact the media or the councillors directly. It will be much more effective.

People have stated posting on the Save Greystones Harbour FB page so that would be a good starting point.

Langerland · 19-04-2011 1:00pm

I was very surprised by Cllr Haydens comments. When you look at that whole brigade down there in the Town Council, they are in self preservation mode now. This farce has become an unmitigated disaster and their top priority is to save their own hinds. Fairly typical political agendas. Meanwhile, the harbour/marina dream is gone. I would say we are already too late to do anything with it for this Summer. Taking the hoardings down would make the whole place a lot easier for vandals and the likes to begin defacing it. It's not like I'll be bringing the kids down their for a walk and to play in an ugly, dirty, unfinished building site even if the hoardings do come down. (If they were to come down, the whole area would need to be landscaped and there is just not enough time to do that even before Summer begins)

......depression setting in

Blandpebbles · 19-04-2011 1:01pm

This seems to be creating circle waste of time.

Don't post here post on FB which references a link to this thread and around we go.

Save Greystones Harbour from being concreted over? A bit late perhaps.

Better to simply either visit Ciaran Hayden's Shop en masse or a council gathering to demand answers.

We all want the hoardings down and I don't feel any form of media boards, FB or East Radio serves the public by allowing the bickering of two citizens to take centre stage.

Mitch Connor · 19-04-2011 1:11pm

Huntthe wrote: »

Perhaps someone could set me straight on this ?

The Lord Mayor/Wicklow CoCo. angle is that the hoardings will stay up as long as people object to changes to the development plans for the harbour. These people are 'mischief makers'

The hoardings will come down if people stop objecting and Sispar/Wicklow CoCo are allowed do what they like ?

Essentially Sispar/ Hayden and Co are holding the harbour hostage from the people until they get permission to do what they like and the pesky public stop objecting to something they don't want ?

I'm just trying to get my head around the 'spin' at the moment.

_____________________________________________________

People might be interested to know what one local prominient business man who's family have been here for generations thinks. He posted this on a public forum so it is on the record.

The implication being that people who object to the current situation are 'blow ins' and aren't really entitled to an opinion.My parents aren't from here they've only lived here for 37 years and me my whole life I wonder are we entitled to an opinion or how many generations does it take ?

Or he could be wondering how many people who watched the harbour fall apart through neglect are complaining about it not be perfect and open now (having not done anything to help the situation in the past)

Huntthe · 19-04-2011 1:36pm

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Or he could be wondering how many people who watched the harbour fall apart through neglect are complaining about it not be perfect and open now (having not done anything to help the situation in the past)

Not sure what you mean.

At this stage I reckon the vast majority would take the old harbour back.

F3 · 19-04-2011 1:41pm

Langerland wrote: »

I was very surprised by Cllr Haydens comments. When you look at that whole brigade down there in the Town Council, they are in self preservation mode now. This farce has become an unmitigated disaster and their top priority is to save their own hinds. Fairly typical political agendas. Meanwhile, the harbour/marina dream is gone. I would say we are already too late to do anything with it for this Summer. Taking the hoardings down would make the whole place a lot easier for vandals and the likes to begin defacing it. It's not like I'll be bringing the kids down their for a walk and to play in an ugly, dirty, unfinished building site even if the hoardings do come down. (If they were to come down, the whole area would need to be landscaped and there is just not enough time to do that even before Summer begins)

......depression setting in

Don't get depressed, don't underestimate the strength of many, there is a workable solution, we may not get all that we would want, but we will get more than we have now. F3

The Durutti Column · 19-04-2011 2:31pm

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

I suggested a FB page to organise a protest. It would be effective for spreading the message. If whoever is organising the protest creates an event page it can then be posted on the existing pages and on our own pages. I for one would attend and I would be delighted to pass it to all my contacts. There is a huge media presence in Greystones so the chances are good for publicity.

Shame them I say.

I find the comments on Ciaran Hayden's public FB page appalling.

