Height limits for buildings in Cork City

AugustusMinimus

snotboogie wrote: »

To be fair the comments and likes on the article are predominantly in favor of the development and against the artist and his petition.It's the usual loud, entitled, minority who are against it

Yes. But the media always give equal time to the nay sayers even though they are in the vast majority.

They also giving equal weighting to their arguements even though they can be poposterous.

The M28 is a case in point where the Echo are taking it seriously that the motorway will cause gridlock in Douglas.

D'Agger

namloc1980 wrote: »

Guaranteed they will object on the basis that the modern building imposes on the bonded warehouses. Have no doubt they'll object.

We should have a whip round for a prize for namloc1980 here

TBQH - I see some merit in his point regarding Cork needing a museum & given the rich history of Corks port the idea of a maritime museum isn't the worst, however, given that would require public money and organisation from local councils....that's a complete pipe dream, it'll join the pile with Tramore Valley & marina parks I reckon.

To me, the Port of Cork buildings are the most important in the city. The history behind them is important and the beautiful stonework on them is unbelievably beautiful. There's no appreciation for that kind of stuff in the city,”

You don't appreciate what you don't deem useful - those buildings offer nothing to the city at present from what I can tell - correct me if I'm wrong there. It's the classic argument of wanting to protect heritage but not preventing progress. His arguments shift towards the latter from where I stand.

Given the precedent of One Albert Quay going up, further development in this area is both necessary & I would hope...inevitable.

D'Agger

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Yes. But the media always give equal time to the nay sayers even though they are in the vast majority.

They also giving equal weighting to their arguements even though they can be poposterous.

The M28 is a case in point where the Echo are taking it seriously that the motorway will cause gridlock in Douglas.

The echo need clicks or buys from both the people expressing those views & those who oppose them. Giving oxygen to these stories is best for their bottom line as ultimately both sides of the party will consume it.

opus

snotboogie wrote: »

To be fair the comments and likes on the article are predominantly in favor of the development and against the artist and his petition.It's the usual loud, entitled, minority who are against it

Is there anyway to tell the council that you support the project given it seems to be the naysayers who get a lot of the publicity?

AugustusMinimus

opus wrote: »

Is there anyway to tell the council that you support the project given it seems to be the naysayers who get a lot of the publicity?

This is the problem. All the structures in place magnify the naysayers.

GavRedKing

He says:

“To me, the Port of Cork buildings are the most important in the city. The history behind them is important and the beautiful stonework on them is unbelievably beautiful.

Are they really beautiful enough to warrant the use of the word twice? :pac:

Roger Hassenforder

GavRedKing wrote: »

He says:



Are they really beautiful enough to warrant the use of the word twice? :pac:

They must be very very important too.

https://twitter.com/CorkGreens/status/959086856066551808
Jasis H. Christ. I see the greens are pushing a petition now.

marno21

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

They must be very very important too.

https://twitter.com/CorkGreens/status/959086856066551808
Jasis H. Christ. I see the greens are pushing a petition now.

Cork Greens showing themselves up as total fruitcakes here. Lets object to the densification of Cork City Centre and preserve some old derelict warehouses during a housing crisis and make people live out in Glanmire and drive into the city.

Are they for real?

Imagine going back to the time when these warehouses were built, of no architectural merit whatsoever, and telling the people who lived in very poor conditions that in 2018 the plan to replace these warehouses with a 40 storey tower as part of securing Cork's future prosperity is being held back to preserve something of **** all benefit to anyone in Cork.

Meursault

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

They must be very very important too.

https://twitter.com/CorkGreens/status/959086856066551808
Jasis H. Christ. I see the greens are pushing a petition now.

Oh for f**k sake. Its a wonder there are any multinationals at all in this country with these nutcases objecting to everything.

snotboogie

Here is a Green TD explaining his reasoning for objecting:

https://twitter.com/oliver_moran/status/959199900243243008

AugustusMinimus

The Greens are quickly becoming like Solidarity and Sinn Fein. Objecting for the sake of objecting.

