Call for 'external eye' to verify if Dublin City Council's Wood Quay figures actually add up
As Dublin City Council ploughs forward with the development of new civic offices at Camden Yard, councillors still have unanswered questions around the justification behind it all.Last December, DCC’s plan to acquire Camden Yard, the former DIT site on Kevin Street, sparked outrage as representatives learned the news in the media and said they were blindsided by the €90 million purchase. At the same time, it was revealed the site would become the council’s new civic offices, as the costs of retrofitting the current headquarters at Wood Quay to meet climate standards was deemed too expensive.With the offices at Wood Quay only opening in 1986 and being the source of major controversy and protests during the 1970s, due to its location on the grounds of a historic Viking settlement, many were left scratching their heads about how retrofitting a relatively new building could cost between €487 million and €504 million. The details of how they arrived at these figures have not been released to the public, leading to calls for more transparency before work commences at Camden Yard.At the May monthly council meeting, representatives were presented a strategic report justifying Camden Yard as the ideal spot for their new headquarters. This presented Camden Yard as a real bargain, as they would not only gain new offices but also build 299 residential units at the Kevin Street site for a total cost of €581 million. Moving from Wood Quay could also unlock the doors for over 500 further residential units at the former offices.“While the headline figure for Camden Yard is higher, it is important to consider what that investment actually delivers. The Camden Yard option provides the council with its office accommodation at a cost approximately €150 million cheaper than a straightforward retrofit of the Civic Offices,” the strategic report stated.“At the same time, the overall development delivers 299 residential units and unlocks the Wood Quay site for future housing development, with the potential of over 500 units. The overall public value, housing, regeneration, and modern, efficient office accommodation, is significantly greater.”DCC present the key financial considerations as follows:Camden Yard acquisition price: €90 million (plus VAT & Costs).Previous owners spent over €100 million on construction aloneThe most time-consuming and risky construction phases (basement, archaeology) are already completeOffice accommodation delivered at €150m less than retrofit cost299 residential units delivered at Camden Yard500+ residential units potential unlocked at Wood QuayStaff consolidation from seven buildings into one location delivers long-term operational savingsThe need for an external eyeDCC has laid their argument out loud and clear, but not everyone is convinced as several councillors questioned how reliable the figures can be if they are not first investigated by an independent expert. Green Party Councillor Janet Horner called for more oversight and “an independent external eye.”Cllr Horner said that for the public to truly accept the move from Wood Quay to Camden Yard as being an appropriate use of public funds then there needs to be more transparency around where these figures are coming from. She said this needs to go beyond simply bringing councillors in for one-on-one meetings or private presentations going through documentation, as they are not experts.“At the moment people do not have faith in the case that has been put forward by the city council. To get any recognition of what you are saying is a strong business case requires a significant amount of independent oversight,” she said.“It has to come from the appropriate level of expertise. Not from us looking at documents, which in fairness, we would take several years of studying for a degree before we would be able to actually properly tell whether they are on track or not.”It is clear that there is a certain degree of scepticism among councillors around the costs of retrofitting Wood Quay. An initial high-level estimate was previously given of €250m, but the council’s report said “given the scale of that potential investment, the council commissioned a further study to examine the matter in greater detail.” Following this, the costs had more than doubled to €504m.Green Party Cllr Donna Cooney said that, even after going through the council’s report, “the figures still don’t make sense in terms of the refurbishment costs.” With a societal shift toward people working from home more often, she wondered if spending hundreds of millions on new offices without first examining potentially more affordable and less carbon intensive options is a smart business move.Sinn Féin Cllr Daithí Doolan said his party will always support the development of more public housing, which can be achieved at both Camden Yard and Wood Quay, but that the reports underpinning these projects are “shrouded in secrecy.” He called for the two projects to be “decoupled” and for the report around Wood Quay to be put into the public domain and allow “the court of public opinion” decide whether it is appropriate