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

Fiachra2

Mitch Connor wrote: »

In fairness - most accomodation in greystones is readily snapped up. Very hard to rent an apartment in the area for example. The Apartments in Eden Gate/Eden Wood are gone within days of coming on the market.

Now, it may be harder for them to sell the apartments, but renting them out should be very easy. If they are a decent standard, given the location and views a lot of them would have they will get snapped up very quickly in the renters market.

That isn't to say I like the idea of a big aparment block or two, or more, being built in that area - or that I trust they will actually do it and then get on to the landscaping that they should already have done - but to cite empty apartment blocks in the Dublin area or around the country as a reason they couldn't or shouldn't be built is ignoring the actual situation with regards to accomodation in the Greystones area.

That may be the case but if it is then why not build them now and make your money quickly? Why wait till next year.

Hubert Fitzpatrick (late of Wicklow county council!) writes today in the Irish times (in his role with the CFI) pleading for hand-outs to the construction industry in the form of zero vat, no development levies and some other nonsensical suggestions. However he makes two points.

1. There is no demand for apartments outside "central urban areas"
2. House prices are too low for it to be economical to build more

So on the basis of what the CIF are saying Sisks wont build but they will say that they are going to and my original point is I bet that some of the Town councillors will listen to sisk rather than the CIF and will want to delay landscaping for another year.

Fiachra2

Press release from Tom Fortune below


Independent Councillor Tom Fortune has expressed astonishment at the reply sent to Greystones Town council following a recent meeting at which the community proposals for tidying up the derelict harbour area were presented. Representatives of Sisk attended the meeting and agreed to take a look at the community proposals. However they have now rejected them out of hand. Instead they have offered to carry out a minimal amount of grassing in a small area of the site and open a pedestrian access to the North wall via a lengthy circuitous route that takes the public well away from the harbour itself.

Their response is simply unreal said Fortune these people seem to have no concept of the extent to which they have put upon the people of this town and the damage they have done to tourism. We have had to endure a building site for six years now. They kept us waiting for almost three years for the Primary Care Centre that then never happened. During that time they have been granted many concessions by Wicklow county council including extensions of time and variations to the plan. We have every reason to believe that they may also have been granted a significant write off of debt by NAMA a write off which, if it happened, is funded by the Irish tax-payer.

Despite this they seem to feel they have no responsibility to the community of this town. They seem to think that the community should endure this eyesore indefinitely. Sisk were contracted to build a marine and residential development and they have failed to complete this. The problem is their creation and it is up to them to resolve it to the satisfaction of the community. What they propose involves no material removal of hoardings, no landscaping of the site, no park area, no usable access to the North pier in fact virtually nothing of what the community sought. A lot of thought and work went into the community proposals and they have received widespread support in the town. To dismiss them in this manner is outrageous.

At the next town council meeting I will be asking that the council send a clear message to Sisk that their proposals are completely unacceptable and I hope that my fellow councillors will support me in this.

pixbyjohn

Sisk have spent millions on the harbour without any return, surely they won't spend any more until there is a certainty that they will get their money back. They are a business and surely that's the way business works. Like it or not.

cuddlycavies

pixbyjohn wrote: »

Sisk have spent millions on the harbour without any return, surely they won't spend any more until there is a certainty that they will get their money back. They are a business and surely that's the way business works. Like it or not.

I wonder if they have a F off price? And what it is? Could it be raised? Turn the project into a job creating community project that would leave the town with something to be proud rather than ashamed of. An outdoor food market with cover for example.

Buzkashi

pixbyjohn wrote: »

Sisk have spent millions on the harbour without any return, surely they won't spend any more until there is a certainty that they will get their money back. They are a business and surely that's the way business works. Like it or not.

You're missing the point, mate.

As I understand it, this is supposed to be a Public Private Partnership with a benefit coming to the public and the community. So far, no benefit to the public, right?

But also so far, many times that Sisk have been in what F3 called a 'default event', which is where a contractor under-performs to such a degree that the employer, in this case WCC, can call them in and fire them. If WCC did this, they could, back in 2008 and 2010 have called in the €10 million bond, and finished the community works themselves, leaving a nice big land bank in their possession to sell for countless millions when the economy improves.