If the building was lower down in the Docklands they’d still object.

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

Here is a Green TD explaining his reasoning for objecting:

https://twitter.com/oliver_moran/status/959199900243243008

He didnt get in, and I cant believe i voted for him.

Roger Hassenforder

Greens are getting a bit of a battering on twitter!

AugustusMinimus

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Greens are getting a bit of a battering on twitter!

The poster they made is very reminiscent of the M28 “Steering Group’s” work. A touch of scaremongering especially in its language and use of colours.

Water John

The Greens would always have had two wings, Eamon Ryan and Mary White who would be progressive thinking and another section who could be described as Luddites.

namloc1980

As expected the objectors are coming out in force even before this really begins. As seen with the Apple farce in Athenry it only takes 1 person or objector to bring a development like this to a grinding halt. Unfortunately I can see this rumbling on for years in planning hell and judicial reviews. Meanwhile the bonded warehouses will continue to crumble and be of zero use to the people of Cork. Greens in particular are a disgrace.

D'Agger

A park was suggested as an alternative - would be cool, however, given the councils track record with parks I think we should really just leave this to the private sector and develop the docklands because we'll actually see an end result that would benefit the city rather than becoming another project the council mucks up and becomes a nuisance to maintain.

The comments I'm reading are suggesting to use a different part of the docklands, just not this part - what other part are they referencing? It's very easy to point and say - don't do this, here are alternatives, but these alternatives weren't being proposed with the last X amount of years while the site remained unused. The minute there's a proposal from the private sector - Boom - all the suggestions for parks and other uses come flying out. That's what makes this so annoying - where were all these progressive ideas the last few years?

Full of suggestions & alternatives the minute somebody actually moves to do something with the property. Reactive politics.

snotboogie

D'Agger wrote: »

A park was suggested as an alternative - would be cool, however, given the councils track record with parks I think we should really just leave this to the private sector and develop the docklands because we'll actually see an end result that would benefit the city rather than becoming another project the council mucks up and becomes a nuisance to maintain.

The comments I'm reading are suggesting to use a different part of the docklands, just not this part - what other part are they referencing? It's very easy to point and say - don't do this, here are alternatives, but these alternatives weren't being proposed with the last X amount of years while the site remained unused. The minute there's a proposal from the private sector - Boom - all the suggestions for parks and other uses come flying out. That's what makes this so annoying - where were all these progressive ideas the last few years?

Full of suggestions & alternatives the minute somebody actually moves to do something with the property. Reactive politics.

They are not progressive ideas, they are scrambling excuses to justify their NIMBYism. These are the same people who will complain about jobs going to Dublin, not enough tourists in Cork and a lack of housing, then turn around and protest a mixed development with office, apartment and hotel space. Here is the enlightening Facebook post from our local anti progress TD:

Speaking this morning, Oliver Moran, the party’s representative in Cork North Central, said The idea of a forty-storey skyscraper at the head of Lapp’s Island is ludicrous. It has all of the airs of a vanity project that the city will end up regretting in a very short time. Our focus should be on redeveloping the docklands north of Centre Park Road and around the train station in a way that will have a true impact on the city’s future. That’s where the future of city living in Cork lies, with good public transport links, like a Cork Luas or a Bus Rapid Transit system.”
What this proposal shows is the urgency of taking the Custom House and bonded warehouses into public ownership before someone does something to the city that we will never forgive them for. We should see this site as a social and community hub for the future of the docklands. What we’d like to see is a river amenity centre, with moorings and training facilities, as well as a retail and cultural centre. But that can’t happen if the site is taken over by a garish skyscraper that belongs in another part of the docklands away from a building of national significance like this.”

Forty-storey tower “would never be forgiven”, says Green Party

AugustusMinimus

Could someone explain how an old stone bonded warehouse is a building of national significance?

mire

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Could someone explain how an old stone bonded warehouse is a building of national significance?