I support Cheeky's suggestion. The only way to even post something on the SAVE THE HARBOUR FB page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4311437482) is to click on Discussion and start a new one, or join the one that started yesterday (Monday 18 April).

What about a new FB page called GIVE US BACK OUR HARBOUR aimed at organising a demo? People are actively talking about a demo around the town, so this could be a focus for organising it.

OK, that's done. See here: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_148849258516045

Cheeky Chops · 19-04-2011 7:41pm

Well done ....

You know what, even if we achieve nothing, at least we are refusing to be complacent and sit on our backsides saying this current situation is ok.

It is not ok. I think the time is now to embarrass those political representatives that sold us out.

I may be an old softie but I do believe people power can work ..

F3 · 21-04-2011 1:54pm

up to 122 members now on Facebook

pixbyjohn · 21-04-2011 2:41pm

I see some of my photos have been posted on that facebook page but I didn't post them there or give permission for them to be posted.
There appears to be a lot of computer activity re the harbour protests but there is no one actually doing anything in reality about it. I suppose there is no point really at this stage because not many are interested one way or the other. If people really cared they would have been out marching already.
Its all too easy for the small amount of contributors to the various computer discussion forums to air their thoughts but to stand up and be counted at a public rally is a different matter. I am disappointed that the project is not completed but I am not too worried about it in the short term. It will be finished at some point in time.

recedite · 21-04-2011 4:52pm

Article in this weeks Bray People about the harbour. Quotes from Cllrs Hayden, Mitchell & Mc Loughlin laying the blame squarely on Fiachra Etchingham, including this choice one from Hayden referring to the EIS;
it "will achieve nothing only more delay. It is all these delays that are keeping the hoarding up and nothing else".
Eh... What about the fact that the builder has packed up and gone away, leaving the unfinished development site with Nama, Ciaran? Isn't that the real problem?
There is a small bit at the end to provide the requisite minimal amount of balance. Article written by one Esther Hayden (any relation? I don't know) gives Fiachra's address, presumably in case anyone wants to complain to chief mischief-maker

directly.
Unfortunately its an old politician's trick; if you keep throwing enough mud, eventually some of it sticks.

Cheeky Chops · 21-04-2011 7:52pm

So the town Council meeting is on Tuesday night ... where is it and can members of the public attend?

Can we ask for questions to be tabled?

pixbyjohn · 21-04-2011 8:49pm

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

So the town Council meeting is on Tuesday night ... where is it and can members of the public attend?

Can we ask for questions to be tabled?

The town council offices are beside the park and ride, just behind the South Beach car park.

Blanchflower · 22-04-2011 3:24pm

recedite wrote: »

Article in this weeks Bray People about the harbour. Quotes from Cllrs Hayden, Mitchell & Mc Loughlin laying the blame squarely on Fiachra Etchingham, including this choice one from Hayden referring to the EIS;
it "will achieve nothing only more delay. It is all these delays that are keeping the hoarding up and nothing else".
Eh... What about the fact that the builder has packed up and gone away, leaving the unfinished development site with Nama, Ciaran? Isn't that the real problem?
There is a small bit at the end to provide the requisite minimal amount of balance. Article written by one Esther Hayden (any relation? I don't know) gives Fiachra's address, presumably in case anyone wants to complain to chief mischief-maker directly.
Unfortunately its an old politician's trick; if you keep throwing enough mud, eventually some of it sticks.

The dirty tricks department of the local politicians is now in full flow. The development at the harbour was doomed as soon as the property bubble burst in 2008. To blame the stalled development on anything else is a lie.

Alan_P · 23-04-2011 6:12am

Blanchflower wrote: »

The dirty tricks department of the local politicians is now in full flow. The development at the harbour was doomed as soon as the property bubble burst in 2008. To blame the stalled development on anything else is a lie.

