North Quays €32m sell-off may be sunk

fricatus

http://www.munster-express.ie/news1.html

North Quays €32m sell-off may be sunk

By Jamie O’Keeffe

The Port of Waterford is considering re-opening the currently vacant and derelict North Quays and Frank Cassin Wharf in the city as their plans to sell the land-bank to a group of Cork property developers for over €32m are stalled.

With the matter currently before the Commercial Court - a division of the High Court - informed sources this week indicated to the ‘Munster Express’ that the Port is “seriously considering” the possibility of reopening the North Quays for use by customers shipping scrap metal and peat moss to export markets because they cannot secure the co-operation of CIÉ.

It was announced over two years ago that O’Brien & O’Flynn Ltd of Cork were buying the high-profile site after a tendering process.

A €500,000 international architectural and urban design competition focusing on possible future uses for the North

Quays’ site concluded in October 2002 when a vision emerged that envisaged a mix of development on the site including residential and office accommodation, a hotel, light industrial units and a landmark venue building as its focal point.

When contacted by the ‘Munster Express’, a Port of Waterford spokesperson refused to comment on the rumours circulating about the company’s future plans for the land-bank on the north-side of the Suir, except to say that as a commercial State company it is Port board policy to derive maximum income from all assets.

The North Quays site is seen as crucial to rebalancing Waterford city centre and to driving future inward investment.

However, sources close to the Port say there is “unbridled rage” among board members at CIÉ’s lack of co-operation and the continuing frustration by the transport company of attempts to close the sale. Fed up of CIÉ’s “obstinacy”, some directors are even said to be considering their position.

The Port’s efforts to sell their riverside land-bank - covering over 12 acres either side of the former R&H Hall flour mills - have been repeatedly delayed, but it is what has been labelled the “foot-dragging” by CIÉ that is being pinpointed as the final stumbling block that may see commercial shipping return to Waterford city centre.

A judgment delivered by Mr Justice Fennelly in the Supreme Court last July appeared to clear the way for Port of Waterford Company to complete the disposal of their surplus lands and a sale price believed to be over €32m was agreed with the Cork consortium.

OF Fishing Ltd failed in an appeal against an earlier High Court decision upholding the legal power and authority of the Port of Waterford Company to sell parts of the inner port.

The delay of 18 months caused by the failed course of action pursued by OF Fishing Ltd was described by the Port at the time as “regrettable”.

Bards

Just read that on the Munster too, and my gut feeling is that Waterford Port are trying to influence the electorate to push Cullen into making a decision. After-all he is Minister for Transport and CIE's boss. "informed sources...mmmmmm"

Expect a positive decision in the next few weeks just before the election is all I have to say

fricatus

Bards wrote:

Just read that on the Munster too, and my gut feeling is that Waterford Port are trying to influence the electorate to push Cullen into making a decision. After-all he is Minister for Transport and CIE's boss. "informed sources...mmmmmm"

Expect a positive decision in the next few weeks just before the election is all I have to say

The "informed sources" thing refers to the port, not CIE.

You're probably right about Cullen... and this headline is a major embarrassment since his electoral literature mentions the North Quays as one of his "achievements".

But let's be Machiavellian about it: who cares as long as some heads are banged together and construction gets going?

mike65

What the fupp is CIEs beef?

Mike.

Bards

fricatus wrote:

The "informed sources" thing refers to the port, not CIE.

the Ports are also his responsibility, anyway, what i was inferring was that the usual Informed Sources are most likely comming from the port company itself leaking info to the press in the hope that cullen will act in the best interest of the Port.

Afterall, it was his brainchild the development of the North Quays and is on his election manifesto as something which is on track to achieve

Freddie59

mike65 wrote:

What the fupp is CIEs beef?

Mike.

CIE's rail lines to Rosslare run through it. So they probably have some antiquated right of way. The minister needs to get on the case straight away. That place is a bloody eyesore.

mike65

Well bearing in mind the station location and the existing topography (ie a river out front!) the lines will still need to run behind the north quay but so what, its a feature.

Mike.

fricatus

Bards wrote:

...anyway, what i was inferring was that the usual Informed Sources are most likely comming from the port company itself leaking info to the press in the hope that cullen will act in the best interest of the Port.

OK, sorry, gotcha... and once again, it's Machiavellian, but they're dead right to kick up a fuss and get some movement.

mike65 wrote:

Well bearing in mind the station location and the existing topography (ie a river out front!) the lines will still need to run behind the north quay but so what, its a feature.

Mike.

Why just behind? Can they not also build above the railway lines (with a suitable level of vertical clearance)? It would be nothing new in world terms: look at Birmingham city centre or the whole city of Tokyo on Google Earth. Of course that kind of thing wouldn't work here

mike65

Oh they could, I'd need to look at the exact position, but I don't think they would be in the way of any new construction.

I dunno anyone can tell me, but does the new station design take into account the possibility of it being linked to any new development on the North Quay by bridge or tunnel?

Mike.

shanethemofo

Bards wrote:

the Ports are also his responsibility

Not necessarily, he is not in charge of the port of waterford.
CIE's Beef is to do with a right of way that they are being stubborn over i think, which the port already had ownership of.

Bards

shanethemofo wrote:

Not necessarily, he is not in charge of the port of waterford.
CIE's Beef is to do with a right of way that they are being stubborn over i think, which the port already had ownership of.

from http://www.transport.ie/marine/index.asp?lang=ENG&loc=1916

note the part I have highlighted in Bold
==================================
As of from the 1st of January 2006 The Irish Coast Guard, Maritime Safety Directorate and Maritime Transport have moved to the Department of Transport.


Maritime Transport
==============
To provide a framework for the provision by port companies operating within the national transport chain of port services whihc are efficeint, effective and adequate for the needs of our trading economy.

To facilitate the availability of commercial port services which are effective, competitive and cost efficient.
To ensure adequate infrastructure at ports to cope with growing throughput and facilitate copmpetitive shipping services in line with assessments of national seaport capacity to 2007.
To facilitate the coordination and integration of maritime transport within the total transport chain.
As provided for in the Harbours Act 1996, to oversee the transfer to alternative uses under local control, of those remaining regional ports and harbours which do not form part of the national maritime transport system for trade and travel while maintaining, in transition, an appropriate corporate governance regime. To implement the general strategic development framework for State regional ports and harbours through transfer of ownership to port companies or local authorities.
To expand Irish based ship ownership and ship management and to increase Irish seafarer employment.
To sustainably increase Irish seafarer and onshore maritime sector employment.