Under the NIAH,http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/niah/search.jsp?type=record&county=CC&regno=20506374

Description

Sixteen-bay three-storey bonded warehouse, built 1814-49, built on a trapezoidal plan having canopies to ground floor level. Built of rubble sandstone with squared and cut limestone having large cast iron rainwater goods and timber and slated canopies. Vaulted stores to ground floor and stone spiral stairs within external semi-circular towers.

Appraisal
A large warehouse, unique in Cork, situated on a very prominent site and using building materials traditional to the area. Although suffering from lack of maintenance, the warehouse retains the majority of its original fabric and is a landmark building within the city.

D'Agger

snotboogie wrote: »

They are not progressive ideas, they are scrambling excuses to justify their NIMBYism. These are the same people who will complain about jobs going to Dublin, not enough tourists in Cork and a lack of housing, then turn around and protest a mixed development with office, apartment and hotel space. Here is the enlightening Facebook post from our local anti progress TD:

They are progressive if they're proposing adding amenities where disused property currently sits. I think it's too easy to simply slate all opposition to the proposed development as NIMBYism which is a term that gets thrown around a lot on this forum tbh but I digress.

There's a reason people are objecting - they see it as a vanity project - I can see a bit of reasoning there to an extent, it's a gigantic building tbf. I also agree with Olivers idea that North of Centre Park road needs development. That said, the property was sold without (unless I'm mistaken) objection - what did they think was going to happen here only private development.

Why not push for development North of Centre Park Road with the ideas mentioned here - the amenities, training centres etc.

I see some valid points here, but they seem to be specific to this site and I don't understand that side of their argument one bit. The building where it stands would be some beacon for Cork and people entering the city - I'd like to think it would spur development in the surrounding areas mentioned previously. The worry there, as is being preached by the Greens here - is will we be left with a bigger version of the Elysian, not close to being full if hard times should roll around once again with the surrounding area still in the same condition.

Personally I don't see that happening but can understand how some might harbour doubts about it - pun fully intended

snotboogie

D'Agger wrote: »

snotboogie wrote: »

They are not progressive ideas, they are scrambling excuses to justify their NIMBYism. These are the same people who will complain about jobs going to Dublin, not enough tourists in Cork and a lack of housing, then turn around and protest a mixed development with office, apartment and hotel space. Here is the enlightening Facebook post from our local anti progress TD:

They are progressive if they're proposing adding amenities where disused property currently sits. I think it's too easy to simply slate all opposition to the proposed development as NIMBYism which is a term that gets thrown around a lot on this forum tbh but I digress.

There's a reason people are objecting - they see it as a vanity project - I can see a bit of reasoning there to an extent, it's a gigantic building tbf. I also agree with Olivers idea that North of Centre Park road needs development. That said, the property was sold without (unless I'm mistaken) objection - what did they think was going to happen here only private development.

Why not push for development North of Centre Park Road with the ideas mentioned here - the amenities, training centres etc.

I see some valid points here, but they seem to be specific to this site and I don't understand that side of their argument one bit. The building where it stands would be some beacon for Cork and people entering the city - I'd like to think it would spur development in the surrounding areas mentioned previously. The worry there, as is being preached by the Greens here - is will we be left with a bigger version of the Elysian, not close to being full if hard times should roll around once again with the surrounding area still in the same condition.

Personally I don't see that happening but can understand how some might harbour doubts about it - pun fully intended

The Greens proposals are naked anti development. They are suggesting building a park and preserving the custom house buildings, where is the room for that? Times Square bought the site for €6 million in 2016, so we are looking at a minimum of €6 million of public money being spent before any warehouse regeneration, maritime museums or boating clubs are put in this space. Vanity, complexes about Dublin are pure waffle, this is a private development for private industry, I would imagine that a private business (with no connections to Cork beyond this site) is looking to make a profit couldn't care less about Cork vs Dublin or vanity projects for the city. 