Indeed. Here's an interesting calculation. According to the harbour supporters own web site, http://www.greystonesharbour.ie/ , the total cost was going to be €300 million. There's no reason to believe it will be less, due to falling construction costs, because the contracts were signed more or less at the peak of the boom.

As per a quote I found from the oral hearing and posted in this thread earlier, the whole thing has to be financed from the sale of the residential components, some 340 or 380 houses, depending on whether the current increase in the residential part gets the go-ahead. €300 million divided by 380 is, wait for it, 789,473. That's the AVERAGE price the residential units have to achieve to make the development viable. A lot of the marina units are 2/3 bedroom apartments, and there are 4 bedroom houses for sale in Greystones at €350,000.

The project is now financial lunacy. But of course, it's stalled because someone asked if the county council were actually acting lawfully, and it turned out they weren't.

F3 · 23-04-2011 7:10am

Bullseye Alan!

Blanchflower · 23-04-2011 11:39pm

Alan_P wrote: »

Indeed. Here's an interesting calculation. According to the harbour supporters own web site, http://www.greystonesharbour.ie/ , the total cost was going to be €300 million. There's no reason to believe it will be less, due to falling construction costs, because the contracts were signed more or less at the peak of the boom.

As per a quote I found from the oral hearing and posted in this thread earlier, the whole thing has to be financed from the sale of the residential components, some 340 or 380 houses, depending on whether the current increase in the residential part gets the go-ahead. €300 million divided by 380 is, wait for it, 789,473. That's the AVERAGE price the residential units have to achieve to make the development viable. A lot of the marina units are 2/3 bedroom apartments, and there are 4 bedroom houses for sale in Greystones at €350,000.

The project is now financial lunacy. But of course, it's stalled because someone asked if the county council were actually acting lawfully, and it turned out they weren't.

The project seemed like financial lunacy from its very inception. The bursting of the property bubble made it even moreso. This can never be a going concern. The pity is that the crash did not happen in 2006 and the dam thing would not have even started. But alas the crash came too late to save Greystones Harbour from the madness. So now we the citizens of Greystones are left with a ghostly wasteland of a harbour hidden from public view by vile ugly hoardings. The greedy people who pushed this monster through the planning system against the wishes of the people of Greystones should hang their heads in shame.

F3 · 24-04-2011 8:56am

I think you should post this thread Alan, on the new Facebook group 'give us our harbour back'

Alan_P wrote: »

Indeed. Here's an interesting calculation. According to the harbour supporters own web site, http://www.greystonesharbour.ie/ , the total cost was going to be €300 million. There's no reason to believe it will be less, due to falling construction costs, because the contracts were signed more or less at the peak of the boom.

As per a quote I found from the oral hearing and posted in this thread earlier, the whole thing has to be financed from the sale of the residential components, some 340 or 380 houses, depending on whether the current increase in the residential part gets the go-ahead. €300 million divided by 380 is, wait for it, 789,473. That's the AVERAGE price the residential units have to achieve to make the development viable. A lot of the marina units are 2/3 bedroom apartments, and there are 4 bedroom houses for sale in Greystones at €350,000.

The project is now financial lunacy. But of course, it's stalled because someone asked if the county council were actually acting lawfully, and it turned out they weren't.

Blanchflower · 24-04-2011 10:21pm

The Inspectors Report is now available for download from the Bord Pleanala website at:

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/YD0004.htm

The Inspector concluded that inaccurate and misleading information was provided to them relating to the attempt by Wicklow County Council to amend the planning permission granted by An Bord Pleanala back in 2007 following two oral hearings. The Inspector concluded in Section 13.2 that

"I declare a concern about the level of inconsistency and ambiguity on the exact quantum of commercial and residential development proposed on the overall Greystones Harbour site. I consider it unreasonable to expect the Bord to comprehensively assess a proposal which has not been satisfactorily presented to the Bord. In addition I consider that these possible inaccuracies may provide a misleading account to the public. The Bord may wish to defer adjudication of this matter until clarification has been sought or may decide that the substantive issues can be adequately assessed with the information on file."

