Unused 7MB vendor huts may solve trader troubles
(CNS): A collection of colourful, but woefully small, vendor huts on Seven Mile Public Beach could help resolve the problem of irregular trading at the location, according to the Public Lands Commission board chairman. The huts were part of the infamous NRA deal with Dart that led to the closure of the West Bay Road and the current pressure on Public Beach, but they have never been used and some are already broken.
Licensed vendors told CNS that they had never been invited to lease the huts but said they were far too small for the needs of those currently plying their various trades on the beach.
The huts, which now belong to the government, were supplied by the Dart Group as part of the ‘For Cayman’ deal between Dart, government and the National Roads Authority. The agreement became known as the “NRA Agreement” because the major element of it was the closure of the West Bay Road in exchange for the construction of the Esterley Tibbetts Highway. But Dart had also committed to a number of upgrades in and around the Public Beach area, most of which have never been delivered.
The small huts are now the responsibility of the Public Lands Commission, which also has ultimate responsibility for the situation relating to the irregular trading in the area. PLC Board Chair Woody DaCosta told CNS that a proposal has been drawn up to tackle some of the issues but the commission cannot act until government comes up with a policy.
The PLC has undertaken a comprehensive review of the Seven Mile Public Beach situation, taking into account the existing but relatively new regulations relating to public lands, as well as the Ministry of District Administration and Lands’ current policy situation.
“The goals were to ensure that the general public’s right to meaningful enjoyment is not infringed,” DaCosta said. He explained that if the government wants to continue the policy of vending on the Seven Mile Public Beach, the commission has to establish a permitting or licensing process and a framework that is genuinely transparent, supported by the Constitution and, after it is approved by Cabinet, publicly accessible on the PLC’s website.
“Consequently, an operational plan, which features a never before policy and procedures manual specifically for the SMPB was created by the PLC,” he said. “The PLC has been informed by the ministry that said plan was sent to Caucus for consideration and then on to Cabinet for final approval, as is the process. Unfortunately, we were also informed that said plan was deferred on several occasions.”
DaCosta said that, given past court rulings in relation to public policy in general and the need for transparent government procedures and policies to be in place when setting rules, the PLC cannot just take decisive action without proper policies in place in relation to the public lands legislation.
“All we can do is call for enforcement of the act and its regulations,” Da Costa explained, noting that this is directed by the ministry. The proposal, if it is adopted, is a comprehensive plan and it takes into consideration the huts and their operational use, he said. “We cannot argue that they are somewhat small. Therefore we have considerations that should address those operational Issues for vendors at the same time endeavouring to keep the area aesthetically pleasing.”
Although the huts were part of the deal, DaCosta said they have nevertheless been an expense for the government, which is now responsible for the repair and general maintenance, upkeep, renovation and upgrades they will likely need if they are to become useful.
DaCosta also noted other issues with the deal, such as the loss of tourism room tax dollars, which has ultimately, though inidrectly, brought the cost of the deal back to the people. Consultants and the auditor general have all said that the deal that led to the construction of the Esterley Tibbetts extension was not well balanced and favoured the developer. At the time, however, with the economy in decline and government finances in the red, then-premier McKeeva Bush lauded it as a way to get the local economy back on track.
But more than a decade on, the impact of the development around Seven Mile Public Beach and the loss of access to the beaches now owned by Dart in the area, which were once used by tourists, especially cruise passengers, has led to enormous pressure on the Public Beach.
While locals continue to battle for access, visitors arriving by cruise ships or not staying on a beachfront property have almost no beach space to go to where they are able to access facilities, such as food, drinks, chairs and shade, except at Public Beach, where they are being welcomed but where some vendors might be trading illegally.
As noted by Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan recently, with so few beach locations for visitors to access, the challenge now is to balance the wants of tourists, the traders who are supplying them and the provision of public beach for local residents to enjoy, as it was originally intended without commercial activity.