Instead, WCC let them away with everything. They certified the harbour complete, which it blatantly is not, and reduced the amount of the bond to €5 million!

They even gifted them an extra three or four acres for nothing, subtracted from the public park, to build more houses on, houses that may never be built, and thus reduced the public benefit by a huge degree.

That land is prime development land on the waterfront, possibly the most desirable site on the east coast. Even now it's got to be worth €12 to €15 million just for the few acres, and will be worth much more in a rising market.

So why is WCC letting these f@cking predators away with wholesale breach of contract, and instead of curbing them or punishing them their officials actively reward their behaviour and encourage it?

Like I said, you're missing the point, my friend.

Do you think, like that Mitchell fella, that it's OK if this thing isn't completed for 22 years?

pixbyjohn

It will be finished when Sisk decide to finish it. It is that simple. I would love to see it completely finished and open tomorrow but sorry to say it can't happen until Sisk are ready to move on it.

Buzkashi

pixbyjohn wrote: »

It will be finished when Sisk decide to finish it. It is that simple. I would love to see it completely finished and open tomorrow but sorry to say it can't happen until Sisk are ready to move on it.

Very passive attitude. I don't share it and I suspect most other Stoners don't either.

Cerco

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Press release from Tom Fortune below


Independent Councillor Tom Fortune has expressed astonishment at the reply sent to Greystones Town council following a recent meeting at which the community proposals for tidying up the derelict harbour area were presented. Representatives of Sisk attended the meeting and agreed to take a look at the community proposals. However they have now rejected them out of hand. Instead they have offered to carry out a minimal amount of grassing in a small area of the site and open a pedestrian access to the North wall via a lengthy circuitous route that takes the public well away from the harbour itself.

Their response is simply unreal said Fortune these people seem to have no concept of the extent to which they have put upon the people of this town and the damage they have done to tourism. We have had to endure a building site for six years now. They kept us waiting for almost three years for the Primary Care Centre that then never happened. During that time they have been granted many concessions by Wicklow county council including extensions of time and variations to the plan. We have every reason to believe that they may also have been granted a significant write off of debt by NAMA a write off which, if it happened, is funded by the Irish tax-payer.

Despite this they seem to feel they have no responsibility to the community of this town. They seem to think that the community should endure this eyesore indefinitely. Sisk were contracted to build a marine and residential development and they have failed to complete this. The problem is their creation and it is up to them to resolve it to the satisfaction of the community. What they propose involves no material removal of hoardings, no landscaping of the site, no park area, no usable access to the North pier in fact virtually nothing of what the community sought. A lot of thought and work went into the community proposals and they have received widespread support in the town. To dismiss them in this manner is outrageous.

At the next town council meeting I will be askinag that the council send a clear message to Sisk that their proposals are completely unacceptable and I hope that my fellow councillors will support me in this.

The response from Sisk is arrogant. It seems to me that they are confident that they can behave with impunity.
Does this confidence come from some of our local representatives or is is all down to WCC?
It will be very interesting to see which councillors support Tom Fortune's call.

thecommander

Buzkashi wrote: »

Very passive attitude. I don't share it and I suspect most other Stoners don't either.

And how has that been working out for you so far? Nothing that 'stoners" have done has changed a thing in this project. You'd swear that you were an almighty force to be reckoned with. John is right, it will happen when it happens.

Cerco

thecommander wrote: »

And how has that been working out for you so far? Nothing that 'stoners" have done has changed a thing in this project. You'd swear that you were an almighty force to be reckoned with. John is right, it will happen when it happens.

Just re-enforces the undemocratic nature of decisions surrounding this fiasco.

Annasopra

Keep it civil folks

F3

thecommander wrote: »

And how has that been working out for you so far? Nothing that 'stoners" have done has changed a thing in this project. You'd swear that you were an almighty force to be reckoned with. John is right, it will happen when it happens.

I think in fairness, the 'Stoners' have been very tolerant of matters surrounding the harbour. Stand back and look at who is actually suffering.