to demolish Wood Quay.Independent Cllr Malachy Steenson accused the council of “picking numbers out of the air” and said history has shown the costs at Camden Yard could extend well beyond the stated €581m, with Cllr Gavin Pepper citing the ballooning costs of the National Children’s Hospital as proof financial figures often change over time.A diminishing of democratic accountabilitySinn Féin Cllr Mícheál Mac Donncha described the decision to link the purchase of Camden Yard with the removal of the Civic Offices from Wood Quay as an example of disempowerment of the council from the decision making process. “I wonder if there is another capital city in the world where the decision to move the location of the main offices that deal with the citizens is taken by officials rather than elected members, it’s quite extraordinary,” he said.Social Democrats Cllr Cat O’Driscoll, Sinn Fein Cllr Kourtney Kenny, and Independent Cllr Kevin Breen all spoke about the shock of learning about the Camden Yard purchase in the media. Having been presented with a multi-million euro acquisition as essentially a done deal, although this purchasing power technically lies with Chief Executive Richard Shakespeare, the manner in which it has been handled has rubbed plenty of people the wrong way.Cllr Breen said the project was “dropped” on councillors through the media,” before being called into a briefing session only to be handed a portfolio where “if you jumped off with it as a parachute you’d land safely.” “I understand the need for corporate sensitivity, but a project like this needs to be scrutinised,” he said.“This project is more or less being dropped on us. I think here in the council chamber you need to ask yourself with a project like this, and a huge list of problems in the city like dereliction, is €338m the best use of money in this city? I find it quite absurd.”Mr Shakespeare was notably absent from the council meeting, but faced intense criticism from some council members. Green Party Cllr Ray Cunningham said there are lots of arguments for and against moving from Wood Quay to Camden Yard, but ultimately the decision was made “by a civil servant who wasn't elected and isn’t answerable to the people of Dublin.”He warned that the move creates a "democratic deficit," effectively trapping elected members into a corner where they will be forced to approve a further €500m in borrowing just to avoid leaving a "half-built site" to fall into dereliction. For Cllr Cunningham, even if the relocation proves to be the right move, the lack of oversight from a democratically elected representative is a failure of local governance and highlights the need for a democratically elected mayor to make these kinds of decisions.Independent John Lyons said that Mr Shakespeare may want a project to define his legacy, but that in his opinion the project “stinks.” He said the time and attention given over to discuss Camden Yard far exceeds the time allowances for issues such as the delayed regeneration of Oliver Bond House and the long-promised Traveller-specific accommodation at Labre Park.“The signal it sends to the people of Dublin. Why aren’t we using this time and attention and pursuing different revenue streams to actually address all of the appalling outstanding maintenance issues our council tenants are facing on a daily basis, rather than raising the rents on them,” he said.He described the council’s report as “gaslighting of the highest order” and cited the quotation at the end of the document, which stated: "If we are not prepared to invest in our city, why would anyone else?” Cllr Lyons said that the Camden Yard site is “a good deal,” but called for development of social and affordable housing. He questioned the costs of the entire project and said councillors “would not be doing our jobs” if they did not scrutinise and question it.Ultimately, DCC’s strategic report describes Camden Yard as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to deliver "significant and lasting public value.” They argue that staying at Wood Quay represents inefficient use of public funds and their proposal offers a chance to potentially unlock over 800 new residential units for a city in the midst of a housing crisis.As it stands, the overall debate has been driven by councillors' frustration with the way things have been communicated and how it has laid bare just how little power elected officials have when it comes to major multi-million euro acquisitions. While the future of the Wood Quay site will be one categorised by consultation between the council and the public, the development of Camden Yard looks set to move ahead whether councillors want it to or not.This content is funded by the Local Democracy Reporting SchemeWant to see more of the stories you love from Dublin Live? Making us your preferred source on Google means you’ll get more of our exclusives, top stories and must-read content straight away. To add Dublin Live as a preferred source, simply click here.Join our Dublin Live breaking news service on WhatsApp. Click this link to receive your daily dose of Dublin Live content.We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice .
