Residents say port project is unacceptable burden on lives and health

THE Port of Cork company is applying for permission to relocate its container traffic from Tivoli and the city quays to Ringaskiddy.

Sat, 22 Dec, 2007 - 00:00

Letters

Importantly, the residents of the lower harbour area do not oppose the relocation of the city quays’ traffic to Ringaskiddy. They believe the issue of the docklands development and the Tivoli container facility has been confused in the eyes of the public.

In short, the city quays and the Tivoli facility are not one and the same thing.

The Tivoli container facility, located about a mile downstream from the city docks, is not a barrier to the most welcome proposed new City Quarter development of the docklands.

The Port of Cork, a private company under the Harbours Act 1996, currently handles between 120,000 and 140,000 containers (or TEU) annually and has ambitious plans to make Ringaskiddy a European hub port, generating 600,000 TEU to 800,000 TEU annually.

The massive Southampton port barely reached the 800,000 TEU figure in 2005.

The Port of Cork has said it intends substantially to reduce its workforce, thus depriving the Ringaskiddy and Cobh areas of any financial benefits whatsoever.

It proposes to infill the foreshore from the existing Ringaskiddy dock basin to the National Maritime College and extend some 500 metres into Monkstown Bay, thus reclaiming approximately 42 acres.

The company proposes to erect 70-metre-high cranes (higher than Cork County Hall) on the new waterfront and operate the facility 24/7 the year round.

The facility will also require smaller moving lift-type cranes which constantly emit a warning noise as they are operated. Light pollution in the area would dramatically increase as the operation of the port would be fully floodlit through the night.

According to RPS, consultant engineers to the Port of Cork company, the noise pollution at source while stacking containers would be the equivalent to that of a jet engine.

The health and safety consequences for the residents of the lower harbour area would be appalling. Residents would be permanently denied their right to the quiet enjoyment of their homes and environs.

Rest and sleep would be seriously compromised and denied to many, so we object to the imposition of this proposed nuisance in our midst.

We question the validity of Port of Cork’s claim to best global practice in port environmental management with particular regard to its commitment to “reduce and control the potential impact of commercial vessels”, the “minimising of nuisance in areas such as noise” and “reduction of impact on marine ecosystems from the movement of vessels”.

For the many people from city and county and the communities of the entire harbour area who enjoy water sport activities within the safety of Monkstown Bay, the future is very bleak.

We value the amenity which is the harbour and we view the proposal with great foreboding as the increased, constant shipping activity would consign such relaxation and enjoyment to fireside memories.

There is a very serious potential for damage to the nearby Monkstown Creek and its irreplaceable birdlife. The incidence of Cork city flooding would increase due to the resulting constriction of tide flow at Whitepoint, bearing in mind that flooding in Cork rarely occurred pre-1950, before the infill of the tidal plain between Tivoli and Dunkettle.

One can only imagine the road traffic congestion which would result from the implementation of this proposal. The roads of Ringaskiddy, Carrs Hill, Raffeen, Monkstown and Passage West would be clogged up with container-laden traffic heading for the South Link Road and the Jack Lynch Tunnel.

The Port of Cork company consultant engineers clearly stated that traffic was not their problem — it was an issue for the National Roads Authority!

The benefits to Cork, and the entire country, from this proposed development would appear to be minimal and it makes little fiscal or commercial sense. Indeed many would question its viability in the national interest.

Therefore, the proposed Ringaskiddy development is being opposed as an unacceptable burden on the lives and health of the residents of the lower harbour area.

Don Teegan

Hon Sec

Cork Harbour Environmental Protection Association

John Barry

Hon Sec

Blackpoint Residents Association

Audrey Hogan

Hon Sec

Ringaskiddy Residents

Association

Alan Fleury

Executive Committee