The Giveaway of a Public Beach

wicklow | environment | opinion/analysis Tuesday August 19, 2008 20:55 by Mr.Peter Brady. - Concerned Citizens Action Committee

Expressing the Democratic rights of the people of Wicklow.

This is our third statement.

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 embankment 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, as well 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.

ose 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.