Greystones Harbour Deception

by Deirdre Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:28

Yes sir.

I agree - a neighbour of mine ( who is anti harbour , but then she is entitled to her opinion ) convinced me that the arguments being put forward by the GPDA at the oral hearings were outstanding and rock solid.

I must admit - I was worried that maybe they had found some gem that would stop this new harbour.

But to see them trying to convince the inspector of their rantings was quite amusing. It was great to see that somewhere along the line their argument would have to stand up - which of course it didn't and completely failed. But to the locals who know who is who - one was able to tell me exactly what the individual agendas were - most were because they already lived at the harbour and didn't want change. However lots were for political gain - I see some thought there were votes to be had !!

The oral hearing is great - because it doesn't go by slant or rumour or hear say- it deals in FACTS!!

And while I don't believe a new harbour should be built to sustain employment - isn't it great to see that jobs will be created - both temporary ( construction ) and permanent.

So anyone looking in on this page should understand that due process was adhered to- and the people with the final say ( Bord Pleanala ) - gave their decision. END OF STORY !!

Deirdre

by Rower Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:20

It is great to see progress in Greystones. Our new clubhouse will be ready in 18 short months and our new community harbour will be open a couple of months later. Great for the youth of the town.

by phat cat Thu Aug 28, 2008 09:12

The GPDA lies might have been convincing on doorsteps but were not good enough to fool the Inspector at the Oral Hearings. I too sat throughout both these hearings and witnessed every argument put forward by the GPDA political show boaters, Cawley and Etchingham, torn apart by the real experts put forward by SISPAR/WCC. The truth always outs!

by Patrick Thu Aug 28, 2008 09:00

Morning Mildred,

Just to let everyone know that I attended the oral hearings and on day one I counted 142 people in attendance at the Royal Hotel. Day 2 was 76 and day 3 was 32 !!! Not much intrerest there.

The royal hotel could not cope with 6000 people.

The GPDA campaign - ( which is ridiculed by others on this page ) - could only muster this many people after it called on the 6000 ( ha Ha ) objectors to attend!! What a joke !!!!

The problem here is that these people need to follow a simple process:-

1. Go to Easons
2. Buy the Oxford dictionary
3. Look up the word 'democracy'
4. Understand it !!

And the 'corrupt' slant and 'pay-off' jibes by the people who unsuccessfully tried to impose their minority views on the majority of the people are merely an attempt to scuttle what is going to be a fantastic new harbour - to the benefit of all !!

As I note from other participants - a spokeswoman from the GPDA ran as a candidate on the 'anti harbour' ticket and got no-where. Perhaps the 6000 certainties were lost looking for the Royal Hotel.

On a final note - it appears that certain people need a greater understanding of statistics. If the 6000 were all from Greystones' 16000 population then it would be a 37.5% 'no' ( which when I did maths in the leaving cert is a minority !!! ). However this is not the case. To extrapolate correct info from these figures you must take into account where the votes came from. So it is pointless using this 6000 figure when many came from Ballina, Co. Mayo and Virginia Co. Cavan. These towns have obviously no connection with Greystones other than disgruntled people who have moved to Greystones from these areas rallied up the in-laws etc. to boost up the amount. What a joke !!

One last note - I believe that the ordinary punter on the street saw tghrough this nonsense and that is why all you hear now around the town is ' Won't it be great when it is finished '

But in the meantime it is interesting to note that the harbour is going well - clubs will be in before everyone so that is great.
Good day,

Patrick

by Rower Thu Aug 28, 2008 08:32

An Bord Pleanala made an unanimous decision based on the findings of its inspector. This Bord is the ultimate planning Authority in this country and is the final route of appeal. 8 out 9 Town Councillors supported this and 18 out 24 County Councillors voted for this. These bodies are democratically elected by the people. This project was also supported by 4 out of 5 T.D's. Greystones Chamber, County Wicklow Chamber, Chambers Ireland,6 marine based clubs, The Irish Marine Federation, and an over whelming majority of Greystones residents. The GPDA nominated canditate at our democratic elections ( Evelyn Cawley) managed just 2000 votes which was 3% of the vote. Any Candidate that used the Harbour card at the election struggled. Only 10% of Greystones people objected to this project.

by Mildred Wed Aug 27, 2008 19:58

The level of submissions made by the people of Greystones against the harbour development was significant enough to warrant TWO oral hearings by An Bord Pleanala.

The people who attended these Oral Hearings could not understand how, based on the evidence given, that approval was given.

I see that some of the local councillors have requested a redesign of the development because of the flood risks.

by Ciaran Hayden Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:42 ciaran at trailerman dot biz Greystones

Greystones Chamber Press Release
Only 10% of Greystones Population Oppose Harbour Plans:

A number of members of Greystones Chamber and Greystones Community Group have analysed all submissions in relation to Greystones Harbour received by An Bord Pleanala. The closing date for these submissions was 29th January 2007. The Bord received less than 3,500 this time around, much less than protest groups had expected. The following are the factual findings of the make up of the submissions received by the Bord;

• 48.6% of submissions are from Greystones
• 7.2% of submissions are from Bray
• 7.2% of submissions are from County Wicklow, excluding Bray & Greystones.
• 32% of submissions are from the rest of the Republic of Ireland.
• 2.6% of submissions are from Europe, with 15 coming from Switzerland.
• 2% of submissions are from the Rest of the World including Malaysia, Canada, USA, New Zealand & Australia.
• 30% of submissions are from Charlesland.
• Only 10% of the Greystones population of 17,500 made a submission,
• Many submissions were made by teenagers and children. (Greystones Chamber welcomes the youth into the debate).
• The Counties of Kilkenny, Cork, Mayo, Donegal, Westmeath & Sligo made a disproportionately high number of submissions.
• The towns of Mullingar, Swords & Raheny also had a high number of submissions.
• 3 submissions came from a school in Bray.
• 20 submissions were indeterminable, (ie) blank, no address or illegible.
•

Greystones Chamber is delighted that many people in Greystones now support the redevelopment of Greystones Harbour and this bears out in the findings of the submissions examined. Chamber President, Mr Ciaran Hayden, said, Quote, “Many emails were circulating around Greystones looking for in excess of 8,000 objections. This just didn’t materialise. It is obvious that the people of Greystones have had a close look at the revised plans and thought them a good compromise”. Mr Hayden went on to say, “the revised plans are much more popular than the previous plans, and I now hope the Bord will make a quick decision to allow construction to start in the very near future”.

End

It is very plain to see where the objectors came from. Also not included in the Chambers findings was the widespread fraud that existed at the time e.g. Submissions from dead people, from babies and forged names were widespread.

by M.M. Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:22

"And those who didn't and still don't want it should be mature enough not to come near it when it is completed ( as it will destroy the harbour !!! ) But I smell hypocracy - i really do - and I will be the first to ask the sailing club do they like their new premises, and the first to put myself forward to show the 'no' people around our new harbour."

Let me asure you, Deirdre, that I definitely will stay away. As a matter of fact I haven't been down there for more than two months now, and definitely have no intention whatsoever patronizing this insane "development" once it has been concluded.

by Deirdre Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:46

Fintan,

Thankfully 6000 objections were not ignored - you are wrong again.

They were scrutinized in two oral hearings - and were deemed not to be in the best interest of planning. You forget that the population of Greystones is 16,000 and 49% of these 6000 - say 3000 came from greystones.

Now maybe you are living in a state run by a dictator - but we live in a democracy where 3000/16000 are entitled to their view - but they must not cry and whinge when the minority views don't win. The other 3000 odd submissions - some were fraudulent, many from Mayo ( I wonder why !) others from Virginia Co. Cavan ( Mmmmmm ).

You see - people like the objectors come and go - and it is always a good sign for us positive people when you start the typical nonsense like in your last comment. If anyone disagrees with you people then we are all corrupt - what a joke !!!!! But with failed elections and work starting then it is good to see that the 13,000 were catered for - and if to the detriment of a 3000 minority then it is good to see that democracy is alive and well and working in Ireland.

You people never mention the ultimate in the democratic process - the ELECTION. Now you can rant and rave all you want - you are not accountable to anyone! But when a prominent member of the GPDA went for election most agreed that that would be the litmus test. We would see if as many people as you say were against the harbour as I have always doubted these signatures. Though they did make interesting reading !!

And it failed miserably - and amidst many a chuckle and comment at the GPDA ( which I note there are others on this appear to think the same way I do ).

So we are getting a new harbour, to the benefit of the majority - yipeeeeeeeeeeeee !!

And those who didn't and still don't want it should be mature enough not to come near it when it is completed ( as it will destroy the harbour !!! ) But I smell hypocracy - i really do - and I will be the first to ask the sailing club do they like their new premises, and the first to put myself forward to show the 'no' people around our new harbour.

And PS - I am not the ddeveloper !!!! Though with the huge interest in the apartments to dqate I would like to be !!!

Have a nicce day - I will - as it is one day nearer to our harbour to the benefit of the majority.

Deirdre xxxx

by Native Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:45

The true people of Greystones have been granted their wish, a new harbour. The concerned citizens of Bray should mind their own business. Whinge, whinge and more whinging thats all you lot can do.

by Mr.Peter Brady alias. - Concerned Citizens Action Committee. Tue Aug 26, 2008 00:43

An update detailing a letter from Kathy Sinnot has been posted here: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/88816

by Deirdre Mon Aug 25, 2008 09:07

Was considering joining your organisation - but yet again all we hear is 'brown envelope this ' and 'corrupt' that.

I listened to that rubbish from other so-called anti organisations in Greystones and it appears that you are no different.

Same old slant - different ( maybe ) people.!!

'6000' this and 'not wanted' that - people are well aware of who is involved.

Always remember that a local member of GPDA went to the so called 'majority' assuming a huge vote and we all know how the ' majority' of people with a vote in Gresytones voted !!

If onl;y facts could be spoken - we would all hear a lot less about the harbour!!

P.S. Progress is great - clubs looking forward to their new premises - my nephew is in the rowing club and the kids there can't wait.

Keep up with the harbour advances .

Deirdre xxxx

by Fintan o'Hara - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Sun Aug 24, 2008 01:18

i totally agree with the above comment.how can the voice of 6,000 objections be ignored that is just not right.i find it very sickening and disgusting that democracy is being ignored in Greystones.But of course the politicians in Greystones arent interested in what the people have to say,they are only interested in the brown envelope and corruption.we can not have our voices or opinions ignored,and we will not tolerate our voice being ignored.

by John Sawyers Sat Aug 23, 2008 17:36 themanbehindthebar at gmail dot com

This article sickens me. My heart bleeds for the residents in the Greystones area who have to put up with this. Another example of how profit comes before people in todays backward society and how inconsiderate the government are for the 'everyman.'

by actor - not greystones,thank you. Sat Aug 23, 2008 07:33

could not agree more with the above comment.
Why the blue shirts are 'popular out there' is this.
The blue shirts are 'snob based' ,always were.
The motor mouths 'out there' love blue shirts.
Like the toffee nosed residents they seem to
think they are ,one wonders why a council
house was EVER permitted to 'stand' as long
as it has ,but sure some plebs have to clean
up the dirt and filth accrued ,DONT THEY?

by Greystones resident - Tidy Town's Committee Thu Aug 21, 2008 20:43

If the rumors are true, there is war in the local FG Cumann over the selection of candidates- with all this fighting how will they even reach the people when one FG senior councillor is fighting for his political CAREER against a young mouth all mighty who has all the answers and is happy to claim credit for work he hasnt even done!! Hopefully the people will see through this. It appears from the reading of local media that he has huge concerns for the people in the harbour in relation to the road being closed off for the next 12weeks and is coming down heavy on the developers over this asking questions why the people should have been informed before this happened. But it appears from the reading of the article that the FG councillor is coming to the rescue once again of the developers which is very interesting to see two men from the same party are on OPPOSITE sides of the broken fence. This is just bearing out the old party politics kicking into place before the people even GET A LOOK IN. Well done to the concerned citizens committee for providing us with so much information and trutH that was HIDDEN from us under the GDPA's dirty stinking lying rotten carpet. It is interesting to see who gets out of the water in their wadders and not cups of coffee.
INTERESTINGLY THERE IS ANOTHER COUNCILLOR IN THE SAME, YES THE SAME, PARTY WONDERING WHY GREYSTONES LOST THEIR BLUE FLAG!! No wonder for this when you see the tonnes of rock being dumped into the Irish sea on the Greystones coastline. Do you not understand there is a huge amount of sediment and dust coming off these rocks/boulders that will continue for some time to come. what to you expect when yourself and your budding councillors voted for this dirt in the first place by making the north beach into a building site. Not only are we waving goodbye to the blue flag, WAVE GOODBYE TO ANY FG SEATS IN GREYSTONES-YOU CAN'T HAVE ALL CAKE AND EAT IT.

by Peter Brady Alias - Concerned Citizens Action Commitee Thu Aug 21, 2008 19:49 fightingcorruptioninwicklow at hotmail dot com

Dear Citizens and Friend,

A click on the above survey will enhance it. We the concerned citizens action committee would like to make it very clear and with no doubt that we support the 1999 Greystones Delgany Development Plan, and the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010 which protects the public foreshore and the north beach Greystones. We also support the construction of a community marina and harbour to facilitate the birthing of 290 boats which is far less under the 2006 local area rogue plan. We do not support the construction of 341 residential units out on the public foreshore which has nothing to do with the construction of a marina and which the people of Greystones do not want. We say take a hard look at Dun Laoire marina and harbour-do you see apartments on the public foreshore? Answer is NO. We see take a hard look at Howth marina and harbour which is a fishing port-do you see apartments on the public foreshore?Answer is NO.....................

We say for the people of Greystones to take a long hard look at the area councillors Who supported the GIVEAWAY of our public beach to private developers aswel as our beautiful heritage and did not support you or your objections as elected representatives BUT will expect you next year to vote for them in the 2009 Local Elections. We are all ready receiving their full colour glossy fliers being delivered by An Post (incurring further cost). We say PUT THEM OUT and make local goverment worrk for you and your children's futures. We also take not of the comments regarding Malahide and the high-rise apartments that has destroyed the natural beauty of the area which once again the local community did not want this. But this was imposed in on them by Fingal County Council at a time when zonings where being pushed through with impunity by putting the developers first Which we now know was the scandal of North County Dublin where we had payments to politicians and the setting up of the Mahon Tribunal. The Irish People have witnessed the unfolding of corruption before their eyes which was a national DISGRACE where the smell of coffee has turned so sour for the majority of them!!!!!

We say to the people of Greystones, Bray and north Wicklow you reserve the righr of having sour grapes when you are looking on at the COUNTY MANAGER signing off on a 300 million euro deal with a developer but at the same time will deny the people of Bray and north Wicklow a full time fire service and other essential services for young people. OH YES THE COFFEE IS SMELLING ALRIGHT-SMELLING OF CORRUPTION MY FRIEND. So, take this message back to your Masters. And roll on the community harbour for the people of Greystones WITHOUT the high-rise.

by Peter Brady Alias - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Thu Aug 21, 2008 18:11

FACT: This survey states 38.947% of the total sample of peoples views answered question 3 "repair the existing harbour only" which put them at the top of the bar chart seen here leaving the four other questions way behind.

The Survey

by Native Wed Aug 20, 2008 00:27

Hey Peter, wake up and smell the coffee - they are building it and there is nothing you can do about it. Roll on our harbour and well done Greystones Chamber and our local Councillors for supporting the community of Greystones.

by Mr.Peter Brady Alias. - Concerned Citizens Action Committee. Tue Aug 19, 2008 21:05

Dear Citizens and Friends

As you are well aware by now the response in relation to the Greystones Harbour Deception (The Scandal),Is one of Triumph to see
so many comments.Those who are for the development and those who are against.So democracy is at work and at least our first statement dated the 20th of february 2008 gave the people of Greystones and the wider community a voice which they were denied at the two AN BORD PLEANALA oral hearings.However there appears to be a lot of confusion regarding numbers of people who filed submissions of objections in relation to the controversial construction of 341 residential units out on the public foreshore.As stated in our first statement that the majority of the people recognised the harbour needed to be fixed up and refurbished,which was allowed to go into disarray by the local authority,they were moving towards public private partnership.

Which meant that the 1999 Greystones/Delgany development plan which protected the public foreshore did not suit the developers in the 1999 plan all construction work was to take place to the west of the proposed access road adjacent to the railway enbankment,keeping the public foreshore intact,and for the construction of a marina to facilitate the berthing of 290 boats,refurbish and extend the whole harbour,retain part of the foreshore for club and community buildings,provide four new slips,dredge the basin and the old inner harbour,provide amenity lighting,railings and part walls,provide facilities for commercial fishermen and extend to the south wall and breakwater,provide for public walkways throughout the harbour area which came from paragraph A of the 1999 plan.

Paragraph B community club and management facilities,coastal rescue,rowing club and boat yard,sea scouts,saving club,angling club,harbour management and facility unit,relocation of existing club by negotiation.Paragraph c existing harbour side properties,new urban square,parking,landscaping,the restoration of services,access and retention of warehouses,maintain vernacular character.
Have regard to the development plan zoning objectives.Area D/E Housing And Commercial 250 apartment units adjacent to the railway enbankment with height restrictions in place,maximum height to be no higher than the roofs of adjoining houses in Redford Park Estate.

