Lancaster Quay Hospital

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

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

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……….)

Agreed, I much prefer the cooler blues in the drawing to the much over-used beige/orange of the photomontage.

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 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.

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.

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

taux credit auto РTaux cr̩dit auto. Comparatif des
offres! Les meilleurs taux crédit auto sont sur le net !

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

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.

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…

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?

@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 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! 😉

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…

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

@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.

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 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?! Let’s see some conherent strategic policy & direction from Government.

You might elaborate on your logic as to why there will be no net addition of medical posts as a result of this development.

@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 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 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.

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 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.

I was only thinking last week about one of the biggest missed opportunities during the Celtic Tiger.

If every city centre hospital was sold at the peak, we could have build a new “campus hospital” somewhere on the outskirts (e.g. within 10 minute drive of city centre – off Bandon Rd, East Cork dual carriageway etc). The value of the city sites would have made it close to cost neutral. We would have freed up city sites for better use (per Pug above) and had a world class hospital, with every specialty and facility you could think of. Well laid out with nice landscaping, decent parking, public transport terminus etc etc. Ijnstead we continue to have a hotch potch of hospitals, with our main one being an overdeveloped, badly laid out and run down CUH. I discussed this with a consultant who works in A&E in CUH and he agreed. He hates CUH as it’s so difficult to work on as a site due to the bitty way in which it’s been developed over the years.

@Angry Rebel wrote:

I was only thinking last week about one of the biggest missed opportunities during the Celtic Tiger.

If every city centre hospital was sold at the peak, we could have build a new “campus hospital” somewhere on the outskirts (e.g. within 10 minute drive of city centre – off Bandon Rd, East Cork dual carriageway etc). The value of the city sites would have made it close to cost neutral. We would have freed up city sites for better use (per Pug above) and had a world class hospital, with every specialty and facility you could think of. Well laid out with nice landscaping, decent parking, public transport terminus etc etc. Ijnstead we continue to have a hotch potch of hospitals, with our main one being an overdeveloped, badly laid out and run down CUH. I discussed this with a consultant who works in A&E in CUH and he agreed. He hates CUH as it’s so difficult to work on as a site due to the bitty way in which it’s been developed over the years.

I am sure that if someone was to propose a Houston,Texas style world class medical centre you would have the usual “No to high rise and No to urbansprawl” objectors having their usual fit.

not if you desgn it right and stick it somewhere slightly out of the way of the general publics viewing but very near the city, say like a large area, currently neglected by the Government like, i dont know, the Docklands

@Pug wrote:

not if you desgn it right and stick it somewhere slightly out of the way of the general publics viewing but very near the city, say like a large area, currently neglected by the Government like, i dont know, the Docklands

You would still have the landed gentry Mary Leland types moaning as they will lose their view of Montenotte with a 6/7story “Manhatten” type development.

not at all, i believe the greenery on that side of the river is already pretty much protected, and dont forget, planning has already been granted for the site where the Marquee is held for 3 large residential towers for apts, something like 14 storeys , a conference centre and offices. I suspect the Docklands masterplan has suggested medical use down there already, certainly i reckon there must have been some submissions to locating a hospital down there. THe Mercy / South Infirmary have been talking about getting out of the cramped quarters in town for a while now

I see from the City Council’s website TP 10/34317 that Riga (one of Owen O’Callaghan’s companies) has lodged another planning application for a private hospital, though this time they are calling it a clinic on Lancaster Quay. Hoepfully he’ll have more luck with ABP this time around!

“for the construction of a medical clinic at the Lancaster Gate development, Lancaster Quay, Cork. The proposal allows for a modification to the permitted and partially completed hotel and apartment permission (permission t.p.04/28705 as modified by 06/31502 and T.P. 05/30361); including the omission of the permitted crèche. The proposed medical clinic will be built in the area previously allocated to the Blocks D and E (and crèche) of TP 04/28705 as modified by 06/31502; a new separate basement car park access will be developed for dedicated car park access to the proposal. The proposal also allows for the closure of the internal circulation road from the eastern to western bridge, the physical separation of the basement car park areas and the dedicated use of the existing basement ramp to provide for access to the apartments and hotel only. The proposal will consist of 93 no beds for inpatient and outpatient treatment; consisting of 46 no general beds, an intensive care unit (high dependency unit) (5 no beds), 22 no surgical day beds, 10 no recovery beds, 10 no post natal beds, staff and ancillary administrative areas, diagnostic imaging, admissions, reception, cafeteria, physiotherapy, consultant suites (10 no.), surgical theatres, pharmacy all on six floors with ancillary basement alterations and works to the existing basement, provision of plant areas and general site layout alterations. The total GFA of the proposed development is 10, 713sqm. The proposal also allows for an additional 1,017sqm of works in the basement through the provision of services and access areas to the existing permitted car parking areas”

ABP doing their bit for the construction industry again I see

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/236807.htm

@wearnicehats wrote:

ABP doing their bit for the construction industry again I see

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/236807.htm

By that count nothing will be built in Cork City centre again.

Even in the areas that did not flood last year.

The probably still have permission for an unwanted stack of apartments

@Springer wrote:

By that count nothing will be built in Cork City centre again.

Even in the areas that did not flood last year.

The probably still have permission for an unwanted stack of apartments

The flooding issues seem to be particularly in relation to its use as a hospital though. The concerns are not that the building would flood, but that access would not be maintained, which would be unacceptable in the case of a hospital (but presumably tolerable for a certain period for residential or retail development). I would have thought that the concerns about the effects of contaminated hospital waste in the event of a flood could easily be dealt with.

@jungle wrote:

The flooding issues seem to be particularly in relation to its use as a hospital though. The concerns are not that the building would flood, but that access would not be maintained, which would be unacceptable in the case of a hospital (but presumably tolerable for a certain period for residential or retail development). I would have thought that the concerns about the effects of contaminated hospital waste in the event of a flood could easily be dealt with.

I thought it was elective surgery only. Anyway, I’m interested in this scheme because of the flooding issue with regard to a PA that I hope to lodge soon. Having read the draft report –

http://www.leecframs.ie/floodmaps/maps.asp

I too doubt that anything even remotely adjacent to the Lee will get passed any time soon. This is a draft report though right?

Between the tunnel and flooding will we see any development in Cork over the next few years, and the government lack of funds/will to do anything about rectifying them.

I say “will” because 3 billion can be spent on Metro North and we won’t even mention the banks!

Latest estimate for Metro North is €6bn!!!!