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

Tabnabs

Work has started this week to build five new Greystones Harbour clubhouses in county Wicklow for Sea Scouts, Rowers, Sailors, Divers and Anglers. The clubhouses are being provided 'free' from harbour developer, Sisk, with completion expected at the end of this year, according to Wicklow town councillor Derek Mitchell.

The temporary boat compounds are now being moved to allow laying underground pipes and a permanent surface prior to the boats moving back in mid summer.

'it is great to see progress again and this will be a boost to marine and youth activity in the town. No other town in Ireland has given such great facilities to marine organisations' said Cllr Mitchell.

'The Harbour Project also won the best Civil Engineering project at the Local Government Awards.

http://afloat.ie/port-news/greystones-harbour/item/27714-greystones-harbour-club-houses-for-sea-scouts-rowers-sailors-divers-anglers-underway

Jimjay

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Well. Here we are in mid January and the building of the clubhouses that was absolutely, positively, without a shadow of a doubt (and how dare you think otherwise!) going to start in January has well.........not started! There may be people who find this surprising but they must live in Bray because at this stage I doubt if anyone in Greystones does.

Spoke too soon?

legrand

Tabnabs wrote: »

http://afloat.ie/port-news/greystones-harbour/item/27714-greystones-harbour-club-houses-for-sea-scouts-rowers-sailors-divers-anglers-underway

Free? And here I was thinking that Sisk/WCC paid for the land in the first place. Thanks for setting me straight Derek - I'm really grateful.
What? They didn't pay for the land? So the 'free' thing - how did you work that out - I'm all ears.

Fiachra2

Jimjay wrote: »

Spoke too soon?

I bet they only did that to prove me wrong!:mad:

Jimjay

Fiachra2 wrote: »

I bet they only did that to prove me wrong!:mad:

At least they are doing something at last. (or looking like they are)
Club houses should be a great step :-)

red_bairn

They have cleared a section close to BJ Marina. Know what they are doing there?

Patriarch

Jimjay wrote: »

Spoke too soon?

Well spotted

Fiachra2

red_bairn wrote: »

They have cleared a section close to BJ Marina. Know what they are doing there?

I understand its a pen for the sailing club. The existing pen has to be dug up to lay drainage pipes etc.

legrand

Fiachra2 wrote: »

I understand its a pen for the sailing club. The existing pen has to be dug up to lay drainage pipes etc.

I wondered about that as they just laid basic hardcore and tarmac but no ground services (I thought it may have been for plant machinery in preperation for build out of residential/comercial).

I also heard a rumour that Sisk now have a developer partner on board. Anyone know anymore?

Fiachra2

legrand wrote: »

I wondered about that as they just laid basic hardcore and tarmac but no ground services (I thought it may have been for plant machinery in preperation for build out of residential/comercial).

I also heard a rumour that Sisk now have a developer partner on board. Anyone know anymore?

Yes they have announced this. Partner is probably a euphemism. It is more likely they sold the project to an investor with Sisk retained as the builder. Having repaid the loans to NAMA (minus a sizeable write down) it would not be at all illogical to then cut their losses and sell off the project. They could then crystallize the full loss on the development and go back to their core business which is building things.
The good news from the community's point of view is that the new developer/partner for whatever reason is prepared to provide some of the community facilities in advance of building houses. (An option which Sisk/WCC were not prepared to countenance). The pity is that they did not start with landscaping which would have benefitted the whole community rather than simply providing something (albeit a welcome something) for the rather small body of harbour users.

Alan_P

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Yes they have announced this. Partner is probably a euphemism. It is more likely they sold the project to an investor with Sisk retained as the builder. Having repaid the loans to NAMA (minus a sizeable write down) it would not be at all illogical to then cut their losses and sell off the project. They could then crystallize the full loss on the development and go back to their core business which is building things.
The good news from the community's point of view is that the new developer/partner for whatever reason is prepared to provide some of the community facilities in advance of building houses. (An option which Sisk/WCC were not prepared to countenance). The pity is that they did not start with landscaping which would have benefitted the whole community rather than simply providing something (albeit a welcome something) for the rather small body of harbour users.

I've heard this claim about NAMA writedowns of the loans a couple of times. It seems extremely unlikely to me, several friends of mine who've had dealings with NAMA have found them extremely aggressive and hardnosed. Given that SISK have at all times been a trading, solvent company, there's no earthly reason why NAMA would writedown these loans. In fact, it's a core part of NAMA's business model that performing loans are managed out and paid down fully and partly compensate for the nonperforming ones.

What's the evidence for these writedowns ?

Tabnabs

Alan_P wrote: »

What's the evidence for these writedowns ?

https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/nama-in-e50m-secret-debt-writeoff-report/

I've never heard it contradicted!

Who are the new developer partners?