Area D harbour side housing Area E high quality modern architecture.Area F public park links to the cliff walk.Area G heritage park.All this an be viewed on page 32 and 33 of the 1999 Greystones/Delgany plan,aswell as natural and man-made amenity objectives where it states in paragraph 2 preserve the beach and foreshore this can be viewed on page 10 of the plan.

This was the plan for greystones harbour which was written into the Wicklow county development plan as far back as 1999 and remained there up until the year 2004 until it was made into planning legislation of that year.It needs to be made very clear and with no doubt that under proposed amendments of 1999 that the local authority tried to change the 1999 plan from harbour development to marina,but failed in their attempt because harbour development was enshrined in the county development plan as far back as 1999 and could not be varied.So the bottom line is this that the wicklow county development plan 2004-2010 protects the public foreshore and the north beach of Greystones.

As you are well aware by now the agency involved based their findings on the county development plan and because of this planning permission should not have been granted under no circumstances for the construction to take place at this location.As a direct result of this the county development plan has now breached and the law is now broke.The Wicklow county development plan 2004-2010 is protected under the planning acts of 2000 which need to be enforced by the people of Greystones/Wicklow by taking it to the courts.

The local authority know they are inviolation of their own plan when the protected views in that area are being changed in the moving of the goalposts once again.The people of Greystones,Delgany,Killcoole,Newcastle and Bray were not dealt a proper hand in which their democratic rights of objections were ignored by the local authority and the agency involved who put the developers first before the people.
This is a gross indictment on the people by their servants,who will and should deliver a blow next year in the 2009 local elections in sending a clear message to them,the county manager and his officials that you did not get a mandate from the people of Greystones and for the democratic rights of objections to be respected and upheld,in which you all failed the people.Their is also a clear attempt being madce to surpress the voice of intelligent people who know what they are talking about and we would ask for you to respect their democratic views of irish citizens instead of calling them begrudgers.

We are also appealing to a particular school in Greystones and its parents to think long and hard in letting your children on to a building site when you have heavy machinery at work.Even though this was a supervised tour it is still in clear breach under health and safety regulations and we would ask that if any one of these children got seriously injuried or maimed while on site who would be held accountable for this.Are school children covered by public liability insurance when entering building sights ?.We would suggest for questions like this to be asked of the school and the developer before organising any more school tours on the sites,all in the name of public relations.

We will conclude by referring to the Greystones Chamber and press release dated june the 26th 2008 which refers to the number of submissions which they obtained from the agency which makes very interesting reading to see so many concerned citizens in our country and local community in making submissions,it appears however Greystones chamber is delighted that many people in Greystones now support the redevelopment of Greystones harbour and this bears out in the findings of the submissions,examined by members of the Greystones chamber and the community group.However from the reading of this press release was to influence the agency to make a quick decision in the granting of planning permission,this is stated on this site dated the 26th of june 2008.

However at no time does the press release refer to the original 6,000 objections that were lodged into the agency first time around which endorsed the first oral hearing at a particular hotel in bray,in which you could not get standing room on the first day of the hearing.But unfortunately for the majority of the people attending the hearing could not get their voices heard because the inspector who was chairing the hearing was a arrogant man in which he informed the people that this was not a public meeting.We feel as concerned citizens that the majority of people recognised after this that their objections had fallen on deaf ears and that this agency was not interested in what they had to say,unfortunately Democracy was suppressed that morning for the people of greystones,in which they were left on the outside looking in at the proceedings between this self appointed group the Greystones Development Protection Association and the Developers.

It is obvious to all that some agreement was reached with them that the developers would compensate certain people for the loss of their seaview which meant a lot to them and rightly so,this is why a valuer was brought into the hearing.So for the Greystones Chamber to suggest that the rest of the people of Greystones supported the revised plans is simply not true when a survey was carried out between 2:00pm and 4:00pm on a friday afternoon the 18th of january 2008 on church road Greystones outside the shops and the Post Office.Where the findings of the survey made very interesting reading where 95 people out of 37 answered yes to question 3 which was repair the existing harbour only which was representing 38.947 per cent of the total sample of the peoples views which put them at the top of the bar chart leaving the four other questions way behind this survey was conducted the same day the hoarding went up around the harbour and clearly represents the true feelings of the people who were part of the six thousand objections that still hold the same views which can not be covered up.The Greystones harbour marina survey is at the bottom of this statement for your consideration which expresses the true wishes of the people of Greystones and of the Greystones chamber who want you to believe otherwise.

It appears however that the Greystones chamber,even though planning permission was granted took our first statement very serious when they have to publish figures on the website,we are now calling on them to publish the original 6,000 submissions that were lodged into the agency which endorsed the first oral hearing and let us see the true findings for the people of Greystones.And finally we would like to mention that a certain county councillor has published a very glossy newsletter which was delivered throughout Greystones by An Post speaking about his involvement in the harbour and the wonderful club houses that are coming on stream.We say stop taking captions out of the 1999 Greystones/Delgany development plan which was voted and agreed upon by the council and not just by you.We know you want to be at the forefront of this for election purposes but really was their any need to publish a newsletter like this that must of caused you a small fortune,surely these moneys that were spent out on this would go a long way in providing a benevolent fund in helping out our citizens in Greystones regarding this private operation of parking restrictions which were imposed in on the people once again,and we take note you did not mention this in your newsletter.

Maybe you could put a proposal forward in asking the developer to get this benevolent fund up and running seeing that they are involving themselves in the affairs of the local community,it would answer you better to do this for the people instead of promoting yourself and the developers.We would like to thank gabriel,gavin,mary skelly,MM,angela,glen,joseph,paul flynn,patricia McCafferty,mark conroy and the rest of the concerned residents and citizens for exposing the scandal and the untoward carry on that is going on in our county at the moment.We would like to meet up with all of you in due course and congratulate you for putting up such a great fight.They may have told you it is happening and the construction is under way but they know that we know what is going on,this is why they fear the threat of all you by exposing them through your democratic statements do not let them intimadate you.We would just like to say there was no need for the local authority to hand over our heritage to a developer when the same local authority could afford to build a proper harbour with the proposed marina.

By keeping withing the confines of the 1999 Greystones/Delgany development plan,which was the community harbour leaving out the high rise apartments on our public beach.Thanking you the concerned citizens action committee for Bray and Greystones.

If you want to contact us email us at fightingcorruptioninwicklow@hotmail.com.

by Planner Mon Aug 11, 2008 20:42

The Irish apartment market will crash hard, due to a combination of factors:

• Oversupply - many not even completed yet. (see Dublin docks)
• Bad design - too small for long term living to raise a family and noise pollution/lack of privacy is a common complaint.
• Too many mis-management companies who do not provide adequate service.
• Council policy - Social welfare tenants move in, other tenants move out.
• Negative equity Owners - many bought with a five year horizon, with the intention of being able to trade up, the 3 bed semi still retains its place as the starter home for many.

The problem with the apartment market in Ireland, is that it has been designed with the DINKY and specuvestor in mind. Now that the immigrants of the last decade are leaving, who is going to rent these apartments? Now that there is no capital appreciation why would the DINKY be interested? Throw in the management company and legal title issues for good measure and you are left with a conundrum, how do you price these yolks in order to find a bottom in the market?

The apartment complex destined for Greystones Harbour shows all the signs of becoming a watery white elephant.

Perhaps the social activity involving the various harbour based clubs will bring some life into the equation but the residential and commercial aspects will be largely deserted.

by Patrick Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:06

Real Estate Agent-

Your sentiments I fear stink of GPDA - and we know all about them and their political unauthorised agendas!!

You and what you say will not dampen our local harbour - you tried but however failed to scupper our community harbour. As realtor has pointed out some of your points are incorrect.

But we are used to it - I hope the GPDA are getting used to our harbour. Because only one fact is important .........WE ARE GETTING A NEW HARBOUR .................

And I ( like many others ) am buying into it - it will be vabrant and most certainly not a white elephant !!

Progress is great - had a look from the sea side - out in the boat on sunday!!

Have a good day - and good riddence to the GPDA

Patrick

by Realtor Sat Aug 09, 2008 13:21

Property prices in Wicklow are rising (Wicklow Times 1st July). Inflation is on the way down (Government figures 6th August) and interest rates may well come down in Setember (ECB 6th August). These are all positive indicators that the property market is in recovery,not to mention oil now $30 a barrell lower than it was in May. Estate Agent is negative to the core and would not know a positive if it hit him in the face. He is also GPDA driven. Greystones Harbour will be a success because we, the people of Greystones, will make it one. The GPDA are very sad if all they can now wish for is doom and gloom.

by Estate Agent Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:10

Patrick

Irish property prices are in freefall with little or no demand. Bank funding has dried up as a result of the credit crunch and interest rates are rising. The absence of demand is especially pronounced in the case of apartments. There are numerous unsold apartments in so called “prime” locations in Dublin docklands. Yet you still believe that “the harbour will be different”. This is exactly the kind of blinkered exuberance which made Irish people (now in negative equity) pay way over the odds for properties during the mad years of the property bubble. Property prices do fall. The emperor has no clothes!

Under these challenging property market conditions apartments will be particulaily difficult to sell and Sisk’s must be fully aware of this.

I can see Sisks engineering significant delays with this project with the aim to complete the construction of the apartments in more favourable times – in say 10 years time. Even then they will be unable to extract the kind of profits that they were budgeting for during the planning stages of the scheme.

by Patrick Wed Aug 06, 2008 11:18

Estate Agent.

I appreciate your comments re the apartments - and I am well up on the property market but would consider your estimate of 7 years perhaps indicative of the rest of the country but this harbour is different. I don't believe that it will be subject to economic factors which will affect the thousands of typical developments around the country.

But I agree with your stance. However what I don't believe is that it will be a white elephant. To avoid being a white elephant 2 things must happen:

1. It must be a vibrant community harbour, and
2. The apartments must sell and be occupied.

Firstly - the community harbour - all clubs, coast guard station, fishermen are all sorted and have come together as the Harbour Users ( HUGS ) and appear to have all that sorted - so it will become a vibrant community harbour.

Secondly - It will be an excellent and well sought after place to live - by people from Gresytones and newcomers who won't be as affected by the recession as perhps others are.

Some who didn't want the harbour built will use the recession so strengthen their argument but as I always said - feck them !! It will most certainly not be a white elephant and I look forward to living there.

Patrick

by Estate Agent Sat Aug 02, 2008 12:04

Patrick

You are a brave man!

Exactly how much are you prepared to pay for the 2 apartments you refer to?

My advice would be to keep your powder very dry, wait and try and buy at the bottom of the market which should be in about 7 years from now. On the other hand you may not want to buy then when the full extent of the white elephant in the sea at Greystones is realised.

by Patrick Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:41

Yeah, But this is not Dublin.

I am in for two of the aprtments and if they are available I hope to get two - if not more.

Greystones harbour will not be judged by apartments for sale in Dublin - It will be beautiful down there.

Again, it's a matter of choice sir.

If you don't like the harbour, don't like the apartments etc - then don't buy there and don't visit there !!

It really is quite simple !!!!

I do - I am buying an aprtment and I will live there and will love it !!!

Roll on the community harbour!!

Patrick

by The Estate Agent Tue Jul 29, 2008 22:27

With a hugh overhang of unsold apartments all over Dublin why would any sensible property developer build another 341 of the dam things?

by phat cat Mon Jul 28, 2008 16:13

Tim O'Brien has written a very nice article on page 2 of todays Irish Times. Seems to me that paper is not a Cawley lap dog after all.

by Harbour User Wed Jul 23, 2008 13:03

I am away at the moment. Has anything significant happened in the last few weeks? Cant wait to get back and see progress - cant wait to have facilities like Malahide in Greystones! F*** THE BEGRUDGERS!

by The Solicitor Tue Jul 22, 2008 21:52

Never ever ever ever buy from the plans!

Once you sign a contract to buy a property, THAT'S IT !

You no longer can opt out and just loose your deposit. If you try to, the other party in the contract is perfectly entitled to sue you for breach of contract. That's what developers are now doing in Ireland as property prices plummet and buyers (facing negative equity) try and opt out.

How the buyer pays for the property is the buyers problem. The salesman doesn't give a dam if you have to sell everything you own and then go to the knee-breakers for the rest. They just know that you signed on the dotted line.

So my friends beware. Property is not a good investment and this will be the case for another 7 or 8 years.

by michael bradshaw - member of the re-public Tue Jul 22, 2008 05:25 survivor at live dot ie

Good Gosh.
Greystones, Co Wicklow is in the process of developing a harbour be gorra.
Suppose that will give the 'upper class' the green light to go walkies on the
local peoples backs, already aching from caddying the upper class's golf
bag's, and doing the odd bit o'gardening over the past 30 years or so.
Greystones it may be, Malahide Marina it shall Never become.
And never the twain shall meet.
Michael xxx

by The Economist Mon Jul 21, 2008 22:21

The property market is in freefall - especially apartment blocks (slums of the future).

Be sensible lads and keep your money and don't squander it on shoe box apartments.

Free advice - Never ever ever ever buy off the plans...........

by Realtor Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:08

HOK Residential have a pre enquiry list of over 500 people. Give them a call and you could go on a waiting list. I also am led to believe the marina is full and there is also a waiting list there. Thank God I booked my apartment and berth early.

by Elaine Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:06

Folks,

Moving back to Greystones because of the new harbour and the potential with the clubs for my children.

I have been following it on www.greystonesharbour.ie.

Does anyone know how I could register my interest in an apartment?

Please help as I don't want to lose out.

Elaine

by 99's Fri Jul 18, 2008 09:57

Folks,

Looking forward to our new harbour - I have booked an apartment and no negative talk is going to stop me from buying in tis beautiful restored new harbour.

It will be hard to get an apartment - but with the new marina there - a great opportunity to get in.

Progress is great -

Can't wait.

by The Economist Thu Jul 17, 2008 23:12

Sorry lads but I am the bringer of some very bad news.

The Irish property bubble has burst and Irish property prices are in steep freefall. Experts now believe the correction could be as much as a 60% reduction. Developers are shutting up shop on any new developments as bank funding dries up.

Two essential features of the type of property bubble we are now in is that they are symmetrical in time and symmetrical on price –
(1)However long it took to create the bubble is roughly the amount of time it takes to unwind the bubble and
(2) Prices usually get fully retraced if not a bit more.

Based on a correction of 251% back to the pre boom 1997 prices the potential Irish property price reductions over the next 10 years could be as follows:

From peak price of €2.5 million down to €1 million
From peak price of €1 million down to €400k
From peak price of €750K down to €300k
From peak price of €500K down to €200k
From peak price of €300K down to €120K

With projected values like these this is very bad news indeed for Wicklow County Council and Sispar as the Greystones harbour development no longer makes any financial sense.

by harbour user Wed Jul 16, 2008 15:42

Well said Patrick. Great to read positive comments. Roll on the community harbour!

by Patrick Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:41

Typical GPDA rhetoric !!!

Many names were harvested for the GPDA 'no' campaign from Charlesland.

Now we are being used as a scapegoat as to why this harbour shouldn't go ahead.

I am sorry if some people think that where I live is a slum !! I love it!

And I will love our new harbour.

Long after the harbour is built we will have to listen to these arseholes who don't and didn't want our community harbour.

But hey - Isn't the progress great - well on track.

I believe the clubs are in advanced negotiations with the developers and are happy with the way that things are moving.

Both piers are about to come above water and then we can really see the progress being made.

Preparatory works are being started to facilitate the building of the clubhouses - which is great.

All monitoring of dust, noise and vibration is on-going and there is a great air of anticipation about the new harbour. the next couple of months will see great strides made on the piers.

The temporary slip is working really well between the clubs with everyone being accomodated and a great understanding between all the harbour users - so well done to all the clubs !!

And as the summer moves on many will begin to see the fruits of their labour - the harbour taking shape. I believe the clubhouses are still on track for starting construction in november - they must be really thrilled.

I launched on the slip last night and it is working well. Several other boats there but all working well.
Channel out of harbour a great asset.

So roll on some more summer days and our new harbour.

Patrick

by Slum dweller Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:11

Is Malahide Marina Village a slum? Is Kinsale a slum? Is Crosshaven a slum? Get a life so called property player - more like GPDA Muppet!

by Property Player Tue Jul 15, 2008 17:54

As a QS who has been a property player all my life I predict that the apartments of today will be the slums of the future.

Irish people never have and never will like living in family unfriendly apartments, and the apartment’s standards of construction are so poor with terrible sound insulation.

With the collapse of the Irish property market apartments are now even more unattractive and there are currently hugh stock of apartments that are just not selling.

by Realtor Sat Jul 12, 2008 13:07

I work in the busines and I've been reliably informed HOK Residential have had over 500 pre booking enquiries for the harbour apartments in Greystones and they are very confident in selling the scheme off plan.

by phat cat Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:22

ignore it lads. The begrudgery wont stop. Please dont respond to it.

by Former property developer Fri Jul 11, 2008 20:52

I saw the writing on the wall and got out before the bubble burst. Lucky me!

It has dawned on me for some time that people who must borrow to buy property are not wealthy. At what point in the recent past did we confuse debt with wealth? Seriously, when did this happen? We now have people who are half a million euros in debt describing themselves as "asset rich and cash poor". But a pin lies in wait for every bubble. And when the two eventually met, a new wave of investors learn some very old lessons.

As there is no more access to easy cheap bank funding who exactly do they expect to purchase these overpriced inappropriately located flood buckets?

About the only way this crazy development is going to make money is if they strike oil when the start the foundations.

by M.M. Fri Jul 11, 2008 18:53

This white elephant of a development will be a joke throughout the land.

....... but the joke will be on us, the people living in the greater Greystones area, while those greedy speculators, "developers" and their political pimps on Wicklow County Council give us the two fingers salute..

by Greystones resident Fri Jul 11, 2008 17:20

I fully concur with the views of Graham McMahon.

This white elephant of a development will be a joke throughout the land.

by GPDA - Greystones Protection and Development Associationj Fri Jul 11, 2008 13:57

We, the leadership of the GPDA, wish to apologise to the people of Greystones for misleading them on Greystones Harbour. In particular we would like to say sorry to Greystones Ridge Angling Club, Greystones Sea Scouts, Greystones Rowing Club and The Wicklow Aquanauts for trying to deny them the facilities they deservedly need. We now recognise that facilities are needed at Greystones Harbour and the only way to get them is through this PPP process. We wish all these clubs well in their new premises.

The Leadership GPDA

by Local Lad Fri Jul 11, 2008 13:47

Hi Lads, great to see so many positive things happening at Greystones Harbour. It must kill the begrudgers like Graham. Keep up the good work everybody it will be well worth it. Let the runners in run out and good riddance!

by Patrick Fri Jul 11, 2008 09:30

Sorry folks,

Headed off for a few days. Went over to UK - spent some time on a marina there on south coast.

Had a ball - anyway - enough about me !!

Used slip in harbour last night - I have to say it is working out very well. Good that there is some extra room at the bottom - handy for coming in and recovering onto the trailer.

God - Sispar are flying - even in a week or so you can see the difference over on the east pier. progress is moving swiftly which is great. Walked the dogs up to the top of the site and the blocks are really moving now. Spoke to a worker there who explained that the steps, walls etc. are precast into the blocks which will look great. I guess they will really be making use of the 'summer' weather to drive the piers on.

Saw the rowing club lads out - great to see the kids out enjoying themselves. The channel is handy also for entry in and out of the harbour.

Well keep up the good work - it is certainly a goal to achieve for the people of Greystones. I can't wait but then I love the idea of a community harbour there with so many club options for the kids.

Isn't it fascinating how just the building of the temporary groin gives such shelter in behind it on a NE or a SE wind. I am really looking forward to having a spot for my boat - I hope I can get into the marina.

Anyways - might head off for a sail on saturday - must check the WX.

Have a good weekend,

Patrick

by Graham Mc Mahon Thu Jul 10, 2008 23:18

Will the Wicklow County Council/Sisk/Park Developments marina complex at Greystones come to be known as Wicklow’s Folly?

The development which started work earlier this year was expected to command high asking prices and was looking to attract the cream of the crop of purchasers.

Of course the development was conceived in the heady days of the 2005/2006 property bubble when the boom was ..em.... 'booming'

My how things change in just two short years. Now that nothing in certain in the property market the only guarantee that the developers have is that they will get plenty of tyre kickers eager to see the view from the apartments whenever it launches. But how many of these will convert into signed up purchasers?

I envisage that they will not have many takers unless prices are reasonable. Figures of a million Euro are being spoken of for an apartment on the upper floors of the complex. Is that realistic in these more recessionary times?

Perhaps the Greystones marina development may come to be known as Wicklow's Folly - a large oversized development but for the most part uninhabited. Still they could possibly use the apartments as a refuge for the unfortunate young families who have had their homes repossessed?

Maybe Sisks/Park Developments will lose their shirt on this – breakwaters and land reclamation don't come cheap.

by local resident Thu Jul 10, 2008 20:47

I have a nine year old daughter who joined the rowing club two weeks ago, she has had the time of her life doing kayaking. WELL DONE Greystones Rowing Club.

by Harbour Driver Wed Jul 09, 2008 15:34

I was working on site last week and heard the abuse by one sailor . He was a large guy and middle aged 40 plus maybe. But he was with a larger group and also used his finger to make a gesture.

by Fisherman Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:16

I dont like to say but they were part of a larger group sailing on a Wednesday night. Put 2 and 2 together.

by Patrick Tue Jul 08, 2008 09:27

Were these members of the Greystones Sailing Club?

by Fisherman Tue Jul 08, 2008 09:22

I was on the slip last Wednesday at about 7pm and heard 2 sailors giving mouthfuls to a driver of a pick-up jeep with Lagan written on the side of it. I think the jeep driver asked them to clear a path for him and next thing "f*** off, you f****** pr***." Not the mouthful you would expect from sailors.

by harbour user Tue Jul 08, 2008 08:34

Was anyone on the slip last Wednesday evening? Did anyone witness the abuse of Sisk staff by some sailors? Apparently Sisk were trying to retrieve their safety boat while some sailors were launching and next thing mouthfuls of expletives were fired at them by sailors. Has anybody got some input into this? Is this another case of some sailors thinking they own the place or are they still just peeved at the construction starting? I cant wait to see them in their new building with all their neighbours!

by phat cat Tue Jul 08, 2008 08:23

Lads, I beg of you, please dont respond to Gavin/Gabriel anymore. He is the type of person responsible for talking Ireland into recession. He has absolutley nothing to offer Irish society and from now on should be ignored on this forum. Please, lads, send him to Coventry!

by Gabriel Mon Jul 07, 2008 22:50

The Sispar Greystones harbour high rise development looks like it will be a financial disaster for John Sisk & Co and Park Developments. Their financial justification for this speculative development was based on extrapolating the rise in house prices into the future. They foolishly assumed that house prices would continue to rise and they ignored the property bubble. Well lads the housing property bubble has well and truly burst and we are now facing price drops of up to 70%! Some people assumed that house prices always increase and it is now beginning to dawn on them that they were wrong. It is unwise to buy in a falling market as negative equity will soon kick in. Buying in such a market is like fixing a ball and chain around one's ankles and becoming a 'slave' to the property.

Historically when a property bubble bursts it takes around 10-15 years for prices to stabilize and they generally stabilize a good 40% from the peak. In Japan prices fell by 70%. Germany had a massive boom after re-unification and has slowly slid ever since.

The biggest difficulty, apart from a housing market that is oversupplied and facing ever increasing mortgage rates, is the fact that the banking system will not lend anything like the multiples they have been lending for the last few years for a very long time, if ever again. Their balance sheets will not allow them to even if they wanted to.

The surreptitious marketing psychology of the vested interests in the Irish property is now revealed for all to see. The emperor has no clothes! It will be a very long time before that perception changes. Property prices will continue to fall until the developers drop their inflated prices to make them affordable.

Already another developer has struggled with regard to the proposed La Touche Hotel site in Greystones. AIB bank recently appointed a receiver to a number of companies which were formed on a joint venture basis by Tom and Paul Hayden with Bennett Construction to develop the 2.2-acre site.

So what does all this mean for the Sispar Greystones harbour high rise development? Only time will tell but the prospects of a long term building site on the harbour well in excess of ten years is now a real possibility.

by harbour user Mon Jul 07, 2008 17:09

What is Gabriel/Gavin (they are the same person) going on about. Those houses were not located where he said. And if that was the case how come the Sailing Club building is still there? It was built in 1967. It just goes to show that any lie will do. Anybody from this town would know that the water hasn't risen 1 inch but then again most of these objectors are not from this town are they?

by Boat User Mon Jul 07, 2008 15:26

I argree there is no problem with rising water if the water were to rise to high the ol dock would start to fill. so i dont see any problem with rising water........

by Harbour User Mon Jul 07, 2008 14:13

I used to swim in Greystones a lot in the 60's and 70's and the high water mark is still exactly the same on the Kish base and the pier. Funny enough the harbour then had more water and the Dock used to fill. Surely this fact puts the "water rising" argument to bed.

by M.M. Mon Jul 07, 2008 13:33

"Gabriel, put whatever GPDA crap you like up on this forum - the truth is its happening - and you better get to like it because its going to be there in 2 short years and it is certainly going to outlive both of us!"

Dear James Joyce, I have no doubt whatsoever that the structures will outlive all of us, but in a few years time, and we are all going to see it happening, they will be located under water because the water level is constantly rising. Modern construction technology may be able to protect the structures from storm floods , but nothing can be done from stopping the water level rising. And that's a fact.

by Patrick Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:30

Ah James,

Don't go !!! we all know who Gavin / Gabriel is - but sure isn't it entertaining at best !

It is of course a futile argument they make because they don't want it to happen - we are all aware of that. They will move on to the next thing and be negative there so while they are here then I think we should enjoy them.

I will certainly be interested in an apartment there - and my kids can join the Greystones Motor Yacht Club and the Rowing Club - it should be great.

I once saw a list of reasons why Euro Disney shouldn't be built - some were very similar to the GPDA list of reasons mmmmmmmmmmmmm............................

But look at it now - fantastic for the kids.

So keep the chin up James - the positives have won and we will have our new community harbour.

Patrick

by james Mon Jul 07, 2008 09:49

Alas, its time to hang up my pen. The negativity of some people is too much to bear. Instead of contributing to this forum anymore I am going to spend my time looking through the round window - gloating!

by James Joyce Sun Jul 06, 2008 22:37

Gabriel, put whatever GPDA crap you like up on this forum - the truth is its happening - and you better get to like it because its going to be there in 2 short years and it is certainly going to outlive both of us!

by James Joyce Sun Jul 06, 2008 22:37

Gabriel, put whatever GPDA crap you like up on this forum - the truth is its happening - and you better get to like it because its going to be there in 2 short years and it is certainly going to outlive both of us!

by Gabriel Sun Jul 06, 2008 21:31

The doomed cottages in question were in fact not built on the beach without a foundation as disingenuously claimed by James Joyce. They were in fact set back away from the beach being located near the current position of the Greystones Sailing Club and were “protected” by a concrete sea wall. This can be seen from the photo taken before they were washed away by the sea. However they were still destroyed by a major storm event. The council houses between the railway and the cinema, and at Blacklion were built to replace them. During this storm the pier was also badly damaged.

Seas levels have risen since 1930 and are continuing to rise. The frequency and severity of extreme storm events are on the increase.

The planned new Sispar buildings are to be built in front of the site where these cottages were washed away by the sea.

by James Joyce Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:25

80 years ago, no protection, no piers, poor construction, most already abandoned, no maintenance, built on a beach without proper foundation - do I need to go on Gabriel?

by Gavin Sun Jul 06, 2008 01:06

In January 1930 waves of 40 feet high destroyed cottages on the north beach Greystones.

The risk of a similar storm event happening in the forseeable future is increasing as climate change take hold.

It is irresponsible for Wicklow County Council to allow the building of residential dwellings in an position even more out to sea than these cottages were.

Washed away cottages

Newspaper report of tidal wave

by James Joyce Sun Jul 06, 2008 00:18

Well done Gabriel, you're really digging deep now. What's next for this this forum the economics of the Figi Islands maybe?

by Gabriel Sat Jul 05, 2008 20:32

This chart records the traumatic property experience of Japan. A monumental boom in the late 1980s and early 1990s reversed dramatically and house prices fell by 76.4pc from the peak.

by James Joyce Sat Jul 05, 2008 09:21

Is this the same (and only) economist that endorsed the failed Cawley election campaign. I had the pleasure in visiting Malahide Marina Village yesterday and noted not one apartment was for sale. That is a clear indication that if you build in a sought after area coupled with excellent facilities people will want to live there. The Economist you mentioned is known in the business as a prophet of doom and I suspect you are too Gabriel

by Gabriel Sat Jul 05, 2008 00:30

There are major rumblings that a Galway developer has gone bust, owing €313 million to the banks.

This could be the start of the expected fall in property prices (70% drop per David McWilliams)

The economic rationale of Sisk and Park in their speculative PPP with Wicklow County Council is now starting to look very suspect.

by James Joyce Fri Jul 04, 2008 18:20

Gavin is so despondent he even cancelled Christmas. Thankfully not everybody is such a negative. The glass is half empty is Gavin's world.

by harbour user Fri Jul 04, 2008 18:16

Micheal uses the term "high rise" alot. The new buildings at the harbour are 3 storey and no higher than Bayswater Tce. There are currently lots of 3 storey buildings in this area, some constructed by opponents of this plan. Public access is being enhanced in this development i.e. 11 acre heritage park instead of disused dump and football pitch, new sandy beach instead of stoney inaccessible one, parking for 1,000 cars so people can access all areas, improvements to Cliff Walk to make it more user friendly and not to mention a PUBLIC boardwalk for all to enjoy. Please, Micheal, look at the plan and stop reading GPDA LIES.

by Gavin Fri Jul 04, 2008 13:40

Patrick

I am sorry to inform you but there is no Santa so you need not worry about him and the melting ice at the north pole.

A recent article advises that scientists are warning that there may be no ice at North Pole this summer. For the first time in human history, ice is on course to disappear entirely from the North Pole this year.

The polar regions are experiencing the most dramatic increase in average temperatures due to global warming and scientists fear that as more sea ice is lost, the darker, open ocean will absorb more heat and raise local temperatures even further.

As the extent of the sea level rises in coming years becomes apparent it would seem prudent to a reasonable man that building structures on the shoreline should not be allowed. Planning authorities such as Wicklow County Council should listen to the experts. Approval for the building of residential apartments at Greystones harbour may be very costly indeed in the long term as expensive attempts are made to protect these ultimately doomed structures from the sea. In the end the sea will win and the apartments will have to be abandoned.

Gavin

Polar ice

by Boat User Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:49

There making good progress on the harbour now! Great Job Sispar! Yer nearly there!!!!

by M.M. Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:44

Areas where there used to be full public access and where we all enjoyed the right to ramble up to a few months ago will soon be occupied by private (high-rise) dwellings, curtailing public access severely. That's my point.

by Harbour User Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:32

Alas Micheal you are a victim of GPDA propaganda with language like "high rise" and "public access"

by M.M. Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:24

As`stated previously, nobody in his/her right mind has a problem with the restoration of the old harbou,r providing better accomodation for the clubs, and adding some landscaping touches to the general area.. But what most objectors are against, including myself, are the high-rise modern apartment buildings that will be put on the north beach. These structures don't suit the character of Greystones and restrict full public access to the area.

by Harbour User Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:12

The first block was visible at low water last night - another milestone passed! Over 40 blocks are now in place behind the old pier. All the clubs have been issued detailed drawings of their premises. We're getting there lads.

by Patrick Fri Jul 04, 2008 09:38

Gavin,

If we all went by your mentality we would all be speaking dutch here - because there would be no-one in Holland !!! But they seem to have mastered it !

Again, after all the discussions the people who count made the decision that this is a correct project to undertake. Thankfully those of us looking forward to our new harbour outnumber those who believe that because the north pole is melting that this project is doomed.

I would suggest Gavin, that with this info which you have, you scare monger the 1000's of homes around our coast that their homes will be worth nothing !! I would imagine that you will get the same answer back - WOULD YOU EVER ?...........................

Again, it is always an indication of how solid an argument is by the points you make to prove your angle. And typical of the 'no's' we have gone from cancer from concrete, to now the melting of the north pole as to why our community should not have a new harbour.

I have never been surprised at how low the GPDA has stooped, but I would be surprised if the next argument used against our harbour was even more pathetic than the North Pole. I suggest that we contact all the children in the world and tell them that Santa won't be coming down the chimney this year because in trying to stop the harbour the objectors have melted the north pole !!!!!!!!!!

It is entertaining though - I grant you that.

I believe the first block will rise out of the sea next week - should be good.

Patrick

by James Joyce Fri Jul 04, 2008 08:50

Gavin please answer this: John Sisk and Son are the largest civil engineering contractors on this island. Park Developments are the largest home builder here. Between them they have a contract to deliver and manage Greystones Harbour for 30 years. The marine engineering sector is designed to last for 100 years. All homes/apartments will have Homebond guarantee. Do you think for one minute that they would ignore expert advice and gamble with €300 million of their own money? Get off your doomsday stool and try and contribute something positive!

by Gavin Thu Jul 03, 2008 22:41

There appears to be some confusion as to my professional credentials. As already stated I am an insurance expert who specialises in understanding the impending impacts of climate change on the risk profile of the insurance industry.

In the book version of An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore shows illustrations of various urban areas under water and big parts of choice coastal real estate disappearing into the sea. These are projections of what could happen if the polar ice caps melt and produce a twenty-foot sea-level rise. These scenarios are dramatic; they get our attention; they help people understand the issues. But we don’t know how to relate such apocalyptic visions to current problems. We imagine the environment as something that changes very slowly, if at all, and are confident that modern engineering can solve just about any problem. However this is a mistaken trust. Sea levels will rise faster in our lifetimes than they have since before the first cities were built. This will be an extremely significant challenge that coastal communities all around the Irish coastline will have to confront over the next fifty years.

