Lancaster Quay Hospital

Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Radioactiveman » Fri Jun 12, 2009 3:58 pm

Here are some images of the new private hospital proposed by Riga (OCP) to replace the now abandoned second phase of apartments on the old Jury's Site. I must say, I really like it. It certainly beats more apartments and reminds of the nearby Glucksman.
What do people think?

Image

Image

Image
Radioactiveman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Leesider » Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:20 pm

Start building now, God knows we could do with a new crane going up in the city! :-)

Seriously though a lot more in proportion than I thought it would be and doesn't look bad at all from those pics
Leesider
Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:38 pm
Location: Back on Leeside

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby rofbp » Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:47 pm

i know this is an architecture forum, not a health or politics one, but surely it makes no sense to build yet another private hospital in cork. we already have the bons, shanakiel, and the planned facility in mahon.

surely good architecture must have a social as well as an aesthetic value. while the buildings shown above have some aesthetic merit, they have no moral or social value, as they perpetuate the biggest flaw in irish healthcare, namely the public/private split.

the whole reason that public hospitals in places like ennis and nenagh, and shortly the mercy and south infirmary, are being shut or downgraded, is that they don't have the throughput to maintain skills in complex procedures, yet somehow these units with only around a hundred beds don't have the same logic applied to them.

meanwhile, the public hospitals are being reduced to shadows of their former selves.

sorry about the healthcare rant, but i feel the point on the social value of this building still stands. you can return to architectural comment now
rofbp
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:44 pm
Location: cork

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby bosco » Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:20 pm

There's (not insignificant) differences between the first drawing and the graphics below it. In the shape of the building and the materials. Which are they seeking permission for? It looks like it will further block the view of St. Finbarre's cathedral and thus provoke more objections.

And, yet again, more of those boring, bland yellowy beige cladding blocks (same as airport, Lapp's quay, school of music, Dunnes, Academy St..........)
bosco
Member
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:55 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Radioactiveman » Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:39 am

Agreed, I much prefer the cooler blues in the drawing to the much over-used beige/orange of the photomontage.
Radioactiveman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Yossarian » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:55 pm

what ever happened to white limestone and red brick?! f**k beige! I heard somewhere the Cork flag is a reference to white/gray limestone and brick...
Yossarian
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:57 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby rumpelstiltskin » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:55 pm

Yossarian wrote:what ever happened to white limestone and red brick?! f**k beige! I heard somewhere the Cork flag is a reference to white/gray limestone and brick...


Well I don't think we can be too critical considering the red brick s**t that's across the road from it.
rumpelstiltskin
Member
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby johnglas » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:58 pm

Yossarian: Good on you! That combination is the distinguishing building material of Cork and it's both aesthetically pleasing and capable of infinite variety (and any number of 'contemporary' interpretations). Cork could be a great small city if only it had a citizenry and administration that gave a toss about civic integrity and design.
PS That's not to say I don't like Cork (I do), but I found the level of civic neglect and decay in the centre very disturbing.
johnglas
Senior Member
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:43 am
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby sandymiss » Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:07 am

Thanks for your sharingThanks for sharing this useful information. It's great.:eek:



taux credit auto - Taux crédit auto. Comparatif des
offres! Les meilleurs taux crédit auto sont sur le net !
sandymiss
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 6:52 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby wearnicehats » Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:21 am

I truly despair of some people and even more of the planning system that allows it.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0814/1224252550325.html
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Pug » Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:15 am

why despair? They are perfectly entitled to do it, wouldnt you be worried if the hospital you worked in was being drained of funds while a brand spanking new one opened up around the corner ? (oddly located in the city centre, even the Mercy/South Infirmary are looking to get out of their own spots).

This country definitely needs Bord Pleanala, some of the decisions by local authority are utterly bizarre, even ignoring their own developments plans and that councillor on Killarney Town Council who lobbied other councillors to get his lands rezoned is living proof. My personal favourite is local authorities who grant permission with something like 99 conditions, none of which will ever be enforced unless its blatant.

The planners in the local authorities need to sit down and review all decisions that they grant, that are then overturned by Bord PLeanala and see why both sets of planners are thinking differently. Local authorities are an almost political decision for the bigger developments.
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Angry Rebel » Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:29 am

I too despair.