F3 · 25-04-2011 8:08am

I'm not so sure this could be done. Coincidently or maybe conveniently the works have stopped due to inter alia, a material change in the original planning permission, requiring a new environmental impact assessment to be carried out. Notwithstanding the fact that I have not seen the contract in place between Sispar and WCC, the residual €5m bond may not be collateral in any sense of the word to secure finance as you suggest. The way I see it, regardless of the material change, Sispar as the SPV contracted with WCC have sufficient work (original work) to be getting on with, it would appear to me that they simply have no money as an SPV to continue, hense NAMA are in the equation. It also appears to me that WCC in the procurement of this PPP did not seek parent company guarantees.

Blanchflower · 25-04-2011 8:01pm

F3 wrote: »

I'm not so sure this could be done. Coincidently or maybe conveniently the works have stopped due to inter alia, a material change in the original planning permission, requiring a new environmental impact assessment to be carried out. Notwithstanding the fact that I have not seen the contract in place between Sispar and WCC, the residual €5m bond may not be collateral in any sense of the word to secure finance as you suggest. The way I see it, regardless of the material change, Sispar as the SPV contracted with WCC have sufficient work (original work) to be getting on with, it would appear to me that they simply have no money as an SPV to continue, hense NAMA are in the equation. It also appears to me that WCC in the procurement of this PPP did not seek parent company guarantees.

The latest published accounts of Sispar Limited up to 31 December 2009 notes that:

"The bank loan of €38.9 million is secured by a fixed and floating debenture over the assets of the development being undertaken and a fixed charge over the shares in the company. The bank loan facility is guaranteed by Sicon Limited (ultimate parent company of John Sisk & Son Limited) and Park Developments (Dublin) Limited on a several basis."

In the accounts work-in-progress at 31/12/09 is stated at €38.3 million after an exceptional write off of €8.6 million on work in progress. Therefore the total costs up to 31/12/09 were almost €47 million. It will be interesting to see how much more is written off at 31/12/10.

The loss up to 31/12/09 was covered in the profit and loss account by a forgiveness of loans due to shareholders of €9.1 million. So SISK and Park have now taken a hit of €9.1 million so far!

F3 · 25-04-2011 10:59pm

Well done Blanch....I pull the full accounts tomorrow for a closer look, cheers F3

Fiachra2 · 26-04-2011 7:06am

Jaysus Blanch your talent for research hasn't deserted you!

This is very interesting as it means that SISK and Park will utimatley have to cough up for this. But it would also imply:

That NAMA are very unlikely to advance further funds for anything when they will utimately have to pursue the guarantors for repayment of €40M.
As Sisk and Park will ultimately be out of pocket for this anyway then they might as well pony up the cost of reinstating the site and returning it to public usage until such time as they build houses.

Its also interesting to speculate where the write off came from? The only asset is the harbour walls which presumably are valued at cost. So why write them down?

Fiachra2 · 26-04-2011 10:03am

A group of people are going to attend the Council meeting tonight at 7.30 in the council offices. There won’t be an opportunity to speak but the idea is to heighten the councillors awareness of the concern about the hoarding. Your support would be very much appreciated

Langerland · 26-04-2011 1:13pm

Went for a walk down there over the weekend...Saturday to be precise and it was beautiful the whole way along the sea front. To see the harbour in that stateo on such a day, baron and boarded up is an absolutely disgusting sight.

Son of Jack · 27-04-2011 8:35am

Letter to Saturday's Irish Times;

''Madam, – The council holds a bond of at least €5 million to ensure completion of Greystones harbour. This is enough to provide the public square and five free clubhouses. However, the bond is not exercisable until 2014. I believe that these facilities will be completed long before then, but at least we have a backstop date.

This very fine harbour has now been built in less time than Bord Pleanála will have taken to review it on five occasions. When open, it will be seen as the best community harbour in Ireland or Britain .