Dr John Sweeney admitted on the Mat Cooper show this evening that the North Pole could be soon free of ice thereby exposing the land based Greenland ice sheets to warm water which could result in a collapse of these land based ice sheets. If this happens global sea levels would rise quickly and dramatically.

Shoreline structures such as that being built at Greystones would therefore appear to have a very short depreciable life in the light of the real risk of an impending climate change induced catastrophic inundation from the sea.

Already up and down the Eastern Seaboard of the USA, hundreds of thousands of policyholders are being dropped by their insurers; many more have been hit with double-, even triple-digit increases in premiums and deductibles. This precautionary approach by insurers will result in increasing numbers of uninsurable properties located in high flood risk areas across the world. Talk about negative equity? What we are talking about here is zero equity were once valuable properties built on the shoreline become effectively unsalable and worthless.

by Patrick Thu Jul 03, 2008 15:30

Yes I agree - but then the people who failed in their attempt to deliver no harbour and one seat in the Dail always did their business with slant i.e.

...... rumour has it.........
........ a source said .........
..........like many others ...........
............the people of Greystones ........
.............it is understood ......
...............an expert said ...............

Jaysus - Monty Python would do a great sketch of how to tell lies without actually telling them !!!!!
And they could certainly use a few tips from these people.

well done lads - if nothing else I find this very entertaining. The harbour is alive and well !!

Patrick

by James Joyce Wed Jul 02, 2008 23:42

If you pay enough, like the GPDA did, the experts would say anything you'd want them to say. As I said before get over yourself, Gavin, its happening.

by Gavin Wed Jul 02, 2008 21:16

As M. M. quite rightly pointed out not all objectors to the "development" are/were members of the GPDA or indeed the sailing club. Like many others I am very concerned about the development currently being built at Greystones harbour.

In 2007 the IPCC report laid out an array of climate projections for the coming decades. Of these, two were portrayed with greatest certainty – the earth will continue to warm due to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions and, as a result, sea levels will carry on rising by up to 1.5m by the end of this century. Observations show that sea levels are already rising faster than the climate models predict.

Traditional catastrophe risk management focuses on storm surges as a cause of flood, rather than sea level rise as such. Future sea level rise will elevate the height of surges. Combined with the possibility of more intense storms coastal flood exposures will rise.

Unfortunately the risk of flooding for the dwellings to be built at Greystones harbour is a real concern for those knowledgeable in the area of coastal engineering.

Coastal engineering expert, Clon Ulrick, admitted during the oral hearing that the north and south breakwaters will be prone to severe wave overtopping during extreme storms. He also accepted that the area on the south side of the harbour for the car parks and boat storage will be subject to wave run up.
Indeed the Department of the Marine in their submission to An Bord Pleanala raised very serious concerns as to the suitability of the design of the proposed harbour breakwaters which they felt were not high enough to prevent severe wave overtopping.

Some people may bury their heads in the sand and hope that we do not experience the extreme weather conditions that will again wreak havoc at the Greystones harbour area. However the frequency and intensity of extreme weather conditions are on the increase.

by James Joyce Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:51

They have had their day in the sun and reality is the club buildings are being constructed in a few weeks. The GPDA/Sailing Club have new neighbours - much to their disgust. They may start making friends with them or else it will be a very lonely corner of the harbour for them. Plans for the clubhouses have to be approved by July 9th and they look swell. We must have a get together for laying the foundation stone!

by Patrick Wed Jul 02, 2008 09:58

99's,

Well said.

Also MM - if Ms Cawley was a well-meaning person why did very few people think like you do. If she was that well meaning then more would have voted for her.

From my angle - she delayed the building of a safe harbour for my childred and helped to deny them acces to community clubs which were struggling in poor conditions.

I suggest you buy an oxford dictionary - look up the word 'democracy' and then think through what you are saying.

The GPDA put up on it's website a list of 'growing' ( Ha Ha ) candidates for the election - and said that they were supporting the 'anti' harbour. Now, MM, unless we all live in some dictator state I would ask you to tell me which of these supporters of the GPDA are now sitting TD's.

I will agree with one thing you say - the GPDA are a front for the Labour Party - and is probably the reason why so many didn't vote to their thinking. But apart from their political allegiances the main reason people didn't vote for their endorsed candidates was they manner in which they conducted their campaign to get their signatures. I'll say no more.

So if I was one of these candidates I would seriously ask questions as to the wisdom of being endorsed by an organisation which alienated so many people from the very ones who neede their votes!!!

Priceless - well done GPDA

Even Liz McManus struggled to get across the line. She surprised me because I would have given her credit for seeing a lemon! I'd say she went back to the GPDA and asked a few direct questions.

Maybe.... just maybe .... ths so-called vote from the anti-harbour .... just wasn't there ...mmmmm..............EMBARASSING .....

The only, and I mean only, good thing to come out of the election was the diluting of the vote for the other two women by Ms DeBurca .... now we couldn't have planned that better ourselves. So while I used to be mega pissed off about the Bray Greens coming out ot our town telling us why we can't have a harbour - it turned out to be a god send - so thank you Ms DeBurca.

Again - people must realise - we live in a democracy where 10% of the people of greystones objected to the harbour ( and they are of course entitled to their view ) - but the good of the 90% will live on.

Good morning.

by 99's Wed Jul 02, 2008 09:35

M.M,.

People of your thinking come and go!! But it still moves on and thank god.

Re the pier - wouldn't the sailing club/GPDA love if there were issues - wouldn't they just love it.

But hey ---- THERE ARE NONE --- and any they make will be treated with the contempt they deserve.

Re the pier - if you knew what was going on you would be aware that suitable rock armour is being placed beyond the pier to absorb big waves which will allow them to dissipate without overtopping.

But then if I was in the GPDA/Sailing Club then I would probably use the same scaremongering which you are using to justify my arguments that it should not be built.

But - Hey -- Smell the roses !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Long live the common good.

But we need some headers - they can be very entertaining.

Go the community harbour !

by James Joyce Wed Jul 02, 2008 09:01

Are the sailing club throwing more sticks in the fire. No other club has an insurance issue. Scaremongoring has to stop. No insurance company would refuse cover on a building not built. I suspect Gavin is a GPDA/Sailing Club member! Get over yourself, Gavin, its going ahead with or without the sailing club.

by M.M. Tue Jul 01, 2008 23:09

Not all objectors to the "development" are/were members of the GPDA. I have always been and will always remain an objector to this insane project, but I never joined the GPDA because they are a front for the Labour party. As to Ms. Cawley, the independent politician linked to the GPDA. She is a well-meaning lady, but lacking the strenghts to put up a prolonged fight against the FF and FG mafia that's running Greystones and is selling our town as scrap to the developers.

by Gavin Tue Jul 01, 2008 21:59

My professional view is that insurance will be appropriately priced to account for the flood risk associated with any structures in the new Greystones harbour development. I understand that the local sailing club have been informed that they may be unable to obtain any insurance due to the risk of flooding.

The Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study (2005) recommendation regarding criteria for flooding related to sea level rise is to use a 200 year criterion on the basis that flooding from the sea tends to be catastrophic as was the case when the Greystones cottages were destroyed by the sea in 1929. It would appear that this recommendation has not been complied with in the case of the Greystones development.

Indeed I understand that the engineering design of the crest height of the new Greystones breakwaters has been constrained by “the Variation to the County Development Plan to a level of only +6.5mOD”. The east pier of Dun Laoghaire harbour which is subject to wave overtopping is significantly higher than this. It would seem unwise that something as fundamental as the height of the breakwaters did not follow from sound marine engineering logic.

There is therefore a real risk to any structures on this seafront considering the maritime history of the Greystones North Beach area as correctly eluded to by James Joyce in his earlier posting.

by Shikaka Tue Jul 01, 2008 17:01

Helo - I lern england

I luv harbur - i brng mi jildrin to the beech.

pleez huri up with harbur - it a grtate idea - i luv graystones

why did GAPD not want it - it grate fur us - i luv wickloe

i luv watur - will dun to the bilder - peers will luk grate

y did thay objekt - will be butaful.

I lern england

by James Joyce Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:53

I will try and answer Elaines questions as best I can.
1. Yes they are only concerned about the Harbour as put to them when questioned about other large planning applications in the town, they shrugged their shoulders
2. The sailing club objected on many grounds and The Coast Guard building was one - but even at present they dont have panoramic views. The sailing club objected because the chairman of the GPDA is a trustee of the sailing club - plain and simple, also no other club, marine body or statuatory body objected. This course of action has totally alienated the sailing club and that is a problem they must deal with going forward.

by Derek Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:34

Folks,

I am interested in joining the Concerned Residents Action Committee - however I would need an undertaking that the GPDA are not involved.

I am so disgusted with the way they conducted their campaign that I could not possibly join an organisation which was allied to them

michael - can you confirm that this is the case?

Derek

by Elaine Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:22

Folks,

While I agree with all that has been said and also concur that many who supported the GPDA are wondering why they have nothing to do with anything else in the town.

2 Questions,

1. Is it the case that they are concerned with the harbour only?

2. Is it the case that the sailing club in their submission objected on the grounds that the coast guard station was effecting their view to the north ?

Could anyone please answer this for me as I am new to the town but it came up in a converstion.

Thanks,

Elaine

by Patrick Tue Jul 01, 2008 16:14

J.J. - well put. Certainly it is coming to light that people who were taken in by the GPDA lies are annoyed that it happened and that they were fooled.

From being around I notice many eye-brows going up to heaven and quickly followed by

'' That's not what we were told !! ''

When people bothered to make their own minds up rather than being led like sheep they must have been fairly sick that they were used for the purpose of electioneering !!

And to think back on 'Victorian day' - Jaysus what a joke. I note it is not up on Senator Norris's web site - I wonder why.

Still - the thought that they must still have to pump out the same old rubbish is very entertaining for me - nothing new then lads !!!!!!!!!

by James Joyce Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:39

Now were getting to the nuts and bolts of it. Patrick has mentioned this earlier - 2 people with their own political agendas caused all this consternation. Both of whom are mentioned in this forum and one has contributed to it. They stirred an argument to suit their own agendas and have now walked away. The last posting on the GPDA website was last August! The Independent Candidate has not been seen or heard since the election. I'd guess people who fell for their propaganda now, quite rightly, feel betrayed and abandoned. Its a classic case of starting an argument and not finishing it. Some points listed below to belie GPDA myths:
1. Concrete causes cancer - lie of the century.
2. Dust will be unbearable - all levels beneath international best standards
3. Vibrations will damage property - no vibration detected above international accepted norms.
4. Noise levels will be high - no noise levels above industry norms.
5 Traffic chaos will ensue - no disruption whatsoever to traffic in the town.
6. Marina will be white elephant - marina will be oversubscribed by 100% on day one.
7. Harbour will be private and elitist - Community Harbour with 5 club facilities and Coast Guard Station. Local fishermen also catered for. Harbour master to be appointed for 30 year term approved by Local Authority.
8. Beach Nourishment will be detrimental - 30,000 cubes already in place protecting the cliffs as far as Gap Bridge.
9. North Beach Privatised - New sandy beach with good access and parking being built.
10. Cliff Walk will close - Cliff Walk enhanced and widened and dangerous cliffs secured. The cliff walk did not close for even one day.

I could continue for another 20 points but just couldn't be bothered

LIES, LIES AND MORE DAMN LIES - that's what we were subjected to!

by 99's Tue Jul 01, 2008 09:18

Gavin,

While I, like JJ, don't doubt your credentials I also believe that global warming and our harbour are both victims of scare-mongering. However certainly our harbour was targeted in such a way as i have never seen before in our town - ( Alas I am a citizen of Greystones for 42 years !)

It is extremely regrettable that only 2 or 3 individuals stopped our community harbour for their own agenda - have no doubt about that. If it were not for them we would be in our new harbour now - enjoying it.

My problem also is that Ireland has become a country where the hidden agendas of these people are weighted more than the good of the common people. I agree that once upon a time it was too loose re building etc however we have gone too far.

I note that the language and arguments used in the recent decision at Cork harbour by the 'no' people is the exact same as the GPDA lines we were all fed. I am wondering is there a school where you can go to be qualified in this sort of nonsense. Perhaps the 'OUI' - Objectors University of Ireland !!

Because God knows some of them are brilliant at it!! and do you know what makes me laugh - I see these people around and thay don't care less about you or I - only their names in the paper, on the radio or holding a rally - what a joke. We used to hear about the rugby club packed with the objectors!!

Of course thay all had their own seat there !!

So let there be no doubt - they have done, and will continue to clutch at any straw to state why this is wrong. But the news is --- this is SO RIGHT!!

Those of us who know who these people are have, and will continue to, see through their agendas.

Roll on the harbour to the benefit of most of us and to the annoyance of a few "!!"

by James Joyce Mon Jun 30, 2008 22:43

I do not doubt your credentials, Gavin, but can only persume that you too are a victim of GPDA propaganda. Greystones Harbour never ever flooded - fact! Your insurance records will confirm this. Houses built on a beach were destroyed by a freak storm in 1932 not floods. Did your underwriter friends refuse insurance to the people of London prior to the Thames Barrier - I doubt it. If you want to add something positive please engage in fact and not GPDA organised innuendo.

by Gavin Mon Jun 30, 2008 21:35

Having worked with Lloyds of London for a number of years I was involved in a project examining to the impacts of climate change with regard to the insurance industry. A significant conclusion from our study was that climate change induced negative equity will be a major problem in the future. Sea levels are rising and the frequency and severity of major storm evens are on the increase. The shorelines of today will bear little resemblance to the shorelines of 20 to 30 years from now particularly in soft shoreline areas.

Throughout Europe structures have been constructed in flood prone areas such as on the flood plains of rivers and on low lying coastal shorelines.

The new development at Greystones harbour will obviously be in a high flood risk area. The breakwaters may not be high enough to prevent wave overtopping in extreme weather conditions and low lying structures beside these breakwaters will therefore be at risk from inundation from the sea.

As an insurance expert I would strongly caution against purchasing any structure in a flood prone area which in all likelihood will at some stage become uninsurable.

by James Joyce Mon Jun 30, 2008 20:33

Okay guys cool it a bit. Remember the Harbour is under construction and there is nothing the GPDA can do about it. We dont have to worry about them anymore - we won! Lets not rub their noses in it - we dont have to go to that level. Keep this forum clean and lets get on with welcoming our new community harbour.

by Phat Cat Mon Jun 30, 2008 17:03

I agree, lets get a campaign going to convict the GPDA of deception. We can have a Victorian Day at the harbour and have The Stocks there and we can all wear period costume and have Peelers bring the Convicts onto the Stocks - it will be great! - As a matter of fact we could get the Jeannie Johnstone Famine Ship to drop by. After all that's what Queen Victoria did for us - starved us and put us on famine ships to Australia and America!

by Hobby Horse Mon Jun 30, 2008 14:32

Yes lets get a campaign going. We can convict the leadership of the GPDA of lies and on the hottest Sunday of the year we can put Cawley and Etchingham in stocks at the harbour and the whole town can throw eggs at them. Bring it on. I want the first egg!

by James Joyce Mon Jun 30, 2008 13:40

I am afraid, Patrick, it is true. Most people on this committee were very disappointed to hear the negatives were joining the committee. For the first 3 meetings they disrupted as much as they could and then positive people started standing up to them. Once this happened their representative resigned. You see the GPDA cant handle been confronted on their lies so they run away to the nearest hole and dive for cover. At the next meeting they sent down a local councillor who was an anti campaigner but realises the positive people are in control of the group. The worst whinging comes from a group called Historic Rathdown. They have nothing to offer and just whine the whole time. Thankfully most on the committee can see through them and they don't get very far.

by Patrick Mon Jun 30, 2008 13:27

Absolutely,

Now we are talking about the crux of this.

The lies and the nonsense put about by such anti-harbour org's.

Are they accountable to any-one - NO.

Do they care now - NO

Can they stand over what they say - NO.

However I believe that the GPDA has a representative on the harbour liaison committee - somebody tell me it isn't so !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Patrick

by Phat Cat Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:43

Well done James for giving M.M. a good lesson in history. Its the same old story from the opponents of our harbour. They just wont wake up and smell the coffee! The GPDA have planted a seed of deception in peoples minds and must accept responsibility for their actions. Lets start a campaign to force the GPDA to admit they lied to people and get them to publicly apologise to the people of Greystones for the error in their ways.

by 99's Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:04

Folks - same old lies from the objectors - so long as we all see through this we will get to where we need to be.