They are entitled to object, but on grounds that actually mean something from a planning perspective. Why should the grant of permission for Riga have any impact on the funding of a public hospital? Riga is privately funded so it's not an either/or situation. Even if it was, the planning system is not the correct place for that debate. Similarly, one of the grounds for objection is the potential loss of jobs (see Irish Examiner article)...aside from the fact that the facility will result in a net addition of medical posts for the city, why is this grounds for a planning objection?

You are right on some of the bizarre decisions by councils, witness the ABP overturn of the Chartered Land development on O'Connell street, which they noted breached a number of develoment plans written by the same council that granted permission!!! This doesn't obviate the need to prevent the system being used by nuts though...

On an unrelated note, the reporter describes the objector as being employed by the HSE as a shop steward? Does the taxpayer really pay the wages of union officials? I knew that some public sector employers (e.g. CIE) gave huge amounts of time to union officials to "conduct union business" [even though this was never monitored and most just go home early] but a dedicated shop steward?! I hope this guy has a "day job" as well or we may as well throw our hat at any kind of meaningful public sector reform...
Angry Rebel
Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:57 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Leesider » Fri Aug 14, 2009 9:59 am

Should it not be in the remit of the planning authority if the plan is viable or not and in to the general benefit of the city?? Probably more on the extreme side of the equation but in Killarney a leisure centre was granted planning permission eventhough some councillors had serious doubts as to the viability of the project. Now one year on and the operators of the centre are pulling out as it is not economically viable. I know this could be a bit of a minefield but should these things not be taken into consideration?
Leesider
Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:38 pm
Location: Back on Leeside

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Pug » Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:45 am

Angry Rebel wrote:I too despair.

They are entitled to object, but on grounds that actually mean something from a planning perspective. Why should the grant of permission for Riga have any impact on the funding of a public hospital? Riga is privately funded so it's not an either/or situation. Even if it was, the planning system is not the correct place for that debate. Similarly, one of the grounds for objection is the potential loss of jobs (see Irish Examiner article)...aside from the fact that the facility will result in a net addition of medical posts for the city, why is this grounds for a planning objection?



Fair point, loss of jobs shouldnt be used to delay planning, you're right. Personally I think Lancaster Quay/inner city is the wrong place for a private hospital in terms of aesthetics, i dont think its adds anything to such a historic city as cork (then again neither does the desperate eyesore that is Victoria Cross). The hospital is probably being dragged into the public v private hospital debate.

As to whether it should be in the remit of the planning authority if the plan is viable or not and to the general benefit of the city, I would simply say, I wouldnt trust a local authority with that decision, as again, its a policitical decision which is therefore, not always to the benefit of the city. Your case in point being Killarney leisure centre, which appears to have been a pet project of John O' Donoghue, backed by local councillors, even though there was a huge amount of swimming pools in the area. Its a classic ireland piece of planning. Its now in serious trouble so I would like to see accountability from a) who pushed it through b) how they justified pushing it through c) how much was spent on it d) who will justify the bills it will cost the taxpayer and d) who will resign because of it
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Leesider » Fri Aug 14, 2009 11:12 am

Pug wrote: Its a classic ireland piece of planning. Its now in serious trouble so I would like to see accountability from a) who pushed it through b) how they justified pushing it through c) how much was spent on it d) who will justify the bills it will cost the taxpayer and d) who will resign because of it


And pigs will fly.......was going to link that with a John O'Donoghue expense related escapade! ;-)
Leesider
Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:38 pm
Location: Back on Leeside

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Angry Rebel » Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:56 pm

The John O'Donoghue Centre is a very good example of what is wrong with planning in Ireland. If the planners aren't gushing over a developer, it's bending over for a politician...
Angry Rebel
Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:57 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Cliff Barnes » Sat Aug 15, 2009 7:54 am

Of course planning in Cork City and County is a joke.

2 authorities playing power games and at odds with each other.

