The locals are furious, but their objections to plans for Greystones Harbour are being brushed aside. It is a tale of political cowardice and de facto lackmail, argues Peter Murtagh.
There's a bridge club that meets in Greystones. In fact, there are probably several. But the one I was told about regularly fields 21 tables of two pairs per table. One evening late in January, the gathering was a bit of a damp squib, however: only six tables were filled. Quite a depletion; a plummeting from more than 80 people to a mere two dozen.
I don't play bridge, but I believe typical players are calm types with sharp minds who are often, but by no means always, on the sedate side of 60. Who knows where the absent bridge players went that evening, but I reckon a fair few of them were up the road in the rugby club. There, revolution was afoot.
Inside the club's main function room, more than 400 people heard a mixture of political and environmental speeches. What was exceptional about the 400-plus crowd was that there was nothing at all exceptional about them. They were my neighbours, ordinary people with ordinary concerns. Not political activists by inclination or design.
They included a smattering of younger people - concerned and idealistic teenagers and twentysomethings - as well as some in their 30s and 40s who you knew had two or three children spanning the teenage years. And there were a lot like my wife and me, people over 50 who gave the impression of being, to put it simply, totally fed up with the situation. There were also others who perhaps were indeed sacrificing their bridge evening.
The meeting was called to garner opposition to the proposed Greystones Harbour development. Under this public-private partnership involving Wicklow County Council and a consortium of John Sisk and Park Developments - Sispar - a combination of privately owned land, public rights of way, foreshore and reclaimed land will be given to Sispar.
In exchange, Sispar will build a new harbour. This will include a private marina for 230 boats and enhanced facilities for some existing harbour users, such as the sailing club, rowing club, angling club, diving club, and sea scouts.
There will also be 375 apartments, the tallest of which will be four storeys high and at the front, or seaward, side of the development. These apartments will overlook the harbour, thus blocking the sea view of buildings to their rear. There will be 1,000 car parking spaces and some 6,500 square metres devoted to retail units - about the same space as the new Woodie's in Bray, that company's largest outlet in the country.
At which point, a declaration: I am opposed to this development and have been canvassing opposition to it. I think the proposal displays breathtaking contempt both for the immediate area of the existing harbour and for well-established local opinion - without even seeking to test whether it has changed.
But the plan has a significance well beyond the relatively narrow confines of a squabble in a Co Wicklow former seaside town lately become a Dublin dormitory. At work here is an unholy alliance between a cash-starved local authority, rapacious development, and politicians who seem blithely uninterested in listening to any views other than those reinforcing their own.
If public lands and a public amenity (however decrepit - and who's responsible for that?) in north Co Wicklow can be expropriated and given to a private developer, then whole swathes of Ireland's coastline are up for grabs.
The idea of a marina in Greystones goes back to 1991, at least, when it was promoted by Tracey Enterprises. Remember that name, because Tracey has staying power if nothing else.
Next in line was Albert Gubay, the UK property developer worth an estimated £650 million (€951.9 million) in 2004 and based offshore on the Isle of Man. Gubay proposed a 350-berth marina funded by 700 apartments as well as a hotel and other commercial development.
The Gubay proposal bit the dust after a public meeting organised by Wicklow County Council drew more than 500 people who were hostile to it. Opponents of the current plan say that was the last time the council canvassed local opinion in this way. Since then, they argue, such consultation as has taken place has been orchestrated to minimise impact.
"They never hold a public meeting, invite comments and then argue their case," maintains Evelyn Cawley of the Greystones Protection and Development Association (GPDA). Like almost everyone in the GPDA, Cawley objects most to the sheer scale of the proposal.
"It's out of scale to what is needed," she says. "Selling part of the foreshore is not to the benefit of the wider community. The roads cannot possibly cope with traffic either during or after construction. And the character of the apartments is totally out of keeping with the town."
Ciaran Hayden, of an opposing group, the Greystones Community Group, which is in favour, has a different perspective.
"What if nothing is done? The harbour will fall into the sea," he says. "There is no Plan B. We've all been told that. I don't want 375 apartments in the harbour, but if this is the only way to do it, so be it."
And that, neatly put, is the nub of the argument. We have to sell the family silver.
Much of all this is about political cowardice, local government mismanagement and de facto blackmail.
One of Co Wicklow's TDs is none other than Dick Roche, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, who is capable of spotting a microphone at the far end of the constituency and reacting accordingly. The current issue of his "local newsletter", delivered to Greystones homes in the past three weeks, is six pages long and contains not a single word about the harbour project, by far the hottest topic in town. When contacted yesterday and asked what his position on the project was, his constituency office in Bray said it did not know.