Sisk still have their hat in the ring, because WCC want to profit as much as they do. WCC are full profit sharing partners on this scheme. When things went wrong, they have kept giving them another chance. I worked for a Civil Engeering Contractor who had a government project. Things went wrong for the contractor, he didn't get a second chance. The local authority brought the hatchet down ( because they could, as WCC can on this project) and the Contractor went into liquidation. I, and my many colleagues lost their livelihood.

We all have familes to support. What makes Sisk so special? Why didn't I or my ex-collegues get a second chance? I pay my taxes.

Sisk have been given so many second chances this is simply not right and not fair.

Greystones or the 'Stoners' are suffering, be in no doubt, and neither Sisk or WCC give a damn!!!!

Let us see how mighty the Stoners can be, you obviously were not at the 140strong public appearance at the TC meeting last month, you obviously were not at the 70 strong public participation for the brand greystones initiative during the summer where the entire room was furious about the Harbour, you are obviously not one of the thousands that have signed a petition recently. Let us see how mighty we actually are. Maybe we won't win, but I promise you this I will not give up, neither will the 'Stoners'. The Stoners have accumulated knowledge over the past 3 years, The Stoners are a very well educated town. The Stoners are a very well connected Town. And we have a 'Hulk'......

F3

Did you know that WCC have the right to determine the contract for hundreds of reasons?

Do you know that the breaches have been essentially ignored?

If WCC were to determine the contract, they have two choices.

1. To publicly tender the completion of the project to the highest bidder. Whatever that tender comes in at, WCC deduct any costs and Sisk get the rest and told to feck off. Example: Sisk have invested say €80m in building what is there. What is there has created 400 sites out of the sea. That's €200k per site. Supposing the highest tender is €40m (100k per site) and WCC's costs are €3m. Sisk are given €37m and take a loss of €43m.

2. To engage an expert to determine the value of the project, deduct WCC costs and give the residual to Sisk. Example: the expert determines thr value is €40m, WCC costs are €3m. Sisk are paid €37m ad told to feck off. Sisk make a loss of €43m.

These are the choices, this is in the concession aggreement.

Central Goverment could step in fund the €37m and remove Sisk.

Can anyone tell me, how in any ones language, where a private company who finds themselves in financial difficulty, gets free of charge, 3 acres of the finest real estate in the County, looking out over the sea and marina from a County Manager? Oh my, does this really not matter to you? Because it sure as hell matters to me.

Cheeky Chops

F3 wrote: »

Let us see how mighty the Stoners can be, you obviously were not at the 140strong public appearance at the TC meeting last month, you obviously were not at the 70 strong public participation for the brand greystones initiative during the summer where the entire room was furious about the Harbour, you are obviously not one of the thousands that have signed a petition recently. Let us see how mighty we actually are. Maybe we won't win, but I promise you this I will not give up, neither will the 'Stoners'. The Stoners have accumulated knowledge over the past 3 years, The Stoners are a very well educated town. The Stoners are a very well connected Town. And we have a 'Hulk'......

F3 .....focus for FFS man. You are brilliant in what you are doing but you sound a total arse here.

F3

Cheeky Chops wrote: »

F3 .....focus for FFS man. You are brilliant in what you are doing but you sound a total arse here.

Cheeky, reading back, it does sound a bit arsish !

Now stop being cheeky

F3

F3 wrote: »

Cheeky, reading back, it does sound a bit arsish !

Now stop being cheeky

The Avengers - "We have a Hulk" scene
www.youtube.com

Fiachra2

thecommander wrote: »

And how has that been working out for you so far? Nothing that 'stoners" have done has changed a thing in this project. You'd swear that you were an almighty force to be reckoned with. John is right, it will happen when it happens.

What F3 is saying in a perhaps somewhat animated way is that business does not work that way. In business, if you enter into a contract and fail to complete your side, then you will suffer penalties. Sisk have failed to complete their side of the contract. The only reason they are not suffering penalties at present is because WCC are not representing the public interest. We hope to change that!