The delay is frustrating, but it should be seen in the context of the more than 100 years that Greystones has been trying to get the harbour rebuilt. – Yours, etc,

Cllr Derek Mitchell'',

Seems like a generation of kids from Greystones are growing up without access to the harbour.

mikedragon32 · 27-04-2011 9:12am

Derek Mitchell wrote:

It will be the best community harbour in Ireland or Britain

What? Better than Dun Laoghaire's municipal Marina or the general harbour area? Better than any of the harbours on the Isle of White?

What happened to the "World Class" marina we were promised?

Is this the same Derek Mitchell who, as recently as November 2010, stated:

Derek Mitchell wrote:

4 Nov 2010

The next stage will start in January and finish in December 2011 after which most hoardings will come down. This stage consists of the 4 storey Health Centre, public square and free clubhouses for the Sea Scouts, Rowers, Divers, Sailors and Anglers.

So, he's rolled back from promising all of those things listed in November to just a Marina now. Does that mean in October he may admit that what we'll most likely have is just some concrete piers without even mooring posts?

Or maybe he'll just admit to not having a clue about what's actually going on.

Fiachra2 · 27-04-2011 11:33am

Son of Jack wrote: »

However, the bond is not exercisable until 2014. I believe that these facilities will be completed long before then, but at least we have a backstop date.

r.

That is the really scary part of the letter. Cllr Mitchell is actually prepared to countenance the hoardings being there for 3-4more years!

Son of Jack · 27-04-2011 11:52am

So hypothetically a child born in 2000 sees the hoardings going up in 2008 aged 8.

The bond is released in 2014 and there is a year's 'build' before the hoardings come down when they are 15.

No access to the harbour for almost half their life.

A teenager in 2008 (@13) will see all his teenage years pass before the 'build' complete and the hoardings come down (@20).

With the economic situation, he'll see the 'finished product' when he comes home from working abroad for holidays.

pixbyjohn · 27-04-2011 12:39pm

Fiachra2 wrote: »

That is the really scary part of the letter. Cllr Mitchell is actually prepared to countenance the hoardings being there for 3-4more years!

Did many of the group "give us back our harbour" go to the Town Council meeting last night ?

F3 · 27-04-2011 5:30pm

About 6 went

vinpaul · 27-04-2011 6:52pm

If as few as 6 turned up, the level of support for those agitating against the proposed plans seems almost neglible.
Why keep objecting, when the only route to giving us some chance of using the facilities is to let development proceed at whatever pace NAMA will allow. The sooner work proceeds, the sooner the hoardings will come down and forget about idle promises from politicos.

Fiachra2 · 27-04-2011 7:05pm

vinpaul wrote: »

If as few as 6 turned up, the level of support for those agitating against the proposed plans seems almost neglible.
Why keep objecting, when the only route to giving us some chance of using the facilities is to let development proceed at whatever pace NAMA will allow. The sooner work proceeds, the sooner the hoardings will come down and forget about idle promises from politicos.

Well actually there are only 9 councillors. Of them two that I know of would support the community. So those who want to find a workable sollution to the problem were in the majority in the room.

However we digress.....

F3 · 28-04-2011 6:02am

vinpaul wrote: »

If as few as 6 turned up, the level of support for those agitating against the proposed plans seems almost neglible.
Why keep objecting, when the only route to giving us some chance of using the facilities is to let development proceed at whatever pace NAMA will allow. The sooner work proceeds, the sooner the hoardings will come down and forget about idle promises from politicos.

Where you there Vinpaul? Your use of the word 'agitating' is unusual to describe a community, yet it was the word used by a councillor to describe the feelings of the concerned people of Greystones, perhaps it's just an unusual coincident.

vinpaul · 28-04-2011 8:13am

No I was not at the council meeting. I don't see the point in any more protests.
The major construction work is finished and will not be undone. At this stage all I wish to see is the harbour and the surrounding area being opened up to the public. I am a regular walker around the enclosed building site and it is not a pleasant sight.
I understand that any future funding is conditional on NAMA releasing funds. I hope that this should be forthcoming sooner rather than later and let's stop the bickering that seems to be attracting far too much attention both locally and nationally.