Alan_P

Tabnabs wrote: »

https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/nama-in-e50m-secret-debt-writeoff-report/

That blog is just quoting a story from the Sunday Independent, a newspaper of shall we say questionable credibility. (I regard it as a comic).

In fairness to the blog, they do qualify the post with "The deal, if confirmed".

Fiachra2

Alan_P wrote: »

What's the evidence for these writedowns ?

Look at their accounts!

Fiachra2

Tabnabs wrote: »

https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/nama-in-e50m-secret-debt-writeoff-report/

I've never heard it contradicted!

Who are the new developer partners?

They haven't been named afaik.

Tabnabs

Alan_P wrote: »

That blog is just quoting a story from the Sunday Independent, a newspaper of shall we say questionable credibility. (I regard it as a comic).

In fairness to the blog, they do qualify the post with "The deal, if confirmed".

As I say, I've never heard it denied nor was the story retracted.

Harry Kane

The 2012 year end accounts of Sispar Limited and Sicon Limited are available to the public in the Companies Registration Office. These accounts appear to show a significant debt write off by the State to a private company. These accounts show that the bank loan of €40.2 million owed by Sispar Limited to NAMA as at 31st January 2012 was eliminated from the Sispar Limited balance sheet as at 31st December 2012. As Sicon Limited only paid €10.9 million the balance of the bank loan of €29.3 million appears to have been forgiven by NAMA.

Alan_P

Harry Kane wrote: »

The 2012 year end accounts of Sispar Limited and Sicon Limited are available to the public in the Companies Registration Office. These accounts appear to show a significant debt write off by the State to a private company. These accounts show that the bank loan of €40.2 million owed by Sispar Limited to NAMA as at 31st January 2012 was eliminated from the Sispar Limited balance sheet as at 31st December 2012. As Sicon Limited only paid €10.9 million the balance of the bank loan of €29.3 million appears to have been forgiven by NAMA.

Wasn't Sispar the joint venture created specifically for the marina development, which is effectively defunct since Park pulled out ? It's possible NAMA insisted that the loan be transferred back to a Sisk balance sheet.

If it was written off, it would be totally contrary to everything I've heard about how NAMA operate, and probably unique, given that it was a performing loan. It is of course possible that the original contract was so badly written that NAMA's hands were legally tied.

I think I'll contact some TDs about it, and see if they can find out anything.

Fiachra2

Alan_P wrote: »

Wasn't Sispar the joint venture created specifically for the marina development, which is effectively defunct since Park pulled out ? It's possible NAMA insisted that the loan be transferred back to a Sisk balance sheet.

If it was written off, it would be totally contrary to everything I've heard about how NAMA operate, and probably unique, given that it was a performing loan. It is of course possible that the original contract was so badly written that NAMA's hands were legally tied.

I think I'll contact some TDs about it, and see if they can find out anything.

Nama are not required to divulge any details of their transactions to anyone including TD's. Your best bet if you want to disprove this is to obtain the accounts of all SICON group companies and see if you can find the disappearing loan! NAMA's policy was not to give discounts on performing loans but they were not obliged to adhere to the policy.

Alan_P

Fiachra2 wrote: »

Nama are not required to divulge any details of their transactions to anyone including TD's.

They're not required to,but they have responded to a number of letters from TDs. And presumably WCC know if the loans were written off, and they,at least by standard protocol, are expected to respond to TDs.

I'm not particularly interested in disproving the writeoff, I just want a definite confirmation that it's true. If it is, it's totally incomprehensible and the whole sorry mess that is the marina development recedes further into a Stygian miasma.

Harry Kane

The published financial statement of Sicon Limited and Subsidiary Companies and Sispar Ltd for the period ended 31st December 2012 clearly show that NAMA gave these companies a substantial debt write off.

The financial statements of Sicon Limited and Subsidiary Companies for the period ended 31st December 2012 disclosed that the Group had acquired the remaining 50% interest in previously held 50% joint ventures (Sispar) on 10 July 2012 for a total consideration of €10.9 million. Details of this acquisition are set out in note 33.

Note 33 discloses Fair Value Adjustments of €20 million and Negative Goodwill arising of consolidation of €9.8 million. This represents a reduction in the value of the assets of Sispar Limited on its acquisition by Sicon Limited of €29.8 million.

As Sicon Limited only paid €10.9 million the balance of the bank loan of €29.3 million appears to have been forgiven by NAMA.

Honestly!

Harry Kane wrote: »

The published financial statement of Sicon Limited and Subsidiary Companies and Sispar Ltd for the period ended 31st December 2012 clearly show that NAMA gave these companies a substantial debt write off.

The financial statements of Sicon Limited and Subsidiary Companies for the period ended 31st December 2012 disclosed that the Group had acquired the remaining 50% interest in previously held 50% joint ventures (Sispar) on 10 July 2012 for a total consideration of €10.9 million. Details of this acquisition are set out in note 33.

