Business groups in Cork have appealed for Save Cork City to withdraw their judicial review of the Morrison's Island flood defence and public realm scheme.
The application, by Save Cork City (SCC), for a judicial review of the scheme is due to be heard in the High Court this week.
Cork Chamber, Cork Business Association, Construction Industry Federation, the Cork City branch of the Vintners Federation of Ireland, and Retail Excellence Ireland have jointly called for the withdrawal of the legal challenge.
“Securing a flood defence solution is essential to the international reputation of Cork if it is to deliver as the economic and cultural hub of our region," said the business groups in a joint statement.
"At the riverside of Morrison’s Island, there is a comprehensive plan to turn a rundown car park into a waterfront promenade, and to protect the most vulnerable part of our city core while doing so.
"Along with the significant restoration of the existing historic quay walls, the change at Morrison’s Island creates a valuable amenity space for residents and visitors alike."
Heritage
The group says it is asking SCC to consider whether this judicial review is "proportionate to their stated goal of protecting heritage", and whether it is "appropriate to delay a project that has received such widespread support and approval".
The business group claimed that a judicial review does "not weigh up the benefits or otherwise of a project", and said a look at the pros and cons was already taken by elected representatives of Cork City Council after a vote.
They also claimed a judicial review does not look the planning and environmental context, and said that an examination of these issues was already carried out by An Bord Pleanála.
"Right now, acknowledging progress, accepting concessions, and building consensus is important, and we ask SCC to reconsider their actions on Morrison’s Island," read the business group's statement.
Insurance
"Two weeks ago, a day before lockdown, traders were up to their knees in water, their premises damaged without the ability to secure insurance.
"The city and its people deserve the protection that Morrison’s Island works will provide.
"The severity of this flooding and the potential for it to reoccur is something that is entirely avoidable, making the events of this October all the more frustrating.
"We can’t allow flooding to be considered acceptable, and we ask SCC to consider the reality of what their ongoing judicial review means for people running businesses in the area and for developers and investors looking to focus their activity in Cork."
Call rejected
SCC has previously rejected calls to withdraw their objections, and repeated its support for a tidal barrier plan.
In a statement last night it said: "Save Cork City believe the OPW Lower Lee Flood Relief Scheme would seriously damage the potential of Cork to realise its obvious riverside potential, hampering the ability of the city to attract inward investment. Dereliction will not be alleviated by city centre flood walls that will only reduce investment in Cork and additionally cause widespread devaluation of property.
“People have invested their lives and their savings in business and property in the historic city and the flood walls are a dangerous gamble with their prospects for the future and the potential of the entire city economy.
"Successful cities don’t build flood walls in their historic cores, as they cause the kind of damage to the environment seen in Skibbereen or Bandon, but on a much wider scale.
"In Cork, due to water rising from the ground and the drains, it is predicted that they cannot and will not work.
"The stakes are high for Cork citizens, and this is an uncertain time. We need to look at our long-term recovery prospects.
"It is time to get to the truth of the matter and decide on flood defence that protects more of Cork, safely, and creates new opportunity for the entire city.
"It is time for open and friendly discussion on what would create the best future for Cork. It is understandable that business groups who object to a Tivoli or Little Island tidal barrier may be representing some of their members who want the walls scheme in that view [as they should and is their nature], however there are very many other interested groups and organisations in the city that don’t support the OPW scheme.
"We need a serious solution that is democratic and protects property without devaluing the interests of anyone. It is a bonus if we can achieve betterment for everyone, which we believe can be done.
"In these times, the economical view is to seek the financially-sound solution that provides the best protection for all. That is not represented by the OPW flood walls."