Fiachra2 · 28-04-2011 9:02am

vinpaul wrote: »

No I was not at the council meeting. I don't see the point in any more protests.
The major construction work is finished and will not be undone. At this stage all I wish to see is the harbour and the surrounding area being opened up to the public. I am a regular walker around the enclosed building site and it is not a pleasant sight.
I understand that any future funding is conditional on NAMA releasing funds. I hope that this should be forthcoming sooner rather than later and let's stop the bickering that seems to be attracting far too much attention both locally and nationally.

In that case Vinpaul you are of exactly the same mind with those who are campaigning to have the hoardings removed!

However you should be aware that the situation is not as simple as you believe it to be. The assertions of some local politicians published in the media are in many cases inaccurate and based on a very limited understanding of the scale and nature of the problem they face.

Nobody is trying to stop anything at this stage. But as has always been the case with this unfortunate development, a resolution would be a lot easier if all parties actually listened to what others are saying.

F3 · 28-04-2011 11:32am

As we are essentially in almost total darkness on the real facts, all we can do is make educated guesses on what is likely to be the case, and with that qualification in mind, the entire development costs are supposedly in the region of 300million. It is my understanding that AIB was to fund Sispar for the development but after a mere 70 to 80million spent today in 'making the site' (by land reclaimation via breakwaters and infill I.e. The marine works) AIB may be having difficulty (now nationalised) in providing the residual €220 million to complete the development as the original loan may have been lent (in part at least) against the value of the reclaimed land (the site) hence NAMA's interest or involvement. (again I'm joining dots here) If NAMA do not fund the remaining €220 million, then Sispar may need to renegotiate finance from another private source. If anyone can correct me on my assumptions please do as fumbling around in the dark is fin to begin with, but the matter is getting very serious indeed, and the people of GREYSTONES need answers now.

Blandpebbles · 02-05-2011 9:52am

have to agree with vin, a lot of moaning and face booking but no actually real protesting. this thread is now a means to vent and then get back to things that matter such as getting paid to work and raising a family.

all this talk of a generation of kids not getting to use the harbour is very odd too... As a kid growing up in Greystones hardly any kids hung out at the old harbour, what makes the new desolate waste ground of a harbour more attractive?

FYI there are rowing and sailing clubs ongoing operating out of the harbour with a large kid participation, so not sure what this generation of kids is growing up missing apart from probably having somewhere to drink, s**g and sit around moaning about how there is no cinema, shopping centre or niteclubs.

All of which could have been built at a fraction of the harbour bill.

The harbour is simply a totem for the frustration of those who feel hard done by in the economic recession. 99% of the people will never see it, use it or care about it. The north beach entrance has been open for weeks and yet its deserted, because people don't actual care.

recedite · 02-05-2011 11:21am

F3 wrote: »

If NAMA do not fund the remaining €220 million, then Sispar may need to renegotiate finance from another private source.

I'm no expert..... but AFAIK Nama take over and manage existing debt, I don't think they have a mandate to issue new loans. If money has not been drawn down from AIB prior to Nama taking over, then AIB are hardly obliged to put up any more funds? Nama will only issue money for the purposes of finishing off a development and bringing it to market, whereupon they will get back their money plus the original loan (or as much of it as can be salvaged).

Blandpebbles wrote: »

all this talk of a generation of kids not getting to use the harbour is very odd too... As a kid growing up in Greystones hardly any kids hung out at the old harbour, what makes the new desolate waste ground of a harbour more attractive?

Obviously its not more attractive now.
Teenagers dived and swam off the old harbour wall and the kish. People fished off it. Mothers and toddlers hung out at the sandy area of the silted up harbour. Small craft could launch there. It was a good amenity, with convenient parking. The fact that it was being used for activities other than those it was originally designed for is neither here nor there.