With regard to what the "stoners" have achieved rest assured you would still be looking at hoardings across the harbour were it not for public agitation. Naturally the apologists for this mess will deny that but if you don't believe it then ask those members of the council who had been pushing futilely to get the harbour opened until GUBOH appeared on the scene

Fiachra2

Posted on Facebook by Gráinnne McLoughlin TC

I received yesterday the proposed plan from SISK regarding the harbour. It is not remotely good enough. There is a very minimum of grassing planned and a very strange access to the North Pier. Alongside this, they have the original development plans. That's all well and good if they plan to develop but as usual there are no time frames or management plan included. SISK agreed to come on board for the strategic plan for Greystones, to do that they cannot string everyone along with maybe this and perhaps that promises. They simply cannot think that what they propose will be acceptable to anyone - it quite simply is not.

Buzkashi

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Posted on Facebook by Gráinnne McLoughlin TC

I received yesterday the proposed plan from SISK regarding the harbour. It is not remotely good enough. There is a very minimum of grassing planned and a very strange access to the North Pier. Alongside this, they have the original development plans. That's all well and good if they plan to develop but as usual there are no time frames or management plan included. SISK agreed to come on board for the strategic plan for Greystones, to do that they cannot string everyone along with maybe this and perhaps that promises. They simply cannot think that what they propose will be acceptable to anyone - it quite simply is not.

Anyone using Facebook can now see the Sisk plans here, with the community plan to compare.

Buzkashi

A selection from the plans:

BigGeorge

Anyone know when the next town council is on? with well over 100 frustrated voters in the chamber last month, is it time again to get that room filled?

Any information appreciated

Fiachra2

The next meeting of the Town Council is at 7.30 on next Tuesday 29th October. The first item on the agenda is to discuss Sisk's response to the Community Plan for the harbour. (Which can best be described as a response of a two fingered nature)

We would really appreciate a big attendance at the meeting to support the councillors who will total reject Sisk's response. You presence will make a difference and you should be out of there by 8.15 or so.

legrand

for a dose of irony you could read this from today's IT
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/commercial-property/road-works-in-poland-lead-to-dead-end-for-siac-and-sisk-1.1572124

Now I'd prefer to be reading about a success story - and Sisk may rightly feel aggrieved about their experience in Poland - however, we could probably use the same language to describe our experience with Sisk here in Greystones.

See ya on Tuesday..

Fiachra2

There is one very interesting part in that article

The resulting delays meant targets were not met and the(Polish) roads authority called in performance bonds as a matter of course.

Sisk says this impinged on bond negotiations with insurance companies for projects in other countries

As we know Wicklow County Council returned a €5M bond to Sisk a couple of years ago. The Bond was for completion of the harbour which clearly is not complete yet and certainly wasn't complete then. The above piece cast a little light on how this event occurred. Any contractor can only get so much bonding. So if their bonds were being (rightly or wrongly) called in in Poland Sisk would be in a spot of bother. So it would appear that they turned to their good friends in WCC and asked for their bond back even though the work to which the bond related was incomplete. WCC -with no regard to the residents of Greystones-duly complied

Blanchflower

Fiachra2 wrote: »

So it would appear that they turned to their good friends in WCC and asked for their bond back even though the work to which the bond related was incomplete. WCC -with no regard to the residents of Greystones-duly complied

This is outrageous even for the scoundrels in Wicklow County Council. :mad:

TOMJONESsings

Just back from my overseas travels and just can't understand how they allowed such destruction of the harbour. I hear that the Council are intimate bedfellows of Sisks and that they have ignored lots of the planning regulations. Something just don't seem right here. Surely not more brown envelopes changing hands or promises of jobs or something.

Maudi

TOMJONESsings wrote: »

Just back from my overseas travels and just can't understand how they allowed such destruction of the harbour. I hear that the Council are intimate bedfellows of Sisks and that they have ignored lots of the planning regulations. Something just don't seem right here. Surely not more brown envelopes changing hands or promises of jobs or something.

Im afraid so.

TOMJONESsings

I am going to this town council meeting on Tuesday to see exactly what the politicians will do. I hope that they will be very annoyed that nothing is being done.

bertbliss

TOMJONESsings wrote: »

I am going to this town council meeting on Tuesday to see exactly what the politicians will do. I hope that they will be very annoyed that nothing is being done.

They don't annoy easily but perhaps they will have reached breaking point. Would you sing an oul song for us Tom?

clocha_liatha

I woul like to attend ths mmeting, is it open to the public?,also can someone say where the meeting is on, is it the building near south beach playground.?