Roll on the community harbour

by James Joyce Mon Jun 30, 2008 09:11

Once again the opponents are blind to the facts on the ground. Two concrete breakwaters are being constructed at a cost of €30 million to protect the harbour, marina and apartments. These walls are made from the most modern materials and the best engineering science available. They have extra height above chart datum to ensure a storm of the 1932 calibre does not breach. I know about the storm of 1932 because my great grandparents lived there and those houses were made of beach sand mortar mix and built on the beach with no protection. Greystones Harbour has never flooded - the problem is North Easterly storms of a force 12 nature during a spring tide - a once in a hundred year event. Our new harbour has been labortory tested in Denmark to ensure this type of freak storm does not breach the walls. Once again guys facts are available if you really want to show an interest. Just another clarification for Gabriel. The old Local Authority Landfill on the North Beach was closed and capped in 1976. Numerous trail holes found no hazardous substances or anything that might be a threat. James Carroll (Inspector - An Bord Pleanala) made several recommendations about this part of the site. NO apartments are being constructed on it and in fact it is going to be part of our new 11 acre Community Heritage Park. I am aware of these facts because unlike some contributers to this forum I check facts and as a person born and bred in this town I show a genuine positive interest and am fully aware of the pub dependent backward village we once had here.

by M.M. Sun Jun 29, 2008 19:17

Good point, Gabriel.
People seem to be forgetting that a number of cottages and one large villa were destroyed and washed away by the flood in the late 1920's to early 30's.. With the water level on the rise worldwide due to ongoing climatic changes, these new apartments they are building at the moment must be considered as high risk development. Very short-sighted indeed of those who argue so strongly in favour of this project.

by Sales man Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:03

I believe HOK Residential are chomping at the bit to get their hands on the apartments at Greystones Harbour. It seems they have a different prospective on things than Gabriel. Good luck to them for staying positive.

by James Joyce Sun Jun 29, 2008 11:59

Flood prone area and dump! Gabriel is obviously distant from what is happening on the ground in Greystones. I suggest he looks at the plan in detail and correct his comments. By the way the people in property sales have a lot to answer as they are the ones who over valued everything in the first place and got a nice pay cheque for doing so - so no sympathy here Gabriel.

by Gabriel Sat Jun 28, 2008 21:02

I earn my living in the property sector - or try to in the current environmnet. After years of great success I am sorry to report that all is not well in my sector. I apologise if I sound like a prophet of doom but I am only telling it as it is. I am finding it more and more difficult to even get people to visit my properties let alone buy them - and I am particularily good at this. Once happy young couples are now returning their keys to the financial institutions as negative equity kicks in. I grow weary of the economic malise afflicting this once booming economy.

I ask you all this. How can you expect me to sell overpriced appartments situated in a flood prone area on top of a dump. Now that would really test my selling prowess. But hell - there is one born every minute!!!!

by Young Fine Gael member Sat Jun 28, 2008 13:09

Cllr. Mitchell produced a very informative and well put together leaflet about progress at the harbour. It is well worth a read and if anybody needs a copy I am sure he will forward it on.

by Harbour User Sat Jun 28, 2008 11:51

The supporters of this development have the right to be proud of their achievements. They were the target of an unbelievable campaign of hatred. This campaign was orchestrated by people at the very top of the anti-harbour brigade and shame on them for doing it. Well done to the brave people who stood up and were counted.

by James Joyce Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:31

Keep up the positive comments folks - whether the scaremongers like it or not SISPAR/WCC have assurances made and contracts in place that will insure this visionary project is finished. Comments like Gabriel made do nothing for society except accelerate us back to 1985!

by Phat Cat Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:22

Good to pessimism is alive and kicking in Greystones. We did not build the Celtic Tiger with comments like Gabriel made!

by Gabriel Fri Jun 27, 2008 23:07

The timing of the development in Greystones harbour is most unfortunate. In the recessionary times we find ourselves in apartments are especially very difficult to sell as funding has all but dried up. Don’t be surprised if the construction work slows down as the market contracts even further as the recession turns into a full blown depression.

Sad to say but this development has all the makings of a WHITE ELEPHANT of gigantic proportions.

by James Joyce Thu Jun 26, 2008 22:53

An Bord Pleanala made an unanimous decision in granting permission for this visionary project. They agreed with their own inspector on his recommendations from the oral hearings. They obviously seen through the false (mostly alien) submissions and GPDA orchestrated lies.

by Brian Thu Jun 26, 2008 22:15

The facts are that An Bord Pleanala regarded the level of submissions from the public as significant enough to hold two oral hearings into this development. This does not happen very often.

Futile gloating attempts by the vested interests in favour of this development to belittle to views of a large percentage of the population of Greystones and elsewhere are disingenuous.

We will wait and see the impacts of this development.

by Ciaran Hayden - Greystones Chamber Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:55

Greystones Chamber Press Release
Only 10% of Greystones Population Oppose Harbour Plans:

A number of members of Greystones Chamber and Greystones Community Group have analysed all submissions in relation to Greystones Harbour received by An Bord Pleanala. The closing date for these submissions was 29th January 2007. The Bord received less than 3,500 this time around, much less than protest groups had expected. The following are the factual findings of the make up of the submissions received by the Bord;

• 48.6% of submissions are from Greystones
• 7.2% of submissions are from Bray
• 7.2% of submissions are from County Wicklow, excluding Bray & Greystones.
• 32% of submissions are from the rest of the Republic of Ireland.
• 2.6% of submissions are from Europe, with 15 coming from Switzerland.
• 2% of submissions are from the Rest of the World including Malaysia, Canada, USA, New Zealand & Australia.
• 30% of submissions are from Charlesland.
• Only 10% of the Greystones population of 17,500 made a submission,
• Many submissions were made by teenagers and children. (Greystones Chamber welcomes the youth into the debate).
• The Counties of Kilkenny, Cork, Mayo, Donegal, Westmeath & Sligo made a disproportionately high number of submissions.
• The towns of Mullingar, Swords & Raheny also had a high number of submissions.
• 3 submissions came from a school in Bray.
• 20 submissions were indeterminable, (ie) blank, no address or illegible.
•

Greystones Chamber is delighted that many people in Greystones now support the redevelopment of Greystones Harbour and this bears out in the findings of the submissions examined. Chamber President, Mr Ciaran Hayden, said, Quote, “Many emails were circulating around Greystones looking for in excess of 8,000 objections. This just didn’t materialise. It is obvious that the people of Greystones have had a close look at the revised plans and thought them a good compromise”. Mr Hayden went on to say, “the revised plans are much more popular than the previous plans, and I now hope the Bord will make a quick decision to allow construction to start in the very near future”.

End

Contact details:

Ciaran Hayden: Mobile 087-804 5651
Email @ info@greystoneschamber.ie

by 99's Fri Jun 20, 2008 13:51

Yes - good to hear that Sispar are doing the business at a local level.
They do a great job at the liaison group meetings which were set up by a condition of Bord Pleanala.
They are extremely informative towards the participants who in turn can then advise their respective members.
So yes- well done re St. Kevins and roll on the harbour.
The clubs are really looking forward to their new premises and new harbour

by Parent Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:42

Its great SISPAR are so involved in the community. My daughter goes to St. Kevins and her class was brought down to the site and given a full tour. She was even given a souvenir helmet and vest. Well down SISPAR!

by James Joyce Wed Jun 18, 2008 16:52

Couldn't agree more. Well written Patrick. I too was down at the harbour today - great to see the new pier going in! Cant wait to stick two fingers up at GPDA losers when it opens.

by Patrick Wed Jun 18, 2008 14:27

Folks
Same old rubbish !!! But then if I had lost I would say the same old rubbish too !!

Same old GPDA lies, slant, mis-truths, mis-information etc.

They lost and a political candidate was hammered in the election. If 6000 people objected to the harbour and filled in a GPDA letter , why did one of the main persons in the GPDA fail so miserably in the election an an anti harbour ticket ?? Seems to me that you don't have to be a statistician to work that one out !!!

Anyways - down at harbour this morning. Great progress - what a joy to see - isn't it fantastic yeehawwwwwwww !!

I laugh when i see the GPDA people around at the fact that most of us didn't go for their nonsense. regrettable that the sailing club adopted the same tack as the GPDA but sure then the chairman of the GPDA and the trustee of the sailing club are the one person. Again - don't have to be a rocket scientist !!

looking forward to a great new harbour.

Patrick

by James Joyce Tue Jun 17, 2008 08:38

An Bord Pleanala received 3,000 pre organised GPDA objections in total. Everyone of these was analysed by the Greystones Community Group and only 1700 had Greystones addresses many of which were fraudulent. These FACTS are available from the Bord. Anyway I not having a history debate, I am looking forward to our great new harbour as are a clear majority of Greystones people.

by M.M. Mon Jun 16, 2008 18:29

6,000 people from the Greystones area (not from Cuba or New Zealand!) objected to the second plan. I was told so by people working in Greystones post-office, because they had to distribute 6,000 registered reply letters from An Bord Pleanala throughout Greystones and surrounding areas.

by James Joyce Mon Jun 16, 2008 15:26

MM has got it wrong. There is no private harbour - never was. There is, however, a new community harbour for five clubs with boat facilities, parking, public slipway, boardwalk, new public beach, public square, fishing stores, moorings, public boat lift and yard and a Council approved Harbourmaster to ensure it runs smoothly. Keep to the facts please.

by Numbers Man Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:08

Can I please correct Lennon on his figures. The first plan attracted less than 6,000 pre typed objections organised by the GPDA. Over half of these came from outside County Wicklow including Cuba and New Zealand. The second plan attracted 3,000 organised pre typed objections with only 1700 coming from Greystones. The Greystones Community Group uncovered widespread fraud among these pre organised forms including signatures from dead people, babies and toddlers and also from people in support of the plan. They also discovered a huge amount of family organised signatures from Ballina, Mullingar and Cork. The GPDA candidate for the general election only managed 2,000 votes which was about 3% of the vote. She was eliminated on the second count. Four of the five TD'S elected voiced their support for the plan. The fact is, Lennon, less than 10% of Greystones people opposed this. Please stop whining and start doing something constructive in this town. I hope everybody can now see that the 10,000 myth is now clearly dispelled.

by Harbour User Mon Jun 16, 2008 08:37

Lennon has got it wrong and the REAL reason why the Sailing Club objected is because most of its executive council is aligned in some way to the now defunct GPDA. The VAT issue does not concern other clubs and they are also not liable for it. No over-topping will occur as proved by all the marine experts and whats the difference between a 999 year lease with token rent and freehold - none! At least sailing in Greystones will be secure as they wont be able to sell it! For a Club that is increasing its pen size three fold and its building four fold with direct access to water at all states of tide, not to mention all round vision to monitor regattas - the mind boggles wondering why they objected. Lets hope they start building bridges with their marine neighbours as they are all going to be in that corner of the harbour together.

by Lennon Sat Jun 14, 2008 00:50

Having attended the oral hearing on the Greystones Harbour development I listened in anger at how badly the sailing club were treated by Wicklow County Council. The following are some of the problems arising for the club as a result of the actions of the Council....

The proposed swap of their existing clubhouse held under a freehold title is to be replaced by a leasehold interest in a new building.

The swap transaction will generate a huge VAT liability for the club which will bankrupt it.

The new clubhouse will be placed on the breakwater which will be subject to wave overtopping giving rise to health & safety and insurance issues.

Over 10,000 people objected to this outrageous development which will ruin the Greystones Harbour area forever.

by M.M. Sat Jun 14, 2008 00:36

.

No doubt new and safer facilities are needed for all the above
mentioned clubs. But I think the people involved in the Sailing Club
were right not to accept the first thing on offer. Surely those
facilities could have been provided without privatizing the harbour
and parts of the North beach and the construction og ugly high-rising
buildings. Fair play to the people from the Sailing Club for holding
out for a better deal.

by Hobby Horse Fri Jun 13, 2008 15:16

What is all the fuss about? My Husband and I have just moved into Eden Wood from Malahide and cant wait for the new harbour/marina. In fact it was a deciding factor in moving here. Nobody in their right mind could object to a harbour let alone a sailing club! They should hop on the Dart to Malahide and see the benefits such a facility brings to a community.

by Alan Monahan - Chairman - Greystones Rowing Club Fri Jun 13, 2008 09:14 greystonesrowing at gmail dot com Boat Yard Trafalgar Rd. Greystones

Greystones Rowing Club view these complaints as nothing more than mud slinging from small minded begrudgers. Our club will continue to offer safe marine facilities to the youth of Greystones and we will continue to expand our operation at Greystones Harbour. Bow Oar is correct in what she says about the ISA. We are affiliated to The Irish Coastal Rowing Federation and The East Coast Rowing Council but as we are expanding outside rowing we may well seek to affiliate with other Marine Bodies. Safety is always of the utmost concern to our club and this year alone we invested almost €3,000 in safety training and over €5,000 in safety equipment. We would also like to stress that it is vital ALL clubs at Greystones Harbour work together to make it a better place for the youth of Greystones. If any club or individual has a compliant about our activities I would be very grateful if they would contact me directly on the above e-mail.

by Bow Oar - Rowing Club Fri Jun 13, 2008 08:45

It is true complaints were made about Greystones Rowing Club. They were made to the ISA, Coast Guard and Gardai. The complaints related to our safety boats and the age of operators and their qualification. However our club is fully compliant with maritime legislation and is probably one of the most safety conscious clubs in Ireland. We view these complaints as a direct attack on our youth section and the work the parents do to keep it running. We have not yet discovered the source of these complaints but hope to have an idea soon. Greystones Rowing Club is not yet affiliated to ISA but has contact with them and will be pursuing this issue further.

by Phat Cat - Greystones Locals Fri Jun 13, 2008 08:21

I have heard the Sailing Club are feeling a bit threatened by other clubs and the successful activities that they run. I also heard they (GSC) have made several complaints about other clubs to the ISA and the Coast Guard. Apparently these compliants were unfounded and are probably mischief. Does anyone know anymore about this? Could it be possible that GSC is behind this underhand behavior?

by Bow Oar - Rowing Club Thu Jun 12, 2008 17:06

Some clarification for concerned G'stone resident ( never seen that abbreviation before). Greystones Rowing Club was founded in 1920 by local fishermen for local people and since the early 1950's have been looking for a suitable premises at the harbour for their increasing membership. We are no different from GAA, Tennis Club, Scouts, Soccer Club or Baseball Club. G'stone has no right to accuse us of selling our town ( chances are we were here long before that person). We have a right to have safe facilities for our children. Shame on you G'stone and I bet you have never seen the back of the pier from a boat! ............................ Might I also add, G'stone, our Chairman provided his name and contact details to this forum - more than I can say for you!

by Patrick Thu Jun 12, 2008 14:11

Mary - thanks for that.
i have just had a lovely lunch with some clients but I am feeling sick now with that news.

Good god - does the rest of the town know that the sailing club did what they did? I think not.

Well I am certainly going to the press with this - it is disgraceful.

Do their members think that they had a right to determine the outcome of the other clubs. I don't buy the 'executive' excuse - if their members weren't in favour of what they were doing then they should have put a stop to it. But did they - most certainly not !!!!

Well done to all the other clubs for negotiating so well with the council - you can be very proud of yourselves.

Patrick

by Mary Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:03

Patrick,

Yes - my husband and I were going to join the sailing club but were disgusted that they did what they did. How dare they jeopardise the other clubs. My husband fishes with the ridge angling club and he tells me that what went on was disgraceful.

What short-sightedness on their parts - theymustn't have any kids !!

Roll on the harbour and good riddence to the so-called GPDA ( the political wing of the Labour party !!)

Mary and Ieuan

by Patrick Thu Jun 12, 2008 09:49

Folks,

Is this a wind up? Did the sailing club try to jeopardise all the other clubs?

Could some-one please tell me if it is the case.

Puzzled.

Patrick

by 99's Thu Jun 12, 2008 09:46

Concerned G'Stones resident.

Yes it is true re the sailing club - they have objected to it and yes it is shocking!

Not sure how all the members feel about it but it is certainly true. They objected to the CPO and the planning application. They are getting a state-of-the-art building 2.5 times bigger than their own one, a dedicated clubs slip to share with all the other clubs and a compound to hold 90 boats.

But yes - hard to believe but they objected to it!!!

I deal with some members and they are certainly appaulled at the direction which the sailing club took on this but felt powerless as the executive did their own thing!

Still - forgive and forget. They are still welcome in our community corner with open arms and shouldn't feel threatened by coming to join the divers, sea-scouts, coast-guards, fishermen, rowers, GMYC and sure we will be all togehter - one big happy family !!!

Though they did everything in their power to stop the rest of the clubs having premises at the harbour we forgive them. Again, they shouldn't feel awkward about coming in with us - us sea lovers should get on with enjoying the sea and live in harmony.

Regards

99's

by Concerned sailor Thu Jun 12, 2008 09:29

Yes - I am afraid I have looked into it and yes the sailing club have objected. Friends of mine in the club were furious as their kids struggle to bring the boats through the harbour. Though the new clubhouse and clubs slip would improve everything for them I guess the executive knew better!!!

Is it true that the chairman of GPDA, Fiacra Ethingham, is a trustee of the sailing club ! Surely not.

The kids of the rowing club will be safer, and all together in an enhanced community of marine users.

I am not sure if the members of the sailing club realise what has happened but I guess that is their business and for them to check up on. I have joined the GMYC which will flourish with the marina and I am looking forward to a vibrant harbour community for all the clubs!

Well done to the Rowing Club with all their kayaks - my kids are too young for it yet but I will certainly be sending them down when the time is right.

Well done to all the HUGS clubs and good luck in the new harbour.

Pleased

by A G'stones Resident Wed Jun 11, 2008 17:58

Fair play to the lads from the Sailing Club for objecting, if indeed the story is true. But shame on the Greystones Rowing Club for selling their hometown to the highest bidder. Building that marina must be regarded as an act of criminal vandalism.

by 99's Wed Jun 11, 2008 15:14

Dear concerned resident.