Note 33 discloses Fair Value Adjustments of €20 million and Negative Goodwill arising of consolidation of €9.8 million. This represents a reduction in the value of the assets of Sispar Limited on its acquisition by Sicon Limited of €29.8 million.

As Sicon Limited only paid €10.9 million the balance of the bank loan of €29.3 million appears to have been forgiven by NAMA.

And Fine Gael ensured they will be building 375 units in the harbour instead of the 351 per agreed planning application. Profits will not go back to the taxpayer who bailed them out :mad:

Honestly!

Harry Kane wrote: »

The 2012 year end accounts of Sispar Limited and Sicon Limited are available to the public in the Companies Registration Office. These accounts appear to show a significant debt write off by the State to a private company. These accounts show that the bank loan of €40.2 million owed by Sispar Limited to NAMA as at 31st January 2012 was eliminated from the Sispar Limited balance sheet as at 31st December 2012. As Sicon Limited only paid €10.9 million the balance of the bank loan of €29.3 million appears to have been forgiven by NAMA.

Socialism in action...for some.

Charlie-Bravo

Works on-going...

Greystones Harbour Works Mar.2015 (b) by Astro's Pix, on Flickr

Tabnabs

Greystones Harbour

Allocations of moorings at Greystones Harbour has been deferred pending a decision by the members on the proposed mooring layout.

Discussions have continued between Sispar and the fishermen's representative Ivan O'Toole regarding options for landing and berthing facilities in the harbour area. These have included a joint visit to inspect facilities at Dun Laoghaire Harbour.

Sispar technical advisors have been requested to examine the viability of similar facilities at Greystones.

At last week's meeting of Greystones Municipal District, Cathaoirleach Tom Fortune asked if this was the only feedback they would get with regard to the situation with the fishermen.

'Can we have more information than this?' said Cllr Nicola Lawless, who said that she wishes to be kept in the loop.

Members heard that pontoons to provide for an additional 50 berths had been installed by BJ Marinas in the past week.

This will bring the capacity to approximately 60 and is a welcome boost for the facilities at the marina.

The increased capacity is expected to have a positive impact on business in the Greystones area.

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/braypeople/greystones-to-join-partnership-31124515.html

Langerland

Some nice looking aerial shots of the Harbour here in the Wings Of Life World Run video: http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/embrace-the-stunning-scenery-of-dn-laoghaire-as-the-wings-for-life-world-run-comes-to-ireland-31145871.html

pixbyjohn

Greystones Harbour, Co. Wicklow, Ireland by pixbyjohn, on Flickr

Tabnabs

Councillors want officials to provide them with more information about the progress being made at Greystones Harbour.

A report they received said that construction works are continuing with groundwork and drainage progressing well. A tower crane was to be erected and officials provided floor plans of the clubhouse.

Allocation of moorings is deferred pending a decision by the members on the proposed mooring layout.

The report said that options for landing catches by commercial fishermen within the harbour are being developed with a manufacturer and will be further discussed with the fishermen's representative when a viable solution has been finalised.

Benches for the north breakwater and a litter bin for the harbour are on order.

Cllr Grainne McLoughlin said that she is delighted about the construction however she wants to see something that will give an idea of what the end result will look like.

'We want to make sure the finished product is in keeping with what was originally planned,' she said.

She added that she wants to find out who is speaking to whom and when with regard to negotiations about the commercial fishermen.

Cllr Jennifer Whitmore asked if a layout of moorings has been provided and heard it had not.

'Will we have to sign off on the process?' she said. 'My understanding is it's a contractual obligation on the marina owner at the moment. If it's transferred to the council I want to know the ins and outs,' she said.

Cllr Nicola Lawless agreed with the points made by her colleagues,

She added that they have been waiting and waiting on meetings and want some kind of date.

She asked the officials to keep them in the loop more. 'It's great to see the work going on. The fishermen is such a big issue, you need to keep us informed.'

Bray People

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/braypeople/news/more-data-needed-on-harbour-progress-31197323.html

legrand

Judging from the comments above it doesn't sound like our officials have any clue as to what is going on does it? Council officials looking to other officials to tell let them know what's planned - good grief!

And what is the story with access to the north pier - seems as though access limited to keyholders availability? I see no reason to lock it at all let alone locking the gate at 6pm when its bright till 9pm.

recedite

The problem here is that the project was originally set up as a public/private partnership, which means some of the unelected council officials have been busy covering their asses since the project went pear shaped.

The current crop of councillors see it as their job to represent the interests of the public (or at least to make it look like they are)

Some of the older cohort of councillors who were there at the start of the project, and supported it even when the majority of townspeople were against it, are still in the business of trying to justify their original actions.

So if it comes down to a conflict between the public interest and the developers interest, there is a whole treacherous scheming range of motives among the various "public servants" involved.