Fine Gael is resolutely in partnership with Fianna Fáil in supporting the project, the charge being led locally by George Jones and Derek Mitchell, both councillors. The only parties locally against the project are Labour and the Greens.
Some politicians, particularly councillors, have a habit of displaying irritation when confronted by opposition to the plan. There's an implied "oh why can't you just shut up and let us get on with it" reaction. The message is very much that "we've been talking about this for long enough!"
True. But local feelings have not changed much. As of yesterday, written objections to An Bord Pleanala were about to top 3,000, the largest on any one project for more than six months, according to a spokesman, and a fair whack out of a population of 12,000.
It's hard not to have some sympathy for council officials. As one put it yesterday: "It's not long ago that we were turning off public lights to save money."
But any sympathy is overwhelmed by the council's appalling record, probably unparalleled nationally, of environmental negligence throughout the county.
One of the problems at Greystones Harbour which would be solved by the development is the removal of a dump, almost certainly illegal, operated by the council until about 15 years ago. Because of coastal erosion, this covered dump is now almost exposed. Is it any wonder there's a rat problem at the harbour?
To me, it truly beggars belief that a local authority, trustees of community assets on behalf of all citizens, would operate such a facility.
The council is also responsible for the derelict north wall of the existing harbour, an elegant structure of dumped precast concrete flooring. And this is where the blackmail comes in, along with that lumbering chant of the bully, emerging from the undergrowth, knuckles dragging along the ground, to shout in one's face: "THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE!"
That is not an argument. It's an anti- argument. It is a "talk to the hand, talk to the hand" display of contempt for a position with which one does not agree. There is never no alternative,in my view, just an absence of will to find one.
In three weeks of weekend door-to-door canvassing of about 150 homes, more than 80 people signed Bord Pleanala objections for me. Most did so with enthusiasm, a reaction I believe repeated in estates across the town. A number of homes were unoccupied, a number of people wanted to read the letter in their own time before making a decision.
I had just six refusals. Four were from people who sincerely felt the project was the right way forward. The other two were very interesting. One was from a builder, the other from a senior management figure in one of our largest construction companies.
Builder: "Sure why are you worried about this. If there's any problems, you and me'll be long gone." (Alarming. I'm only 52.)
Construction exec (CE): "You've come to the wrong house here."
Me: "You're in favour then?"
CE: "Absolutely."
Me: "Even at this scale."
CE (leaning forward slightly and firm but sotto voce): "The bigger the better!"
There are more than a dozen listed buildings around Greystones Harbour, a decrepit mess for which Wicklow County Council (and the forces of nature) is largely responsible. The last recorded dredging and major clean-up was in 1980 and since then, virtually nothing.
Those whose duty it is, in my view, to preserve, protect and enhance for the next generation have failed and are now washing their hands of their incompetence, giving the problem to someone else. It would not happen in Devon, Cornwall or Brittany.
The design of the proposed four-storey apartments that will block the sea views of anyone to their rear has no echo in any other buildings in the area.
Should not development in established areas be incremental in the change it imposes? Charlesland, to the south of the town, where some 1,400 high-density dwellings are being built, is a greenfield site and poses no problem for me (a view many on my side of the argument would not share).
Developing the harbour should be done with architectural sensitivity, not pseudo-East German brutalism. Local architect Martin Noone designed new apartments on Trafalgar Road, a few yards from the harbour. They are different, but they are in harmony and have a beautiful nautical air to them.
TRACEY. TRACEY. WHAT about Tracey?
Ah yes. Tracey.
In September 2003 the council was pondering a variation to the county development plan. Tracey Enterprises, of Dundrum, anxious as ever to be helpful, made a submission suggesting housing density at the marina needed to be increased from the projected 700 to 1,000. The traffic volume needed to cope with the development was estimated by the company at 130 heavy goods vehicles a day (260 journeys in and out of the site), delivering some 1.3 million tonnes of rock. Greystones roads clearly could not cope but Tracey would step in. The company would build a road across the southern slopes of Bray Head and down into the north end of the harbour area, thereby avoiding the town. The deal? Planning permission for 30 houses on Foxes Farm on Bray Head, which Tracey, just happens to own. Tracey's generous offer was not, apparently, accepted.
And so it goes on . . .
See also www.greystonesmarina.com; advocates of the scheme can be contacted at greystonescommunitygroup@hotmail.ie
Peter Murtagh is a Greystones resident and is a managing editor of The Irish Times