Ask yourself why planning was granted for a huge Douglas court Shopping centre literally across the road from the equally large Douglas Village Shopping centre
Cliff Barnes
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:24 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby rofbp » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:32 pm

Angry Rebel wrote:

They are entitled to object, but on grounds that actually mean something from a planning perspective. Why should the grant of permission for Riga have any impact on the funding of a public hospital? Riga is privately funded so it's not an either/or situation. Even if it was, the planning system is not the correct place for that debate.


i agree that the specific objections made by mr o reilly are flawed, but is it really good planning to have 5 private hospitals in a city and county with only 1/2 million population? (bons, shanakiel, new beacon at cuh, new lancaster quay, new sheehan group in mahon). too much or too many of any type of facility in an area, be they shopping centres, incinerators, factories, houses, hospitals, must surely be a matter for the planners. after all, they comment on having too few facilites (schools, etc) all the time

Similarly, one of the grounds for objection is the potential loss of jobs (see Irish Examiner article)...aside from the fact that the facility will result in a net addition of medical posts for the city, why is this grounds for a planning objection?


it is not a reason to object to the development, but you are incorrect to say it is a fact that there will be a net increase in medical posts in the city because of this hospital

On an unrelated note, the reporter describes the objector as being employed by the HSE as a shop steward? Does the taxpayer really pay the wages of union officials? I knew that some public sector employers (e.g. CIE) gave huge amounts of time to union officials to "conduct union business" [even though this was never monitored and most just go home early] but a dedicated shop steward?! I hope this guy has a "day job" as well or we may as well throw our hat at any kind of meaningful public sector reform...


you point out mistakes by the reporter, yet you use them to criticise the objector. why?

1. all employers, public and private, are required to give reasonable time to employees to carry out their duties as union representatives. just because that may have been abused in other situations does not imply that it has been abused in this situation. he is employed to do hospital work, not to act full time as a shop steward.
2. the mercy is a voluntary hospital, and therefore the gentleman in question is an employee of mercy university hospital limited, not the hse directly.

on both these issues, the reporter was in error. if you have a problem with that, write to ms kennedy, rather than use an architecture forum.
don't cast aspersions on a hospital employee.
rofbp
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:44 pm
Location: cork

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby thesource » Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:22 pm

I think some of these post miss the major points. Ireland has a plan led system, the purpose of the Development Plan is to zone areas for future development on suitable sites and restrict a free for all by developers. The site of O'Callaghan's is zoned residential and is within a residential neighbourhood - this is why they bought it. The expansion of medical facilities in that locality has been zoned for at the Mercy Hospital and there are already approved private hospitals at CUH (Beacon) and Mahon (Sheehan's).

The proposals are also detrimental to the views of St Finbarre's Cathedral and O'Callaghans have ignored An Bord Pleanalla's previous decision which pulled back their apartment building to protect these views. O'Callaghan's are a dinosaur who are trying to bulldozer through their proposals like they used to in the old dats, but times have changed, they maybe able to still have influence at local council level but things will be rather different at ABP level who look not look kindly on him ignoring their previous wishes and trying to run roughshod over the local development plan.

O'Callaghan's have never built, operated or raised funding for a private hospital and are only trying to now because the residential market is dead. They are trying to raise finance at one of the most difficult economic times in our history so naturally investors are nervous about projects like this due to their and their operators lack of a track record and experience in developing and running private hospitals in Ireland.

With the uncertainty surrounding the financial viability of this project would it really be in the long term interests to permit a commercial use at odds with the site and its surroundings, and one that will damage the setting of one of Cork's greatest cultural heritage? The sensible answers is clearly no.

O'Callaghans should be made to continue with their approved residential development and adjust the costs and prices for the current market conditions. When they bought the site they gamble on the boom lasting. It hasn't, so they have to face it like other developers and get through it. Jumping on the private hospital bandwagon is neither beneficial in the long run to them or the people of Cork.
thesource
Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 3:05 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Angry Rebel » Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:02 am

thesource is correct, and I'd like to reiterate another high level point, in relation to rofbps question of whether it's a good idea to have 5 private hospitals. It is not for the planning department to determine this. They can zone areas, as part of a coherent (don't laugh people) development plan, which sets out where they think developments such as hospitals should be located. Whether there is 5 or 50 private hospitals should almost be an irrelevance to the planners, so long as the developments and buildings are in line with development plans and planning regulations. Just as the market will decide that a warehouse (to use rofbp example below) is not needed, even though it may have been built in accordance with all planning rules, it is for the market to decide the right number of private hospitals.