Thanks for that - I wasn't too sure if I heard wrong about the sailing club. Hard to believe they are objecting to it - surely they will be too far from the water where they are for their dinghy's to travel.

Seems bizarre that they aren't moving into their new premises - I believe all the other clubs are happy with their arrangements - good on them!

Where can I apply re the Greystones Motor Yacht Club? Also looking to do apowerboat course. Anyone know where I can do one?

Cheers

by Concerned resident Wed Jun 11, 2008 14:26

Thank God my kids can now go down to a safer harbour than the dilapidated one which we are getting rid of !! Thankfully we now have the facility of PPP's to allow our community use it's forshore so effectively to build apartments to give the HUGS members new club houses! marvellous

And 99 - yes it is correct that the sailing club have objected to the harbour. I believe a newly formed club - Greystones Motor Yacht Club - are in negotiations with Wicklow Co. Co. for a lease on premises at the SE corner of the site. Not sure how they are getting on.

Please hurry up with the harbour

by George Tue Jun 10, 2008 23:19

Arising from the worldwide banking credit squeeze the plummeting property valuations in Ireland mean that the profit assumptions incorporated into the Greystones Harbour Public Private Partnership development are no longer valid. As with similar PPP projects in the city of Dublin the developer is now questioning the economic rationale in continuing with the project.

The people of Greystones are now facing the real prospect of a building site on the harbour area for a period well in excess of the six years promised by the developers Sispar in their planning documents.

At a recent council meeting reported in local newspapers it was admitted that the project is already behind schedule citing north easterly tidal conditions as the reason.

It is clear that high risk PPP projects of this nature only make commercial sence in a rising property market.

by Brown Envelope - Pay Off Gang Tue Jun 10, 2008 14:33

I hope they hurry up and finish it. I cant wait. Is 99's suggesting the dinghy club dont want to be part of the new harbour. They could always built around them!

by Alan Monahan - Greystones Rowing Club Tue Jun 10, 2008 14:19 greystonesrowing at gmail dot com

Greystones Rowing Club has fully supported SISPAR/Wicklow County Council in delivering a world class marine facility in Greystones. Our Club is set to get a new 200sq. meter Clubhouse and ancillary storage in the new harbour. Our club caters for 110 members aged from 9 +. With our new facility we will be able to increase our membership and provide a safer marine sports envirnoment. We strongly welcome the provision of a new Coast Guard Headquarters on the new South Pier. Marine safety is of the utmost concern to our club and we believe this new harbour will be one of the best in Europe.

by Ciaran Hayden - Greystones Chamber Tue Jun 10, 2008 13:57 info at ecrtyres dot com 1 thornbury, Delgany 0878045651

Greystones Harbour project is going to be the most successful PPP in the history of this state. The project will deliver community facilities for 5 marine clubs, local fisherman, 250 marina berths for local boat owners, a 7.5 acre public park, 1000 car park spaces, the largest public square in Ireland, coastal protection 250 meters north of the gap bridge and a vibrant commercial/residential district providing 300+ jobs. There is NO privatising beaches, in fact, a new sandy beach that people can use is being provided. The developer has also categorically stated the project is on target, on time and facilities will be delivered starting in March 2010. I hope this clarifies issues raised in this forum. A public information center is open at Greystones Harbour where the staff are happy to dispel all these myths and innuendo.

by 99's Tue Jun 10, 2008 13:49

Folks - isn't the new harbour going to be fantastic !! What a great opportunity to use a PPP to provide the clubs with new facilities. I heard the Sailing Club has objected to it ! Does anyone know if this is true?

by Joseph Sun Jun 08, 2008 18:58

Hi all, there is a rumour flying around that the developers building the apartment blocks have pulled out. Does anybody have any more information?

by George Mon May 26, 2008 23:15

Look what they have done to Darcy's Field! Covered in tar and made into a large out door batching plant.

I suppose this means they have gone off the mad idea of the borrow pit!

by Mark Fri May 09, 2008 09:56

Wise words.

by Paul Leahy Thu May 08, 2008 21:43

All beaches because of their natural attributes are irresistable targets for developers. We have seen it in Bray and now Greysatones.
Local communities must stake their claim by establishing ownership of a kind. They can do this by getting involved in beach clean-ups. The sight of hordes of kids, parents etc with hi-viz jackets, litter pickers and plastic bags cleaning their local beach will send a subtle message of the meaning of community ownership to those who have other designs and galvanise public opinion in their favour.
A subtle form of protest using reverse psychology to send a powerful message to those who would challenge our birthright.
The litter pickers versus the diggers, the ants versus the elephant, David versus Goliath

by George Sun Apr 27, 2008 17:10

Greystones Harbour is not on an estuary but on the open shoreline. The placing of man made structures on the shoreline results in increased coastal erosion. This is what is already happening at Greystones.

by aristotle Thu Apr 24, 2008 23:19

There is a lot of very dodgy legal opinion being spouted in this discussion.

The foreshore of Ireland (other than the relatively small percentage that is privately owned) is in effect a public right of way in that the public has a right to pass along it, fish from it, and come and go to it by boat. However, where the land contiguous to the foreshore is privately owned (as it mostly is) there is no right of access TO the foreshore save with the permission of the owner of the land.

Licences are necessary to carry out any development of the foreshore, or to remove sand, seaweed, and other materials from the foreshore. In addition, physical development of the foreshore requires planning-permission from the local authority for the area concerned. Where a foreshore licence is granted the public-right of way over the affected foreshore is curtailed and subject to the reasonable exigencies of the development. In other words, the licensee may fence off the foreshore if that is necessary to prevent traspass to the development.

Public rights of way "on land" can only be extinguished by way of vote of the local councillors.

The record shows that marinas are usually beneficial to the estuaries in which they are situate. Not only do they create economic activity, but the pilings and pontoons attract and provide cover and anchorage for marine life. Nowdays, boat ownership is widespread and is not confined to the rich. Marinas everywhere in Ireland are used by a mix of leisure craft of all sizes, and increasingly by leisure and commercial fishing craft. Unfortunately, because of the small element who relieve their socio-personality problems by vandalizing other people's property, access to marinas is normally curtailed and limited to the berth-holders and their guests.

by George Tue Apr 22, 2008 22:40

And the stones continue to wash away......The glacial cliffs are noe being seriously undermined by enhanced coastal erosion arising from the blockage in long shore drift caused by the new jetty built by the developers at Greystones Harbour. The beach nourishment exercise has been an utter disaster. Questions are now being asked of the "experts" who gave advice on coastal processes as part of the Environmental Impact Statement.

by George Mon Apr 07, 2008 22:00

All is not well with the beach nourishment and reclamination work being carried out by Sispar on the North beach and Greystones Harbour. Relaible sources now report that several thousand tonnes of stone they dropped on the beach has already been washed out to sea. The north easterly tides have been causing havoc with work in progress at the development in the sea at Greystones.

by Redford Resident Mon Apr 07, 2008 15:10

This group were in Redford leafletting lastnight. Some of their faces looked familiar. They seemed to be in a hurry and operating somewhat under cover. For the record I support them and their leaflets gives vital information on those involved in the cover up

by Patricia McCafferty Wed Mar 26, 2008 01:24 pmccdesign at yahoo dot ie

In response to George, If the developer (or whoever closed off the beach to the public) did not state so in their Planning application or as part of their plan file then the development has NOT adhered to Planning Legislation, thus the signs are incorrect.

Firstly,
The Local Government (Planning and Development) Regulations 1977 (Part III, Art. 1) states that … the fencing and enclosure of any land habitually open to the public during the ten years preceding such fencing or enclosure for recreational purposes or as a means of access to any seashore, mountain, lakeshore or riverbank or other place of natural beauty or recreational utility … will not be exempted from the definition of development; i.e. be regarded as permitted development. Nor, is it permitted to obstruct any public right of way.

Secondly,
Public Rights of Way
The law on public rights of way is based on common law, which, prior to Ireland’s Independence, would have been broadly similar to the common law on public rights of way in England. The Roads Act 1993 (s. 73) states that it is …
"the function of a local authority to protect the right of the public to use public rights of way in its administrative area"
Unlike in England, no statute clearly sets out the period over which a route needs to have been used by the public, with the express or implied approval of the landowner, before it acquires the legal status of a public right of way. Hence, the 20-year prescriptive period may not apply and many rights of way are difficult to prove at law and open to challenge by an owner. Consequently, public rights of way are infrequent and poorly documented.

Therefore, this development of the Coast is incomplete and concerns should be addressed to the County Council, Without the proper Planning Laws being adhered to the development has NO right in erecting signs to stop the Public use the Beach or Coast and if anyone did get injured on the area fenced off the Developer and the Council would be liable

The reason I looked into Public Right of Ways is Our Bundoran Town Council in Donegal Extinguished a Public Right of Way, for the benefit of a DEVELOPER. However the Planning application submitted was inaccurate in its Site Notice and Planning file and can at any time within seven years of commencement be contested as UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT.

Therefore, I would urge you to fill out an UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT form Section 152 Planning & Development Act 2000 about the developer is doing and what is happening in the area in question and reference any planning files and maps (even if it is the Council themselves) and submitt to your Local Authority stating the illegal Closing / Extinguishment of the beach and Public Right of Way has occured. The Local Authority will have to write to you as to what is happening.

Best of Luck.

by George Wed Mar 19, 2008 14:01

I am fully aware "dude" that they are planning so called "beach nourishment" on part of the beach to counteract the increased erosion that the new breakwaters will cause. However my point is that the the entire beach is restricted to the public. As far as I am aware this was never stated by the developer or the council during the planning process

by LK Tue Mar 18, 2008 19:15

Coastal protection works dude...the cliffs are falling into the sea, they're just piling up rocks aganst the cliffs to curb erosion..wouldnt be safe to walk on a construction site anyways!

by George Mon Mar 17, 2008 18:47

I walked from Greystones to Bray today and was horrified that at no stage during my walk could I gain any access to the Greystones north beach. This right of way to the public beach has existed for thousands of years but now its gone. What right have the developers to stop access to any part of this beach. I understood that during the 6 years of construction access would be restricted within the area where the high rise development is to be built. However I cannot understand why access to any part of this beach is prohibited. This is an absolute outrage.

by LK Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:05

Ok ok , I spelled her name incorrectly..but thats not really important is it? Your point that you made about people not caring is an interesting one. You're obviously being very ironic yes? The entire topic is here has resulted in about 40+ comments with people who care very much about the so called "destruction" of the harbour.
I think its very interesting how many objectors to the scheme, including a few of my friends claim I have been brainwashed by SISPARs plans. They say I was tricked by their beautification phrases like "world class development" and "boost for the people of Greystones". In actual fact I have for a very long time wished something would be done about the harbour. As I said in my above post it, the harbour is dilapidated and falling into the sea. What's very interesting is if you visit the GPDA's website and read their opening comment on the plans. They say the new harbour will "place an intolerable strain on the already over extended infrastructure", it will "will destroy scenic views of the beach and Bray head", it will "will lead to the construction of a road across Bray Head". This is exactly the same tactic that SISPAR use to sway people into their opinion! The two polar groups are both misleading and brainwashing.
The works at the harbour involve widening of the road at the harbour anyway, thus the infastructure will be improved by its construction. Claming a new road will be built over Bray head is actually pure slander in its worst form. The use of the command "will" is very misleading and verging on breaking the law in my opinion. It is clear doctoring of fact in attempt to win supporters. They should really change that to "might" or "could possibly"... Although the construction of the apartments will obstruct the breathtaking and awe-inspiring view..woops...didn't mean to be ironic there...they will only cover it from a certain angle.
Let me put this in perspective for you. The same people who object to densification are the same people who object to the restoration and conversion of the La Touche hotel for apartments. Lets say 80 years ago some developer came along and said i'm going to build a massive 4 storey hotel next to the sea. I'm sure many people detested the plans, they'd of said it'll block our views of Bray head and lead to further development in our area. Nowadays, what do we have? people trying to save this iconic structure, the same people who object to the marina! What i'm trying to say is, although you've become used to the way things are, the familiarity of the place and what not, it wont be like that forever. Things change, new projects change the way towns and cities look. Most of the time its for the best, i'm not saying all change is good. I honestly believe though that the marina will give something beneficial to our community. I'm asking you to look back ten or fifteen years from now when the harbours an alien sight to us and ask, has this been a plus or a negative?(and leave construction out of obscuring what the outcome will be, its a pest to everyone! I live up the road from the development and its a pest, but I can live with it) I cannot predict anything bad whatsoever will come out of the redevelopment of the harbour. I think your response will be my most looked forward one ever! Seriously, i've never written this much in my life!:D

by Paul Sat Mar 15, 2008 16:28

I agree with you on Cawley but you miss the point or indeed perhaps you spell her name incorectly to cause confusion-How do you know that this lady was not secretely in favour of the development? Other candidates (persumably from your party) were funded by developers-that was proven in the Bray People account of the expenses. All of Greystones is up for grabs. Who cares though.

by LK Wed Mar 12, 2008 15:16

I would firstly like to say that although I support the new marina development, I can sympathise the people here who are against it. Yes the construction works are an eyesore. Yes the construction traffic is annoying. Yes the new traffic calming measures are a pest.
Are we forgetting though that this is not dissimilar to any construction project in the state and anywhere globally? In the end I believe we will have a very attractive marina which will yield in much needed tourism for Greystones. The marina will attract businesses to the IDA lands in Charlesland and thus create domestic jobs in our town. This will reverse the label of Greystones as being a sattelite town to Dublin.
As you all know, the harbour although quaint in its original form was in an extremely dilapidated state. With the population increase in Greystones, all the sailing clubs at the harbour have had huge waiting lists for new members. The larger harbour will be able to cater for the next generation of sea-farers and will cope with the population increase which by the way is something not unique to Greystones! You need to face the truth, the harbour needs a makeover and no matter what scale the construction project would have been, it would have been disruptive.
The posting of pictures of the disgraceful graffiti on the hoardings (which are clearly done by some uneducated politcal-protester youth) is rediculous. If people wanted to object to the plans, they should have joined the GPDA band wagon and submitted objections to an Bord Planeala. With half the number of objections from the second oral hearing, it was clear that a vast majority of previous objectors were happy with the new designs. Making wild suggestions about staging "Shell to Sea" style protests (which is what you people seem to want) is absolutely absurd.
This project is well into construction now. Most people actually like this project or don't care either way. Accept that you objectors make up only a small proportion of the common opinion. And for the laugh I want to add that Evlynn Cawley's political campaign (lol) for the Wicklow constituency was actually the funniest attempt at a campaign ever (god how I love free speech)..Spending 40,000 on a campaign fueled presumably by her husband? Her sole election issue you ask?: to sway by political means the refusal of the marina development..and then attracting less then 0.5% of the votes! Its actually so funny..

by Peggy Wed Mar 12, 2008 01:34

Great work with the camera Michael. It shows us vividly the wanton destruction of the beach area. Makes you want to shed a tear thinking of all the people who have walked along the beach for centuries and now it will be no more. We all have fond memories of walking under that bridge as children with our parents and now it is out of bounds. Shame on the developers ruining the beauty of the area and the sacred memories of families happy times there before greed took over and spoilt the landscape that God gave us and as he intended it to remain.

by Michael Martin Mon Mar 10, 2008 02:09

Work is fast advancing on the North beach. All public access to the beach has now been sealed off, including access to the area (north off gap bridge) not effected by the development.
Parts of the harbour are now buried under an ugly tarmac road which leads to the former soccer fields near Redford.. If we are talking litigation here, then we have to move fast, folks.

No more public access to North beach

Harbour under tarmac

Double rainbow over North beach

by Peter Brady - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Sun Mar 09, 2008 21:44

STATEMENT ON GREYSTONES NORTH BEACH HARBOUR DEVELOPMENT AND ITS FORESHORE
Dear Resident,
As you know from our previous Statement the granting of Planning Permission for 341 residential units to be built out on our public foreshore is a matter of grave concern to the residents of Greystones and Delgany and the people of Ireland and how our town is turned into a building site with builders hoarding everywhere. We are appealing to the people of Greystones Delgany Kilcoole and Newcastle to join with us in mounting a legal challenge on Wicklow County Council and An Bord Pleanala in the violation of the Planning Laws and in particular on Wicklow County Council who are in direct contravention of their own County Development Plan 2004. We will be consulting our legal advisors on this and as soon as we have the information we will be going to the wider community on this in relation to financial support in taking this directly to the Courts. Its not too late in taking legal action against Wicklow County Council and the Board.

We the Concerned Citizens Action Committee for Bray and Greystones wish to bring to your attention the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010 regarding An Bord Pleanalas recent decision to grant Planning Permission for the North Beach Greystones Harbour Development. We know 6000 objections have fallen on deaf ears to say the very least. We wish to point out the 1999 Greystones Delgany Development Plan is built into the Wicklow County Development Plan as far back as 1999 on the first draft of this plan and was continued on right up until 2004 when it was made into planning legislation. The 1999 Greystones Delgany Development Plan is protected within this plan which also protects the North Beach Greystones and its foreshore.