Some vendors selling souvenirs told CNS that they wanted government to regularise the situation. Those who have licences believe it is unfair for others to be trading there without following the rules. They said that if government made the huts more functional, they would be happy to pay a reasonable sum to lease a unit, despite their size.
But with only eight huts and an ever-growing number of traders, if the commercial activity is going to be formalised, it is evident that the huts can only be part of the solution.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Business, Local News, Retail, Tourism
Ban cruise ships for a start
I heard people go and do the nasty in them
I bet you hear a lot of things.
These birdhouses are the epitome of Cayman idiocy.
Are these colored outhouses included in the DOT Welcome to Cayman brochure? Or only mermaids allowed?
Yes they have – Govt changed their minds and Dart has complied its Govt that has not enforced the laws and failed to monitor the duties and waivers granted. Govt are clueless and don’t even know where the balance of the concession balance stands or how much Dart has spent in respect of their agreement to invest $400 million. That would be an interesting FOI request.
“But Dart had also committed to a number of upgrades in and around the Public Beach area, most of which have never been delivered.”
It’s been so long, can someone please remind me what was promised?
See below. Nothing was promised. All other offers were rejected by the Government. They got exactly what they asked for and more.
Major slip up 12:55, Dart will be pleased to see confirmation that their scheme is working
Where the new Indigo hotel is being built. That piece of land was to be used and created into a camp grounds for Caymanians. So sad really.
Not true. That was never part of the deal.
Let’s see here. Kenny brings in the over fed damn near dead cruisers, unregulated SMB vendors run a muck, Wayne says SMB vendors unacceptable, Woody says, here’s a policy that CIG needs to enforce but I can’t because there is no CIG policy. Isn’t this what you call a circular firing squad🤔🤔🤔
Stay tuned for the next exciting episode…..
And that is a perfect illustration of this “ every man for himself “ government.
No party policy, cohesion or leadership guide this rudderless vessel called UDPact.
No wayy
We want decent vendor accommodations.
Nice and colorful.
Kinda like Tiillies
Govt throughout the years has allowed SMB to be wrecked, Public Beach to wrecked, – Govt throughout the years has allowed the Cayman Islands most widely recognised asset/commodity to be decimated, – in twenty years this is where we are
As the name implies “PUBLIC BEACH” not Vendor Beach! Keep the vendors off the beaches😡😡
As the name implies, are the other beaches “private”?
The “public beach” framing of this particular spot is the beginning of something else for Cayman.
PLEASE keep the vendors off the beach. It’s such an embarrassment
I used to go to public beach quite a lot back in the day, even if not stopping it was just nice to drive by and see the sea, glimpse a sunset and reset the appreciation of being here. Maybe that’s the problem, we are being robbed of the simple things that steered us to that appreciation and now it’s becoming irrelevant by an overloaded developmental channelling geared with the mindset of **** you.
No $hit they’re too small for beach vendors otherwise they wouldn’t still be sitting there unoccupied. Speaking of $hit, why not turn them into porta-potties? At least they might get occupied frequently then
Just like the ones gov’t built in Bodden town that were never used and eventually torn down…government planning at its finest.
These disproportionately cheap and useless huts physically represent the minimum effort DART ritually expends on community CSR quid pro quo, for which we reward them handsomely with license to extract tens of millions that would otherwise flow into general public revenue. They openly laugh at these host transactions while clawing over our crown land, concessions, waivers, lucrative “managerial” contracts, and room taxes to their account with both arms. We are the suckers, and not even keeping track of how hard and deep this goes. But what is most bewildering are the crooked-minded victims that revere this toxic culture of inexplicable greed, and reflex deceptive practice, even as it penalizes them and future generations. That is some kind of new level of stupid.
Stop the lies, these were the size specified by the Government, Dart had suggested larger ones, but the Government made them smaller. Know your facts.
Dart would likely be happy to take those mini sheds back and use them to cover up the decayed greenery he created upon destroying the former Britannia Gold Course.