The north beach entrance has been open for weeks and yet its deserted, because people don't actual care

Nobody will use the new designated North Beach Swimming Area. It was badly designed. It is too far from parking area, windswept, desolate, deep water, unpredictable waves, ugly concrete and steel environment, and last but not least, it has no sand.

darter · 02-05-2011 1:05pm

Blandpebbles wrote: »

have to agree with vin, a lot of moaning and face booking but no actually real protesting. this thread is now a means to vent and then get back to things that matter such as getting paid to work and raising a family.

I disagree with much of what you say, but on this you are correct - for now at least. Actions speak louder than words, but so far it reminds me of the saying -
When all is said and done, there is usually far more said than done.

Someone needs to take charge and organize a rally and protest demonstration.

Hopefully the groundswell of indignation and desire for the hoardings to come down (FB site) will gain momentum and prevail for this Summer...

F3 · 02-05-2011 1:38pm

Some if us are not just venting, some of us are actually in the process of obtaining all of the facts from the parties directly, then exploring and proffering solutions that meet the needs of all associated parties to the harbour. This is not an easy issue to resolve but a resolution will be forthcoming.

F3 · 02-05-2011 1:46pm

Out of the 10 or so Councilers at the meeting last week, all but one agreed that an interim steep should be explored to opening harbour to the community, that a significant wind of change. At almost 400 members, the face book group is gaining strength and credibility. If action is required, then action will be taken, but it will be the action of a community not radicals.

Blandpebbles · 02-05-2011 2:11pm

'in the process of', 'exploring', 'forthcoming'... all suitably vague. Define community? 400 people is not a community is a minority movement.

In the 44 pages of this thread not one single word has had an impact on the harbour development... it is talk about talk about talk.. nothing more.

The harbour will be finished when it is finished and meanwhile 99.75% of the population will remain uninterested in it until it is finished and can be used.

The north beach is a lovely weather protected spot, with a sandy beach, superb swimming and easy access. Haven't been down there in a while?

Hopefully the .25% of the Greystones on FB will form a groundswell and have the hoardings removed. Where are our elected local TDs in all this, sadly absent as I predicted.

F3 · 02-05-2011 2:21pm

Bland, I understand your pessimism, but some of us are actually in discussions with all parties right now, not vague, but very focused

The Durutti Column · 02-05-2011 4:15pm

Oh, Bland. Where do you even get the energy to post your gloomy posts?

None of us have any time for politicians and their wiles, directed to one object only, but they have to be taken account of. It takes work and persistence, no matter how distasteful the task might be, to gain any benefit from the rigged system we are faced with.

Tell you what, you go on posting the gloom and we'll get the hoardings down, the 0.25% of us. Then you can buy us all a pint in the Beach House while we contemplate the new view. And we'll buy you the portion of Humble Pie with cream...

littlemaxi · 02-05-2011 4:27pm

Blandpebbles wrote: »

all this talk of a generation of kids not getting to use the harbour is very odd too... As a kid growing up in Greystones hardly any kids hung out at the old harbour, what makes the new desolate waste ground of a harbour more attractive?

The north beach entrance has been open for weeks and yet its deserted, because people don't actual care.

As a kid who grew up in Greystones, and now a mum myself, the old harbour was always a favourite local amenity - spent many afternoons/evenings with a toddler/boy wandering around harbour, exploring the rocks, having a paddle, playing in sand, talking to fishermen/anglers/other mums & dads....just as my parents did with me. And I know there are many many more who would tell you exactly the same. I look forward to the opening up of new harbour to once again take a stroll and enjoy the sea air...

I for one, didn't know the north beach section was open until I read this thread this evening, and I doubt many others do either, but Im sure once word gets around, more and more people will be only too glad to use it. I dont for one minute agree with blandpebbles, that people don't care.. thats just a ridiculous statement.

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

Comments