Now, having said that, I will temper it slightly. As health is such a key area and has a substantial publicly provided element, Government have a role in setting national level policy as to the degree to which private involvement is approriate, and the manner in which that is manifested. Delegating that decision to local authority planners is not the way to determine and administer health policy. You might well be right that 5 is excessive, but maybe it's not enough, who knows?! [I'm not a medical expert, I sense you're not either - apologies if you are] Let's see some conherent strategic policy & direction from Government.

Regarding the shop steward thing...you're missing the point, in more ways that one. I didn't use the reporters mistakes to criticise, nor do I care greatly about them, which is why I'm writing this rather than writing to the Editor...they were merely quoted as introduction. Secondly, the reporter says the person is employed as a shop steward. I have no problem with someone conducting reasonable union business outside/alongside their primary duties but my point is I hope noone is employed on public money (Mercy may be voluntary but it's publicly funded) solely to be a shop steward! I hope it was just bad grammar/writing by the journo. Thirdly, that accommodation extended to some employees has been disgracefully abused by some. That is a fact, which I put in, as I pointed out, "On an unrelated note". In no way did I suggest this shop steward has, so relax.

You might elaborate on your logic as to why there will be no net addition of medical posts as a result of this development.
Angry Rebel
Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:57 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Cliff Barnes » Mon Aug 17, 2009 1:07 pm

thesource wrote:
O'Callaghan's have never built, operated or raised funding for a private hospital and are only trying to now because the residential market is dead. They are trying to raise finance at one of the most difficult economic times in our history so naturally investors are nervous about projects like this due to their and their operators lack of a track record and experience in developing and running private hospitals in Ireland.

With the uncertainty surrounding the financial viability of this project would it really be in the long term interests to permit a commercial use at odds with the site and its surroundings, and one that will damage the setting of one of Cork's greatest cultural heritage? The sensible answers is clearly no.

O'Callaghans should be made to continue with their approved residential development and adjust the costs and prices for the current market conditions. When they bought the site they gamble on the boom lasting. It hasn't, so they have to face it like other developers and get through it. Jumping on the private hospital bandwagon is neither beneficial in the long run to them or the people of Cork.


There are not any questions on the planning application forms about "financial viability" as far as I know.Its a private project on his private land for private patients and will provide top medical jobs and jobs during construction and all privatly funded.

So developers should be forced to build housing units when you clearly state that the residential market is dead ?

Are you willing to lend Owen O'Callaghan the money ? Because the banks will not.

Builders and developers adapt according to demand.
Cliff Barnes
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:24 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Angry Rebel » Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:23 pm

Cliff Barnes wrote:Builders and developers adapt according to demand.


Unfortunately that demand sometimes includes the demand from investors for tax break products, which results in the underlying demand for the asset (car park/hotel etc) becoming an irrelevance!
Angry Rebel
Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:57 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Cliff Barnes » Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:55 pm

Angry Rebel wrote:
Cliff Barnes wrote:Builders and developers adapt according to demand./QUOTE]

Unfortunately that demand sometimes includes the demand from investors for tax break products, which results in the underlying demand for the asset (car park/hotel etc) becoming an irrelevance!


And even more demand letters from foreign and Irish banks.
Cliff Barnes
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:24 am

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby Pug » Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:44 pm

i think the overlying thing should be that the planners should be telling them what type of thing to build there, if we go with the logic that developers can build whatever they want simply because its their land, the cities will be in ruins. I dont think that Lancaster Quay site is suitable for a private hospital, I believe its central location could put something far better there and if developers take a punt on a site and lose out because of market conditions, its not up to planners to rescue them
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Lancaster Quay Hospital

Postby phatman » Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:09 am

Pug wrote:i think the overlying thing should be that the planners should be telling them what type of thing to build there, if we go with the logic that developers can build whatever they want simply because its their land, the cities will be in ruins. I dont think that Lancaster Quay site is suitable for a private hospital, I believe its central location could put something far better there and if developers take a punt on a site and lose out because of market conditions, its not up to planners to rescue them


Well said Pug.
phatman
Member
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:51 am
Location: PROC

Next

Return to Ireland



cron