Ok, what kinds of vendors did CIG expect to have in these huts? They are really ticket booths. But for what?
You could stock them with small packets of Skittles to sell, just like they do in Mexico.More than adequate inventory & point of sale space.
No trading huts or vendors on the public beach!!
I thought they were changing huts like at Butlins.
The site that is now under construction, was there ever a drawing circulated that showed that as a camping area?
Everyone likes to blame Dart, when in fact it was CIG to blame.
Applying similar rationale to: “nobody said I couldn’t take a casino advance on government-backed credit, that I forgot to pay back, but will do that now.”
DART needlessly exploit. Who they exploit doesn’t change that operational truth.
Of course, these tiny footprint units are far too small for most vendors to use. All in the planned non-use as stalls but on standby for Dart’s need for more toilets maybe? 🙂
I’d rather there were no vendors. Very grubby.
It’s still a stupid design for that as well.
The ‘For Cayman’ deal was obviously not for us, it’s so sad to know that this could not be comprehended by the people we look to for protection of our interest. The more ‘educated’ people we elected the worse representation we get.
4.52pm Who are the elected “educated” people in Govt now or were in Mac’s UDP?
Alot of our vendors could not even fit into them
Those vending huts were designed, built and paid for by Dart, but not before Government signed off on them. In fact, yes fact….Dart’s original plans for the huts was larger but government asked for them to be downsized. Dart was only complying with Government’s wishes.
Fully disagree with ethically-bankrupt notion that it’s okay to simply hoodwink distracted civil servants and execute some sort of bare minimum in order to receive material advantages, contracts, and money in the 9 figures. It’s further evidence of years of bad faith dealing exploiting the good nature of the people of the Cayman Islands. You don’t have to look very far to find other deceitful examples with that group, and that should tell you everything about the kind of people they are, and who they are looking out for. It’s not us.
God forbid a Civil Servant was expected to actually do their job, even just once.
Yes, that awful Dart that had to take over and complete the ETH because Dart’s end was already finished on time/budget and CIG/NRA was a year behind, don’t talk to me about bare minimum.
A bit revisionist. Dart was paid and also did the bare minimum on the road surface, laying and pulling it up a week later. Dart also received hundreds of millions in crown land, contracts, concessions, duty waivers, changes to laws, and room taxes. Reneging on almost all of the Annexed community pledges. You should read the Agreements and then explain where all the proportionate community benefits went. Useless huts.
Put the traders on the Craft Market, if it still exists, or in the car park at Dart’s Royal Palms, keep them off the beaches, who wants to them there when trying to enjoy relaxing time on beach. Cheap and crass.
Or, just spit balling here, in your backyard?
Gee, that was helpful.
Spit ball away whatever that means, if it makes you feel better, sounds cheap and crass too, don’t like your own backyard been used? Neither do we…Public Beach.
Take it up with the people you elected holmes.
Put the traders on their own land.
dart has improved the area surrounding public beach. fact.
cig, through its general incompetence, has allowed the area to be overrun with unlicsensed vendors which is ruining the whole experience for everybody
I do agree that Dart helped the beach have more space, but don’t think he did that for us. He’s gearing up to take the beach for his new hotel. It won’t be “public” beach much longer…
So why cut off the beach at Royal Palms and so call improve area aroubd PUBLIC beach?
create a craft market off beach where people can try and sell what they want.
all other vendors should be banned from the beach.
Yes a craft market offthe Beach nearby with adequate space to trade, should be built, and vendors required to display their license permits. The public beach was never supposed to be sold and create this huge problem. Govt created this problem Therefore govt must fix this problem.