Wicklow County Council knew they had a serious problem with the County Development Plan and decided to attack the original local area plan which was the 1999 Greystones Delgany Development Plan which was used in planning decisions up to the year 2003 but adopted this plan in 2003 by bringing in a new local area plan the 2006 Greystones Delgany Local Area Plan (this is a rogue plan) and is outside the remit of the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010.

This plan is the plan that has caused all the controversy in Greystones and Delgany in which they have tried to remove the protection of the foreshore and North Beach Greystones. It has also brought serious problems on the local public schools where they have put an action plan on St. David’s Secondary School and have tried to remove St. Brigid’s National School down to Charlesland which is becoming the new centre for education down there which is 3km from the town centre. This is unacceptable and questions have to be asked of Wicklow County Council how could they put an action plan on St. David’s Secondary School when the land is privately owned by the Holy Faith Sisters. This 2006 Local Area Plan was imposed in on the people of Greystones in a most undemocratic fashion. Why should we accept this? Because as stated this Local Area Plan is not in the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010 – what does this tell you?

Because An Bord Pleanala have based their findings on the provisions of the current Wicklow County Development Plan including the variation of that plan and the provisions of the variation relating to the site but in actual fact the Wicklow County Development Plan 1999 Part 1 was never varied or changed because they tried to do this under proposed amendments 1999 and failed by changing development of a Harbour to Marina but could not do this because Harbour Development was there since 1999 Part 1 of the Plan. They failed in their attempt and this is legally flawed. You will see this in the 2004-2010 Wicklow County Development Plan Appendix 1 where it states the Council shall seek to improve public access to the North and South beaches as a priority and shall support the development of Greystones Harbour for sailing and other boating activities. You can view the Wicklow County Development Plan 2004-2010 as well as the other plans at Greystones Library and the Wicklow County Council Offices at the Public Counter. (Planning). We would like to conclude by saying to you for us to achieve anything in this life we need to fight for it and we need to win back what is ours and to do this we will need full support and commitment from the people of Wicklow and Ireland and hold on to the heritage that our forebearers that fought hard and died for in our country for it not to be taken away by legalised gangsters. We wait for your instructions. Contact the Concerned Citizens Committee if you need any further information or Plans. We hope to call a Public Meeting for Wicklow at a later date depending on your support and response.

by Lennon Sat Mar 08, 2008 19:49

An Bord Pleanála Oral Hearing of Appeals against the Application by Wicklow County Council for Approval of a Public-Private Partnership Development at Greystones Harbour and North Beach, Rathdown Upper and Rathdown Lower, Greystones, County Wicklow
An Bord Pleanála Reference 27.EF 2016

Oral Hearing, Bray, 29 and 30 March 2007
____________________________________________

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE
by Prof. J. Andrew G. Cooper, BSc, MSc, PhD

ON BEHALF OF THE GREYSTONES PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

1. Qualifications and Experience

I graduated in 1984 from Queen’s University Belfast in geology, and I was initially employed in southern Scotland on a geological reconnaissance project with BP Minerals. I moved to South Africa in 1985 where I worked for two years in the University of Natal on sedimentation in estuaries and a further seven in the CSIR on coastal processes. I gained my MSc and PhD from the University of Natal in 1987 and 1991, respectively. I took up a senior lectureship at the University of Greenwich, UK in 1993 and a Readership at the University of Ulster in 1994. I was appointed to a personal chair in coastal studies in 2004. I have published more than 200 papers in the field of coastal processes and coastal management and have worked on a variety of research projects in the UK, Ireland, the EU and around the world.

2. Introduction

My evidence today is on behalf of the Greystones Protection and Development Association, and arises from the Association’s concern about the applicant’s proposal for beach nourishment to mitigate the impacts of its proposed marina development at Greystones Harbour.

In my evidence I will address the question of the mechanism of delivery of beach recharge material to the site, the volume thereof and the long term implications of this approach.

My evidence will have particular regard to the question raised by the Board in its letter dated 14 August 2006 to Wicklow County Council. In that letter, the Board stated

“Noting the already restricted road access to the site, the Board is not satisfied on the basis of the submissions made that the required beach nourishment of approximately 6,000 tonnes per annum cannot be brought to site by sea in order to mitigate any potential negative traffic impacts resulting from the proposal to bring this material by road, and consequently through the future completed development”.

3. The Applicant’s Proposal for Beach Nourishment

The applicant considers, on the basis of numerical modelling of coastal processes, that accelerated coastal erosion is likely to result from the proposed development. It has been proposed that this be addressed by rock armouring of the seaward edge of the old dump site and beach nourishment in the area north of this for a period of 30 years. The recharge material is to be sourced from gravel quarries on land and transported by lorry to the beach at a rate of 6000 m3 per year, following an initial emplacement of 30,000 m3. Calculation of these required sediment volumes relies on future predictions of shoreline behaviour under various scenarios. Because the volume of material being transported to the beach is the subject of the board’s letter of August 14th to the developer, I would therefore like to look briefly at the means by which these required volumes are derived.

3.1. Beach behaviour: actual and predicted

Beaches are loose accumulations of sand and/or gravel that can adapt their shape to variations in wave, tide and wind conditions, sediment supply (volume of available material) and sediment type (size, shape and composition). They do so within a fixed geological framework. They may be bounded by headlands or underlain or backed by rock of variable resistance to erosion. The beach adjusts to the combined effect of these parameters at any given time and hence achieves a dynamic equilibrium. A change in any one of these factors may produce a change in the beach itself.

Construction of the marina changes the framework within which the beach exists. This changes the physical boundaries within which the beach exists, which in turn alters the wave dynamics. This adjustment in two of the major controls on beach shape and position will produce a change in the beach shape. There is no accurate way of modelling the likely future shape of the beach under such conditions .

The models (part of the DHI Litpack suite) that were used by the applicant (Greystones Harbour EIS Appendix 6) to predict shoreline evolution for different marina scenarios are complex numerical models that aim to make various predictions regarding, coastal hydraulics, volumes of longshore sediment transport, and future shoreline positions under various scenarios. In order to make accurate predictions of future shoreline positions and sediment transport rates, such models must take account of all the variables that impact on sediment transport .

There are several reasons, however, that mean that such models cannot produce accurate simulations. They include the following:
• Certain important parameters to be omitted from calculations (e.g. packing and density of sediment);
• Not all important model parameters and their interactions are understood. Scientific understanding of transport of mixed grain populations is very limited ;
• There is a ubiquitous inability to accurately characterise the starting conditions (grain size, wave conditions, precise beach shape, underlying rock depth, resistance to erosion etc); For example, the Greystones beach is described in the developer’s reply to the board’s leter of August 14th 2006, simply as “shingle with a median size of 5mm”. This gives no indication of the range and proportions of grain sizes and shapes.
• Some questionable relationships are used in models (e.g. relationship between wave angle and longshore drift rate);
• Constants are frequently used to adjust model outputs to achieve ‘reasonable’ predictions. For example, a range of wave theories can be selected as well as bed roughness parameters and wind or currents can be omitted or included as the operator chooses- this enables the operator to adjust the model result to match a target value;
• The unpredictability of future wave, tide and weather conditions.
• The role of extreme but infrequent storms, that may strongly influence or even dominate shoreline behaviour cannot be predicted or simulated. These may produce much more change in a few days than decades of ‘normal conditions’. At Kilpatrick beach in northern Wexford, for example, storms in early December 2006 caused more than 10m of erosion on a beach and dune that had been essentially stable for the previous decade;

Using the models produces a single quantitative prediction without giving any indication of the probability of such a scenario actually occurring. One can have little confidence in such a simulation and in the case of Greystones, the predicted impact of the marina derived by modelling is therefore quite uncertain. As a consequence, the volume of material required to ‘remedy’ the situation cannot not known. The volumes cited (6000m3 per year and an initial capital emplacement of 30,000 m3 may be much too low or much too high. Raising the amount from 4000m3 to 6000m3 as has been done in the EIS to ‘ account for the inaccuracy of the 1-D model) has no basis in reality, as the model has no error bands.

3.2. Required volume of nourished sand

The practice of placing sediment on an eroding beach to replace or augment natural sediment supply is now widespread practice in many heavily developed coastal areas. Because of the complexity of interactions outlined above, it is not possible to accurately predict future beach nourishment requirements or longevity of nourished beaches. Models are commonly used to make such predictions but they suffer from several fatal shortcomings.

The inability to predict performance of beaches using models relates to several factors. One is the inability to describe the grain size; Beaches contain a range of different grain sizes distributed throughout the beach). Another is the inability to describe the wave conditions; Natural seas are affected by a range of wave sizes that interact with each other, with the wind and with any currents to produce complex fluid motions that vary over time. The role of storms is particularly poorly understood. A third is the chaotic behaviour of the weather that produces waves and currents.

Studies have shown that nourished beaches almost always last for a shorter time than that predicted. Usually, the poor performance is explained by an unexpected storm and there have been several instances when entire nourished beaches have been eroded within a few days. The inaccuracy of models is certainly a contributing factor to poor performance, but the overwhelming dominance of over-predicting the longevity of nourished beaches shows an ill-placed optimism in many such exercises.

The potential situation whereby nourished material is washed away rapidly by a storm is not considered in the developer’s report.

As a result of sea level rise and climate change resulting in the likely increased incidence of storms in the Irish Sea, the volume of material required to maintain the beach position will not remain constant but an ever greater volume of material will be required in the future. There is no commitment to providing a greater volume than that laid out in the developer’s proposal. Furthermore, any increase in volume would increase the traffic volume and level of disturbance on the beach.

3.3. Suitability of proposed fill material

The beach at Greystones derives its sediment from the eroding cliffs of fluvio-glacial sediment at the rear of the beach. This material has been initially sorted by ancient, glacial-related processes and when it is eroded by modern waves it undergoes further sorting on the beach. This produces a distinctive distribution of sediment according to grain size and shape on the beach. A particular packing arrangement is achieved whereby the grains fit together in a particular way. Using material from a different source (an inland quarry) and depositing it directly on the beach by a different mechanism (dumping from a lorry) produces a different packing arrangement and will cause the beach to respond differently to wave processes. Nourished beaches are usually found to erode more rapidly than their natural predecessors.

In addition, no quantitative analysis of the textural characteristics of the proposed source material and the natural beach source material has been undertaken to determine the differences. The high incidence of broken stones in the Ballyhorsey quarry material and its angular nature contrasts markedly with the smoothed and rounded nature of the present beach material. The possibility of use of offshore marine sediments is considered in the developer’s reply but is subject to many uncertainities. The land-sourcing and transport of nourishment material seems to be favoured.

3.4. Environmental value of nourished beach

Beach nourishment involves a high level of vehicular and mechanical activity around and on the beach. This disturbance will have adverse impacts on plant and animal life on the beach. Upper beach vegetation will be disturbed by the movement of imported material across and on the beach. The beach infauna will be buried and the different styles of packing and probability of fine interstitial grains may affect biological colonisation and use of the beach surface. It is unlikely to be packed and sorted by mechanical emplacement in the same way as it would be by waves and this may impact on the recreational value of the beach.

3.5. Sustainability of nourished beach

Above all, it is important to note that the beach nourishment is being proposed as an antidote to problems that will arise through construction of the proposed marina. It is an acknowledgement that an undesirable impact will be created and is a proposed mechanism to reduce this impact. The nourishment is proposed to continue to be financed and undertaken for thirty years by the marina operating company. At the end of thirty years, however, when the nourishment stops, the adverse impacts of the marina will still remain. The resulting problem or accelerated erosion, even if the nourishment performs as the developers expect, is therefore not mitigated but simply forestalled or postponed. The question of who will take responsibility for the adverse impacts on the coast at that time remains unresolved. It would seem unreasonable for the public to take over such responsibility since the impact is the result of private development. If not, how would the adverse impacts be managed at that time?

Once humans interfere with a shoreline, there is usually no going back. The first intervention typically produces undesirable impacts which require additional interventions to ’remedy’ them. They in turn produce further impacts and the beach is transformed from a natural system to an increasingly human-influenced system, dependant on political decisions and economics for its survival. The artificially nourished beaches of southern Spain, backed by sea walls and defended by offshore breakwaters are ultimate expression of this urbanisation of beaches. There, the high volume of beach-dependant tourism activity provides an economic driver to sustain beach nourishment. No such driver exists at Greystones.

Nourishing a beach creates an artificial condition and a commitment to sustain that beach for ever. This is a major commitment for this and future generations to enter into, in order to resist changes that are the result of a one-off marina development.

4. Conclusions

On behalf of the Greystones Protection and Development Association we suggest to An Bord Pleanála that this development will have unpredictable and unquantifiable impacts on a natural beach system. The proposed mitigation by beach nourishment will have negative impacts on the natural environment and the local infrastructure. The volume of material required to maintain a given beach position cannot be known and any increase in volume required would have additional environmental impacts. Most importantly, the practice is not sustainable. The development will create a permanent environmental problem that will persist (and most probably be excerbated) beyond the thirty year lifespan of the proposed interventions.

Andrew Cooper

On behalf of the Greystones Protection and Development Association

by Patricia McCafferty Fri Mar 07, 2008 23:38 pmccdesign at yahoo dot ie

Having read through what is happening to Greystones, I am appaled that Political Corruption and secret Council meetings allowed such land grabbing for Commercial developments.

I am from Bundoran, Co. Donegal and currently we have a developer Damien Connolly Contracts who firstly demolished two Record of Protected Structures with the help of the Corrupt Town Council, He also submitted incorrect and misleading planning application plans and maps to Bundoran Town Council and what is worse is that the Council granted the permission, after I researched on Unauthorised development I found that this developer had NO PERMISSION by the Department of the Marine to build on the foreshore (currently the building is 4 to 5 meters onto the foreshore). Now that the building has its forth storey added and I submitted a claim of Unauthorised development to the Council they have to take my Planning Corruption charge about Bundoran Town Council and this developer serious. The developer is only this week seeking a foreshore licence to build on the foreshore (the building is already constructed) and of course with Corrupt politians like our local County Councillor Sean McEniff (yes the same McEniff with all the Hotels around Ireland) this foreshore licence will be granted thanks to Political influences. Councillor Sean McEniff has opening supported Damien Connolly Contracts even though the Planning Laws have been broken.

Bundoran Town Council are starting to hold their Monthly Meetings in-committe and the Council asked myself and the media to leave at the last Monthly meeting 4th march 2008., even now there is still no reason given as to why the meeting was held in-committee. It is only now after reading what is happening in Greystones is what will happen in Bundoran.

Developments have loads of area in existing Commerical areas, why is our natural habitat being destroyed by cowboy developers and their political corrupt accomplices.

I totally support what you and the ordinary person is doing to stop corruption in Greystones, keep up the good work.

by Michael Martin - G'stones area resident Thu Mar 06, 2008 13:55

Hi Fiachra,

maybe it is too late to save Greystones harbour and the North beach. But bear in mind that the "developers" will not stop their onslaught on the North beach. In fact all of Greystones and the entire coastline right down to Wicklow Town has come under threat. Therefore I think we should continue our fight, unless of course we wish to give those "developers" a free hand in creating a Dade County, Fla, look-alike coast line here in Co. Wicklow.
I don't want to be a leader either. I am not even from County Wicklow. I just happen to live in my house here in the Greystones area for close to 19 years now, and may even spend the rest of my life here. In all those years I have seen a lot of change here in the area, and most of those changes I don't like, and therefore I am prepared to make a stand against the encroaching evil tide.

Why not open up your website and message board again, Fiachra, or join mine, and then let's pick up the fight again?

by Lennon Thu Mar 06, 2008 13:18

The GPDA are the good guys and did all they could to raise public awareness to try and stop this hideous development. The real scoundrels are the FF/FG county councillors who approved the material variation of the county development plan back in November 2003. Shame on them.

Best of luck lads with the campaign but I fear at this stage it is too late.

by Fiachra Etchingham Thu Mar 06, 2008 08:20

I spent 11years, as chairman of the Greystones Protection and Development Association, fighting the proposals to build apartments on the north beach as part of a marina plan. As has been pointed out in this discussion, I lacked the leadership abilities, organisational skills and indeed any of the qualities needed to successfully run a campaign of this nature. However when, in 1996, Albert Gubay was proposing to build 700 apartments in blocks 6 storeys high on the North Beach ,I was the only one prepared to lead the campaign. I would accept that it is most regrettable that neither at that point, nor at any time in the intervening years, a more capable person did not come forward to lead the campaign. I would happily have stepped aside.
A number of posts are critical of the GPDA’s methods. The criticism may be justified but we ran the campaign, to the best of our abilities, in the manner which we thought would be most effective. Michael Martin criticises us for not responding to his emails. For that I can only apologise Michael, but I was trying to do this in my spare time and not all corresponded was answered. Greystones Local asks why we didn’t organise public protests. I would ask “why didn’t you?” If you were so unhappy with our campaign why did you not organise one of your own?
Throughout most of the campaign I was, and still am, a member of the Labour Party. Liz Mcmanus, Tom Fortune and Margaret O’Callaghan have always supported our efforts as did Deirdre DeBurca and the Greens. Likewise I believe the criticism of Evelyn Cawley is very unjust. Evelyn made a huge contribution to the GPDA’s campaign, particularly with regard to mobilising public opposition.
The GPDA did not receive any “brown envelopes”. The signs at the harbour were paid for by the GPDA and erected by local residents who supported our campaign. I imagine they were removed for the same reason as I recently took my “Save Greystones Harbour” sticker off my car-because they believed that the harbour is lost.