The Eylssian shouldn't scare people, it was completed at literally the worst moment possible and a decade later it is a massive success, sold on to private business and fully occupied. If anything it shows the resilience of these buildings if done right, no matter the timing.

namloc1980

The talk of a maritime museum is pie in the sky stuff. With the ongoing farces of the Event Centre, Marina Park and Tramore Valley Park I wouldn't trust the City Council or any public body to do anything right in the city.

marno21

The North of Centre Park Road also needs development - that doesn't justify not building the 40 storey on Anderson Quay

This bull**** about the warehouses being of significance - do these fruitcakes not understand evolution? Cork needs major development more than it needs old crumbling warehouses for artists and pensioners to admire whilst they watch all the young people of Cork head away on the train to Dublin.

Cork needs real development, real jobs and real accomodation more than it needs a "maritime museum" in an old warehouse.

PreCocious

D'Agger wrote: »

A park was suggested as an alternative - would be cool, however, given the councils track record with parks I think we should really just leave this to the private sector and develop the docklands because we'll actually see an end result that would benefit the city rather than becoming another project the council mucks up and becomes a nuisance to maintain.

The comments I'm reading are suggesting to use a different part of the docklands, just not this part - what other part are they referencing? It's very easy to point and say - don't do this, here are alternatives, but these alternatives weren't being proposed with the last X amount of years while the site remained unused. The minute there's a proposal from the private sector - Boom - all the suggestions for parks and other uses come flying out. That's what makes this so annoying - where were all these progressive ideas the last few years?

Full of suggestions & alternatives the minute somebody actually moves to do something with the property. Reactive politics.

Incorrect.

When Custom House went up for sale there was a serious drive to retain it and the warehouses. The warehouses had been used for the SafeHarbor festival.

Currently the rhetoric seems to be build and be damned but yet all the reports say that Cork should have a cohesive natural historical core

namloc1980

PreCocious wrote: »

Incorrect.

When Custom House went up for sale there was a serious drive to retain it and the warehouses. The warehouses had been used for the SafeHarbor festival.

Currently the rhetoric seems to be build and be damned but yet all the reports say that Cork should have a cohesive natural historical core

What "serious drive" was that? Who was behind it and did they put in an offer to buy it?

kub

PreCocious wrote:

Currently the rhetoric seems to be build and be damned but yet all the reports say that Cork should have a cohesive natural historical core

What's the issue here? As has been shown in the plans of this proposed development the now eye sores of warehousing are being maintained not demolished.
They are more than likely listed buildings anyway and one has to wonder as to the intellectual ability of The Green Party in suggesting these structures will be demolished.
They could badly do with some TLC that is for sure and if this development allows for that then I am all for it, but not for just that reason.

namloc1980

I fear what will happen here is that the objectors and NIMBYs will frustrate the process through ABP appeals and judicial reviews to the point that the developers will eventually shrug their shoulders and move on. The Greens and their pals will slap themselves on the back for a job well done and then the site will continue to lie unused for years to come and fall further and further into disrepair. You can guarantee the Greens won't be seen when that happens.

AugustusMinimus

namloc1980 wrote: »

I fear what will happen here is that the objectors and NIMBYs will frustrate the process through ABP appeals and judicial reviews to the point that the developers will eventually shrug their shoulders and move on. The Greens and their pals will slap themselves on the back for a job well done and then the site will continue to lie unused for years to come and fall further and further into disrepair. You can guarantee the Greens won't be seen when that happens.

This is exactly what will happen. The site is commercially unviable without high rise.

Soccarboy11

I'm for this certain 'historicalness' of the city but this can be done while progressing and modernising. Was in New York last year, down in the Financial District and there was an ancient small church in between two 30-40 story buildings. To say it was eyecatching and unique is an understatement. Things can be done and imo having the warehouses next to a 40 story building would save them from crumbling to ruin, would draw tourists to them most likely and would also help preserve them. Sick of this anti-development keep everything below 7 story people. Having a small park right on the entrance to the city through the port is possibly one of the stupidest ideas ive heard. Theres a reason the greens aren't in power in government anymore right?

They say they want to preserve the warehouses, yet nothing will be done to help that if the site isn't developed in the first place. The Image of the skyscraper they used clearly shows the skyscraper, along with the warehouses being preserved and restored. The fact the petition has over 1200 signatures is depressing also.