Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Possibly like I'm getting an impression of you ;)

I'm surprised you have time, when you're not stalking TH and knocking one out over his bank balance 😉

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes I'm kind of getting that impression of you.

So Rich bloke doesn't want the Island's great unwashed cycling and walking through a small piece of his land...fancy that.

At one time the Grand Island was the best hotel on the island .  The reason that it fell into disrepair was calculated neglect , as were a couple of other hotels in Douglas/Onchan. It's not

Posted Images

18 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Look at the carry on TH had with the Grand Island.  You cant develop that unless you build a hotel.

There was nothing wrong with that stipulation.  If it hadn't been insisted on, Ramsey would have been left with no hotel at all. And TH is responsible for his own set of voids in the town too (Curran's).

The stumbling block is the lack of any viable marina-type proposal/option to offer development a carrot, although being a riverine harbour it could end up like Peel as well. Ramsey is spreading outwards whilst its traditional centre is on its knees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about rights of way, has anyone focused on Port Soderick and the fencing off of the south side of the beach by the Heroes on the Water in the old amusement arcade.  Kind of churlish to mention it, but for decades you could access the south beach and oyster beach by walking around the arcade, but now it has been fenced off so you can only get there by chancing it across the river mouth depending on the tide and how the stones have been left from the last storm. 

It is only a small portion of the beach  and the facility is great, if it ever gets used, but it has effectively cut off an area that was available to all. 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

There was nothing wrong with that stipulation.  If it hadn't been insisted on, Ramsey would have been left with no hotel at all. And TH is responsible for his own set of voids in the town too (Curran's).

The stumbling block is the lack of any viable marina-type proposal/option to offer development a carrot, although being a riverine harbour it could end up like Peel as well. Ramsey is spreading outwards whilst its traditional centre is on its knees.

The issue with the Currans site being developed is that eyesore of an old mill type building that MNH and planning thought should be protected.  Unbelievable. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

The issue with the Currans site being developed is that eyesore of an old mill type building that MNH and planning thought should be protected.  Unbelievable. 

Belfast roof trusses apparently, of notable architectural significance to those to whom they matter. Regardless, there'll be nothing done in that area until the harbour/marina matter shows some progress, and that may now be further compounded or delayed with DOI's own plans to improve the quayside pavements and road.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Well not really.  He's kept something going that someone else actually built.

There's quite a bit going on in there too.

That aside, the hotel in Ramsey is a decent hotel and the prices more than reasonable.   It's was very much needed  up there. 

He employs a lot of people across various functions and had he been engaged a bit more years ago by RTC then the town would have had a redeveloped Quay and I suspect a marina too.

Pretty sure that in order to get the Grand Island and the surrounding land, he promised a similar kind of hotel just in a different area. IOM Government being IOM Government were hoodwinked once again

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Barlow said:

That may as be. But from my point of view from what I have written I am correct.

You of course do realise that lawyers are wrong 50% of the time. That sir, is a fact of life.

Even that is wrong. It may apply to a very small percentage ( less than 10% ) who are civil trial lawyers. But even then it’s not clear cut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Neil Down said:

Pretty sure that in order to get the Grand Island and the surrounding land, he promised a similar kind of hotel just in a different area. IOM Government being IOM Government were hoodwinked once again

 

Or, the Grand Island was in such a terrible state, hot and cold water running down the walls, failing electrics, threadbare carpets and furnishings, that a Nissen  hut on the beach would have been an improvement,  and IoMG got a good deal.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John Wright said:

Or, the Grand Island was in such a terrible state, hot and cold water running down the walls, failing electrics, threadbare carpets and furnishings, that a Nissen  hut on the beach would have been an improvement,  and IoMG got a good deal.

At one time the Grand Island was the best hotel on the island . 

The reason that it fell into disrepair was calculated neglect , as were a couple of other hotels in Douglas/Onchan.

It's not unusual for those only interested in making money ( helped by shysters ,in the legal profession and politicians) to buy an iconic building and encourage it's dereliction and subsequent vandalism ( "sorry to hear about the fire" ........ "shhhhh  that's next week") in order that the place resembles such an eyesore  that the powers that be are persuaded to allow  it's destruction and redevelopment.

I'm obliged by your opinion that the IoMG got a good deal  , I'm  not sure that the IoM population did .

Just saying

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was quite a regular patron of the GI in the late 70s and early 80s through to its closure and decline it certainly did but I'm not sure that it was totally intentional. The public bars were always well patronised and its use for functions (how many wedding photos had the seafront tiered lawns as a backdrop?) but I don't think it had enough hotel accommodation custom to remain viable as a hotel.

Certainly part of its demise was the drop off in tourism, it was a huge rambling building that had had any number of bit pieces extensions added on during the tourist heydays.

But the market had contracted, it wasn't at the popular end of the Island as regards the main remaining market (TT) and downhill it certainly went, the smell of damp and rotting carpet was overwhelming in latter times. With no bread and butter income it was only going to end one way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...