All that said I am delighted to see a new campaign being launched .I would happily support such a campaign as would, I am sure, many other members of the GPDA. I appreciate that some of you are suspicious of the GPDA. If my posting here has dispelled these suspicions please let me know. Either way I wish you every success.

by Concerned Resident - none Wed Mar 05, 2008 16:32

Only a matter of time

by Michael Martin - G'stones area resident Tue Mar 04, 2008 20:33

All public access routes to the North beach have now been blocked. This is the first time ever in history that the people of Greystones have no access to their beach. This situation is unacceptable, and I think the time has come for us to go down there to restore public access! !

The writing is on the wall!

The old railway bridge. ACCESS TO BEACH DENIED!

Digging up OUR North beach.

by Peter Brady - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Sun Mar 02, 2008 17:44

We would like to get a meeting with you but we are wary of the Greystones Protection Development Association. We know from what you are doing down there at the moment with your camera that you are sending back some very good information to the website so please keep up the good work. You are letting the world see the depredation and vandalism which is taking place before our very eyes. You are highlighting the scandal. Are you having much success with the E-group. We will be behind you soon. Our main objective in all of this campaign is to mobilize the people in Wicklow and particularly in Wicklow Town informing the people down there that it will be the Morrough next. This will be forming part of the united front. We also know that the South Beach in Greystones is under attack through the action plans in which they are attacking the schools as well. For this campaign to succeed we all need to stand united and behind one another. Thanking you once again Mr. Martin for doing a great job. We will be in touch soon. From the Concerned Citizens Action Committee representing Bray and Greystones fighting corruption in Wicklow. P.S. Thanks for your email.

by Michael Martin - G'stones area resident Sat Mar 01, 2008 19:04

"Construction" work is moving fast on the North Beach and the Harbour. We have to move fast, too, if we are serious about trying to turn this around again. I took more pics when I went down to the harbour this afternoon.

Greystones Harbour (view from Ennis's Lane)

Beach view ?????

"Welcome to concentration camp 'North Beach' !

by Paul Flynn - Greystones Resident Sat Mar 01, 2008 15:59

Happy to attend meeting.

by Michael Martin Fri Feb 29, 2008 00:35

O.K., let's arrange a meeting for the next week. Some suggestions re; meeting place and time have already been made on the E-list. How about next Thursday then?

And yes, I agree with Peter. This campaign can only be won through the courts..

by Peter Brady - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Fri Feb 29, 2008 00:03

Dear Citizens,
The response to our Statement is fantastic and the comments at the very start had so much meaning in them that you could sense the anger and frustration from the people that they wanted to do something about this scandal and that there was a real sense of fighting spirit but we regret to way that the wind is going out of the sails. It was wonderful to see so many comments on the scandal that is taking place before our very eyes in our beautiful town of Greystones. We know from the reading of your comments that there is genuine concern from all as to what is taking place as stated on 24th February 2008 we need to form a united front by stopping this scandal. We are asking the people of Greystones and Delgany to come out and support one another in this fight against corruption. We are a concerned citizens committee who are a group of people who are fed up to the back teeth with the hypocrisy that we are witnessing today in our country. We are not affiliated to any right wing political parties who are responsible of the privatisation of our public beach and remember the real enemy here is the developer who has made billions of Euros on the backs of the ordinary people and whose points of view has very little meaning to him. We are appealing to you to stop fighting with one another because if Mr. Developer was looking on at this tonight he would be laughing at each and every one of us.
If you want to help in this campaign of defiance we are looking for genuine people to deliver information into the areas of Greystones and Delgany because as stated this can be won through the Courts with the information we have obtained. We are appealing to you all that our resources financially and otherwise are limited and because we are a community we should be all working together as a community. It would be great to see the support that came out at the time when the Greystones Protection and Development Association mobilized so many people but we know the way you all feel in relation to the let down here and that trust and confidence is broken. Don't let them do this to you. We can work together as a community and that each and every one of us can express our democratic rights which we were denied at the two An Bord Pleanala hearings. The suggestion that we wish to make to you this evening is that we need street co-ordinators we want each person to be in control of a street regarding the distribution of material and if necessary could you please photocopy some of the material which we will be supplying to you just for your own street. If everybody could do this we could get the whole areas of Greystones and Delgany canvassed and then work into Kilcoole Newcastle and as far as Wicklow Town. We need a joint effort here so we are also appealing if anyone would have access to a photocopier this would be very helpful. This principal of distribution has been very successful in other campaigns and this is the way forward in succeeding in this campaign. We need to take this issue to the Courts and fight it on the grounds that the Planning laws have been violated here and particularly Wicklow County Council who are in direct contravention of their own County Development Plan 2004-2010 in which An Bord Pleanala based their findings on this plan. This information here is stated in the information which we want to distribute throughout County Wicklow. We are prepared as concerned citizens if you are to take this fight to the highest authorities of this land if necessary so would you please read the statements now and stop all the innuendo that is going on here and let us be serious because the individuals who are operating in Wicklow at the moment are pretty efficient at what they are doing at the moment we need to be just as efficient as they are. We will be leaving our contact details on the next statement if you could please leave your contact details and numbers we could call a meeting then between ourselves but we must stress that we do not want any time wasters that this is a serious call that must be heeded here if we want to achieve our aim so fellow citizens ask not what your country can do for you ask what you can do for your country, Once again thank you for reading this statement from The Concerned Citizens Action Committee representing Bray and Greystones.

by Michael Martin Thu Feb 28, 2008 17:21

To reply to your question, Bray Head . At this stage it's hypothetical to argue about 'direct action', since we aren't anywhere near this stage. Tthere is nothing wrong with people from outside of Greystones, And I never said "Greystones people only".People from Bray, Dublin and further afield are more than welcome to participate in all levels of the hopefully fledging campaign. But what I try to avoid here is the travelling serial protesters image, because the majority of people here in North County Wicklow would not support these 'New Age' types.

by bray head Thu Feb 28, 2008 15:50

I`ve never emailed in on this before so how can my posts be negative? I just thought the comments on that e group list a bit mad and now this!
It must be contagious.
What party are you talking about?...What direct action ? and whats your problem with people from outside greystones ?

by Sorcha Thu Feb 28, 2008 12:53

Anytime you post something on a page its negative. What did you do to stop Bray Beach being privatised? Nothing. What did you do to stop American giant Mcdonalds taking over the townhall?Nothing. YOU AND YOUR FAILED PARTY HAVE NOT ONLY LET BRAY DOWN BUT YOU SOLD OUT ON EVERYTHING SO HANG YOUR HEAD IN SHAME. Now mind your own business about Greystones. We all no what side you are on.

by Bray head Wed Feb 27, 2008 23:53

'"Direct Action" ..".a vigil camp"..." I am not too keen on the idea of bringing in serial protesters from the U.K or other foreign countries..."

W.T.F ?

by Michael Martin Wed Feb 27, 2008 17:10

Phot taken today from Viewing Rock, Kindlestown Woods. The building site along the North beach is an eye sore visible from Kindlestown Woods and further afield.
I am disappointed that not more people show an active interest in the preservation of Greystones. Please sign in to our Greystones Watch E-group so we can talk about and co-ordinate the necessary steps that need to be taken to protect North Co. Wicklow from urban sprawl and other unwelcome "development".

Greystones & North beach.

by Peter Brady - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Mon Feb 25, 2008 01:53

Our email address for contact is at the end of our statement above. It is
fightingcorruptioninwicklow@hotmail.com

Please email us.

by Michael Martin Sun Feb 24, 2008 23:12

Hey,
I am not opposed to talking to you guys. The problem is that I have no contact details for your group. I created an E-group which will serve us as discussion platform till something better comes along. Why not sign in so we can discuss matters further. Let's build a united front here.

by Peter Brady - Concerned Citizens Action Committee Sun Feb 24, 2008 21:56

Dear Citizens,
We would like to thank you most sincerely for your comments on our recent Statement. The only way we are going to fight corruption is for all of us to unite together as a united front and not as single groups which has failed in the past. We are appealing to Mr. Martin that you have the right idea but we need to look at the bigger picture here. Greystones North Beach Harbour Development is being taken over by public private partnership whose aim is to privatise everything right across the board in Irish society today. We see this at the moment going on with out sub-Post Offices the letting go of our 300 pharmacies and an attack on our health services. We are calling on the people of Greystones Delgany Kilcoole Newcastle Wicklow Town and right along the east coast of Ireland to stand up now and nail your colours to the mast and fight this corruption which is taking place in all walks of life. We are appealing to you in joining us in mounting a legal challenge on Wicklow County Council and an Bord Pleanala in the granting of this Planning Permission and Wicklow County Council itself who is in direct contravention of their own County Development Plan 2004 and who are in direct violation of the planning laws under the 2000 Act. We have the information to back this up. We will be consulting our legal advisors on this and as soon as we have the information we will be going to the wider community on this in relation to financial support in taking this directly to the Courts. It is not too late in taking legal action against Wicklow County Council and the Board which has nothing to do with appealing this planning permission. This is a different case entirely. We are appealing to the readers on this website to join Concerned Citizens now as a united front and stop making arrangements between one another and let us work together as a united front. We will be putting our Statement out to Greystones shortly with other information. We would like for all of you to look at the bigger picture here. The only way this can be beaten is for the community to come together and stop the brown envelopes from infiltrating all organisations. Thanking you The Concerned Citizens Action Committee Fighting Corruption in Wicklow.

by Michael Martin Sun Feb 24, 2008 19:55

........to Greystones harbour and parts of the North beach. I went down there for a stroll, took a few pics and talked to a few people . Most people have given up on the North beach and the harbour. And maybe we are too late to stop this insane onslaught. But if we start organizing now, than we will soon be strong enough to prevent a similar onslaught from being made on the South beach by Wicklow's FF/FG/Labour mafia and their financial puppeteers.

Please get involved, help us to protect the traditional character of Greystones and surrounding area.

Greystones behind the wire

"Access denied" at the harbour

"Access denied" to North beach.

by Michael Martin Sat Feb 23, 2008 21:20

Anybody interested in Greystones, please sign in to E-group listed below. We will use this E-group to discuss matters further.

As to Glen's question, the answer is YES! I consider the Glen O'Downs campaign a full success? Yes, the council widened the N11, cut a number of trees, too many for my taste, but due to people standing in down there they had to scale down their road-widening scheme severely. Many trees originally marked for destruction are still standing in the Glen today.

In Carrickmines we tried very hard. In the end we didn't get the result we tried to get, but at least we tried to do something.

But Glen O'Downs and Carrickmines are in the past, let's concentrate on Greystones now.

by Greystones Activist Sat Feb 23, 2008 20:33

Michael is a true campaigner and honest unlike the GDPA who got brown envelops to keep the campaign down. They were a developers front. They are a disgrace. They PRETENDED TO BE A CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE DEVELOPMENT BUT THEY WERE SECRETELY FOR IT.

by Glen Sat Feb 23, 2008 18:06

"The campaign failed because the so-called Greystones Protection & Development Association was/is fronted by people well heeled in with the establishment"

Glen of the downs ,Carrickmines were a success? Who do YOU work for ?
I wouldnt go around advertising "my credentials" if I were you.

by Mary Skelly Sat Feb 23, 2008 17:27

Ok. We need to meet to launch a new campaign-but we need to ensure it is free from infiltration and sabotage. I have a few people who will help and know of others but we must watch out for a few people.

by Angela Sat Feb 23, 2008 17:19

INTERESTING...

by Michael Martin - North Co. Wicklow resident Sat Feb 23, 2008 16:58

It's difficult to convince people about their sincerety through a few lines posted on the internet. But here are some of my credentials. I was one of the people to kick-start the Glen O'Downs campaign back in 1997. As a`result of this I was one of those campaigners ending up in the High Court in early 2000 fighting for our civial liberties. The next campaign was Carrickmines Castle. And for the last two years or so I am also involved with TaraWatch fighting for the preservation for our archaeological heritage in the Gabhra Valley, Co. Meath.
I have been living in North Co. Wicklow (in the same house) for just over 18 years now.

by Mary Skelly Sat Feb 23, 2008 15:59

I want to support you but i fear some peiple who say they are against are secretly for.... are you genuine? or a developers puppet? if you are genuine i will help. i love greystones and have been here all my life. Thanks, Mary.

by Michael Martin Sat Feb 23, 2008 14:40

Below is a short vid taken at Greystones Harbour about a year ago. I know it's half past 12 by now for Greystones, but if you are living in Greystones or nearby, please join the fight for the preservation of Greystones' traditional character.
It's not only the harbour and the North Beach that's under threat, but other areas, including South Beach, Charlesland, Bray Head and Coolagad as well.
Don't let them pave all over the Garden of Ireland, please.

by Michael Martin Fri Feb 22, 2008 00:50

Anybody interested in trying to stop the construction of a marina on Greystones Harbour / North Beach lands, please join

Greystones Harbour & North Beach (2005)

by Joseph Thu Feb 21, 2008 22:59 joseph.w.o.rourke at gmail dot com 0857445813

Right, the general idea seems that we should be doing something. So what's stopping us! We should get together somewhere, maybe someones house? Or the beach or in the park weather permitting?

Email me if you're interested. It should be above this comment.

by lulu Thu Feb 21, 2008 19:22

If you fight, you may lose, but if you don't fight, you've already lost!! Best wishes to save your home.

by T Thu Feb 21, 2008 19:03

It seems that people have sat back and hoped good leaders would do their work for them. People should forget about leaders good or bad and just do it themselves.

There is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from organising protests now and doing something even if it is probably too late.

by Resident in support of Michael Martin Thu Feb 21, 2008 18:45

I fully back up the previous post. If you log onto the GPDAS site where it thanks everyone for all their help in the campaign and says well done but WE ARE NOT STUPID MR.CHAIRPERSON WE KNOW THERE IS MORE TO THIS THAN MEETS THE EYE. THE SIGNS AT THE BEACH WERE QUICK ENOUGH TO COME DOWN.....WAS THEIR PAYOFFS TO THE HARBOUR RESIDENTS???

by Michael Martin - G'stones area resident Thu Feb 21, 2008 18:02

The campaign failed because the so-called Greystones Protection & Development Association was/is fronted by people well heeled in with the establishment, mostly people with strong ties to the Labour party. The Labour Party in Co. Wicklow has a very poor record when it comes to the protection of the environment. Labour stabbed us in the back during the Glen O'Downs campaign, they have failed in protecting Charlesland from development, and all they were looking for at the Greystones Harbour / North Beach was a foul compromise with the "developers".
I contacted the GPDA Labour spokespeople several times over the last few years, and never received a reply from them. I tried to sign in to the public forum attached to the GPDA website, but I never received a password, and the message board appears to closed anyway, since nobody has been posting for at least 18 months or so. There was some talk about the GPDA considering taking legal action against the development. But this has faded away as well.
GPDA has a lot to answer for.

by Greystones local - Redford Park Resident. Thu Feb 21, 2008 16:43

This group are a disgrace. Everything in that above statement is what we were stopped saying and now our beach has been privatised. Why did the GPDA not organish public protests?

by Angela - No organisation Thu Feb 21, 2008 16:17

Finally the corruption has been exposed.

by Paul Flynn - Greystones resident Thu Feb 21, 2008 16:08

Good statement but a little late. The so called Harbour protection campaign group that was meant to be leading the opposition failed to mobilise people but instead used it to launch a platform for an "independent" candidate Evelyn Cawley (whose husband is high up in ryanair!). She spent 40,000 on her failed campaign (no donators disclosed in the bray people article). Meanwhile Fiachra Etchingham lacked the leadership to move the campaign on and there are rumors in the local community about him... Meanwhile the so called sinn fein candidate who stayed quite on this issue now supports greeenstar iniatives (the company which holds the monopoly on the waste collection service) in cleaning up the south beach pictured in this weeks wicklow times! It makes you laugh really!!

by Joseph Thu Feb 21, 2008 13:46 joseph.w.o.rourke at gmail dot com

It seems that Greystones has become a building site. The cinema thats has been there for over 50 years ( and my grandparents met there!) has now been closed down. The LaTouche Hotel is being left to rot by the developer who bought it , so he can get around the Preservation Order. Tino's Deli has closed to make room for apartments. And now the Harbour and the north beach are being destroyed for apartments, shops and a modern "concrete-and-glass" marina structure that is not wanted, and does not respect the local architectural setting at all.

With many large housing schemes and a huge Dundrum style shopping centre on the way , it seems that Greystones is being turned into a hive for commuters who work in Dublin. What ever happened to locality?

by Mark C Thu Feb 21, 2008 13:13

Here we are with another example of the corruptness of our political system. Reminds me of the issues that came up in Kilcoole (three miles away) a number of years ago when developers wanted to build on the preserved land there. Thankfully it has been stopped, but one wonders - for how long?

Mark.