Good suggestions, but the issue is that CIG rarely enforces it’s laws. I see no change in this policy.
so the ‘woefully’ small huts that were too small for anybody to use, may now be the solution for beach vendors????
pass me the headache pills….just another day in wonderland.
join 2 to 3 of them together ❤
what I would like to know and understand is!Who is in charge that gave all this power to Mr. Almighty Dart? The Caymanians that really love Cayman are the ones that are suffering because of his decision makings about whats best for The Cayman Islands!Cayman is going to sink in the sea if you keep letting this man continue to do what he’s been doing. Cayman already looks like ajungle of cement! very little trees. It just makes me sick to my stomach!
Those vendor hours are fine. Do not make them any bigger . They were never intended to store materials , life jackets , etc . Or sleep in . Just some one to sand in .
If they make them bigger, it will turn into a slum overnight. Licensed venders ONLY ! Operation of jet skis need INSURANCE ! Everyone there needs to be checked for a license . They also should have company shirts on so EVERYONE can assured who they are dealing with.
What don’t they understand? We don’t want street vendors or hawkers by our beaches.
Correct and the few cruise shippers I know don’t want them either. No one needs a rusty old sun bed to enjoy 7MB.
But Kenneth needs his voters, who is going to tell them they’re reducing Cayman’s tourism down to the lowest standards in the Caribbean…Not Kenny ‘cos he just needs to keep that fat paycheck and to hell with Cayman.
Yup, and he was elected, so who’s idiot? The idiot running for office, or the hundreds of idiots that elect the idiot?
They’re ALL idiots , and Kenny is chief idiot.
There was so much more in the 4 versions of the NRA deal(s). PACT need to crack the cover on these editions from 2012-2016. Eg.DART was improperly given freehold title to 220 acres of crown lease land without supervised completion of the qualifying criteria; the Soto Lands where dog park and Easter camping had been dangled in John Doak renditions – are now under the Indigo Hotel; Sunrise Learning Centre, vocational facilities, and rugby pitch also dangled and withdrawn. We then hired DART to oversee our own NRA, using our own money, while giving them long-ago exceeded $30mln duty waivers and capped room tax concessions – even Roy said he had no idea. We should assume we have lost at least tens, if not hundreds of millions in CIG revenue…and we keep giving them more blank cheque management responsibilities, when they can’t even cut their grass, or comply with Lands Law, or keep an honest account of the many ways they screw us over. They think it’s funny.
It was GOVERNMENT, NOT DART, that cancelled the plans for the dog park and camp ground. And the land sales and transfers to Dart were all legitimate revisions to the Agreement when Alden and Kurt didn’t agree to other provisions of the original NRA agreement.
Who elected the government? The blame lies with whoever that was.
Alden and Kurt are to blame. Typical.
The electorate is to blame. Ministers are elected. If we elect better Ministers, progress may occur.
Oh yes, perhaps all legal. That’s not the same as the right thing to do, or having any of the public’s best interest in mind. ACC should be pouring into every aspect of the NRA Agreements, who was involved and paid to adopt positions contrary to public interest. That’s criminal stuff for which there is no expiry.
What could anyone do with a hut that small? As large and grandiose as the Dart Group is I am very surprise that they were actually part of any deal. Another rip off. Was the NRA really satisfied with that?
Those silly huts were never fit for purpose, and I am surprised that they were ever approved. Designer should be ashamed .
They were made for 1 person to stand in . Not a storage unit .
I thought they were toilets?
The huts were built to the specifications provided by the responsible government Ministry.
FOI is your friend.
10:52 am Government, not Dart, determined the size of the huts. I’m fact, they told Dart to downsize them from the original plans.
What could anyone do with a hut that small?
That’s bigger than some rental accommodations in Cayman.
Dart went over and above the terms of the NRA agreement. It was govt that neglected their responsibilities due to failure to enforce the law.
Not true at all. Eg.DART has still not complied with the Terms of Reference on 220 acre crown land transfer, among other things. CIG’s predictable failures to supervise, do not vindicate DART’s exploitation of flaws they intentionally engineered into the language of the contract, their lack of supervision, or their contemptible disregard for their published obligations to the public of the Cayman Islands. Not surprising when dealing with vulture capitalists.