Arguments for and against the St James’s site
But what are the main arguments for and against it?
Pros:
* It is located in central Dublin City, while still being relatively easy to access from outside the capital.
St James’s is near Heuston station, the quays, and four bus services, while a Luas stop is already based at the hospital. Its position also means busy thoroughfares like O’Connell St will be less of an issue for families travelling from outside the capital.
* It is at an adult facility teaching hospital, and has maternity hospital options.
Unlike other sites, such as greenfield offers and Blanchardstown, St James’s meets the initial tri-requirement plan. Like the Mater, it is already a medical teaching hospital and an adult facility.
It is also close (850m) to the Coombe Maternity Hospital and, if needed, can build its own maternity facility.
* Planning permission and extra building are less of a problem than at the Mater.
The issue has not yet been fully resolved, with Health Minister James Reilly admitting there are still “moderate” planning permission concerns.
However, before Mary Harney’s doomed public- private co-location project was confined to a historical footnote, St James’s had been given the green light from An Bord Pleanála for a co-located private facility on its grounds.
This unit would have been allowed to reach eight storeys in places, and while this does not guarantee an easy path past planning hurdles, it will lessen concerns of a Mater-like rejection.
In addition, there are 13 acres of State-owned land near St James’s which can be built on without the need for more purchases.
Cons:
* Building at St James’s means throwing money away.
Dr Reilly admitted at yesterday’s press conference that the €26m already spent on the Mater site “has gone, not to be recovered”.
This is hardly what a recession-hit country likes to hear.
* There is a “moderate” risk of a repeat of the Mater hospital planning rejection.
As stated above, while planning permission is expected to be smoother at St James’s than the drawn-out Mater affair, stumbling blocks remain.
Despite planning permission previously being received for the private co-location facility, there is no guarantee that this will happen again as the designs are different.
A national children’s hospital will inevitably lead to legitimate local debate over its scale and impact on nearby surroundings.
Practicalities of construction in a built-up area also mean St James’s could potentially be problematic for development, while construction costs will almost certainly be more than at a greenfield site.
* Building the national children’s hospital means development of the adult facility will be halted.
As the Dolphin report confirms, the “new national children and maternity hospitals will consume most of capacity for expansion of the [existing] adult hospital”.
This means that, while drastic improvements in child services will rightly take place, there could be consequences for alternative adult services.
* The official final verdict of the St James’s Hospital site can be read here
Children’s Minister Frances Fitzgerald and Frank Dolphin, chairman of National Paediatric Hospital Review Group, at yesterday’s announcement.
* 1993: The Royal College of Physicians in Ireland calls for a single national children’s hospital. It says Temple St should be moved to the Mater.
* 2001: The Fianna Fáil-PDs coalition’s health reform document, Quality and Fairness: A Health System for You, confirms a “review of paediatric services (regional/tertiary)”.
* Dec 2005: The Children’s Health First report — otherwise known as the McKinsey report — is commissioned by the HSE to clarify how the new facility will be built.
* Feb-May 2006: McKinsey is completed and its site criteria are signed off by the HSE board. A taskforce is set up to find a site based on these requirements. Options include the Mater, St James’s, Crumlin, Blanchardstown, Tallaght, and greenfield locations.
* Jun 2006: The Mater is recommended by the HSE, its taskforce, and Government.
The site decision is mired in never-proven claims of political interference, as it is based in then taoiseach Bertie Ahern’s constituency.
* Jan 2007: Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin, withdraws from discussions due to the plans being put forward by RKW Consultants, who are tasked with examining the Mater site proposal. The National Paediatric Hospital Development Board (NPHDB) is established to oversee the project.
* 2008: An independent report is commissioned from KPMG, focusing on maternity and gynaecology services. It concludes they should be linked to an adult and paediatric hospital on the same campus.
* Oct 2009: Crumlin agrees to re-enter talks with the NPHDB.
* Oct 2010: NPHDB chairman Philip Lynch resigns due to “significant fundamental differences” with then health minister Mary Harney.
They include “the substantial funding gap for the project, clarity... and planning and design challenges”.
* Oct 2010: An Bord Pleanála is asked to examine the Mater site pre-planning application, sent in by the Children’s Hospital of Ireland Foundation on behalf of the NPHDB.
* Feb 2011: The new Government reviews the Mater decision.
* Mar 2011: The new chairman of the NPHDB, who replaced Philip Lynch five months earlier, also resigns.
He says there is a “lack of a continuing mandate and concern regarding the incurring material costs” of the project.
* May 2011: Health Minister James Reilly announces an independent review of the Mater decision. More than a dozen site options have now been offered.
(A year later, key NPHDB member, businesswoman Norah Casey tells reporters at the Irish Nurses and Midwives’ Organisation conference some of these sites are just attempts to get rid of Celtic Tiger-era land.)
* Jul 2011: After the review found no issue with the Mater, planning permission is sought.
* Feb 2012: After months of oral hearings, An Bord Pleanála rejects the Mater planning permission application; design and size are key concerns.
* Mar 2012: Another review is ordered, with a decision due initially by May 24. On Nov 6, it is finally confirmed that St James’s will be the site location.
— Fiachra Ó Cionnaith
* Site acquisition — done
* Procurement of design team — three months
* Design development and preparation of planning application — nine months
* Consideration of application by An Bord Pleanála — six months
If permission granted:
* Procurement of construction contractors — about 14 months
* Demolition/decanting of existing buildings
* Construction of new hospital — estimated at least three years to construct on a relatively clear urban site
* Commissioning of new hospital — about four to five months following the completion of construction.
— Catherine Shanahan
* Read more:
Mixture of anger, relief, and bargaining from parents and TDs
Losing bidders disappointed at site decision
Arguments for and against the St James’s site
Children’s hospital faces IT and planning risks
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
