Cork developments

Markcheese · 29-06-2020 11:36am

namloc1980 wrote: »

Don't know who owns it but it could be lovely little micro park facing onto the river. It's been derelict for as long as I can remember.

Bottom of cornmarket Street ?
It was suggested as a "pocket park " to city councils planning department , when they were feicing up the coal quay ,(12 / 15 years ago ? ) . That idea was shot down straight away ...
Parts of the site can't be built on,because there's a main sewer access point there ...

AwaitYourReply · 29-06-2020 11:39am

namloc1980 wrote: »

Don't know who owns it but it could be lovely little micro park facing onto the river. It's been derelict for as long as I can remember.

After some of the businesses transferred trade or closed, one of which is MF Services Ltd. which had Philips Electrical Service Depot (now in Wilton), I seem to recall there was a plan announced for much/all of that space although; I think the then proposed development of that site was abandoned after the last economic crash/recession. The current condition of that site is an absolute disgrace and it leaves a very bad impression of this part of the city centre. It's such a shame that it is not all cleared & cleaned up and used for parking in the interim rather than be allowed to deteriorate any further.

It reminds me of how parts of North Main Street and South Main Street have gone downhill over the years. Of course development relies on business confidence, financial investment but our city should not let such public spaces deteriorate altogether pending long term development.

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 11:41am

Markcheese wrote: »

Bottom of cornmarket Street ?
It was suggested as a "pocket park " to city councils planning department , when they were feicing up the coal quay ,(12 / 15 years ago ? ) . That idea was shot down straight away ...
Parts of the site can't be built on,because there's a main sewer access point there ...

Yeah that's it. Surely a little micro park would be infinitely better that the utter eyesore it is. Would cost peanuts and I'm sure some of the voluntary groups like Reimagine Cork would be only too happy to bring it to life.

titan18 · 29-06-2020 11:51am

It genuinely wouldn't surprise me if the lack of parks was so the council wouldn't have to clean/close/maintain them.

Without them though, city centre is dead/dying. Look at everything closing on Patricks Street like. I don't see why a store would go into the city centre over a shopping centre. There's zero amenities to attract people into the city and for them to spend time there. It's get in and get out really.

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 11:57am

titan18 wrote: »

It genuinely wouldn't surprise me if the lack of parks was so the council wouldn't have to clean/close/maintain them.

Without them though, city centre is dead/dying. Look at everything closing on Patricks Street like. I don't see why a store would go into the city centre over a shopping centre. There's zero amenities to attract people into the city and for them to spend time there. It's get in and get out really.

The Council have been quite open for a long time that their vision for the city was as a giant retail space and to complete directly with shopping centres. They've no interest in amenities or making it an experience. They want people to drive in, park up, buy a few bits and get out. The city is dying as a result of utter mishandling.

AwaitYourReply · 29-06-2020 1:01pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

The Council have been quite open for a long time that their vision for the city was as a giant retail space and to complete directly with shopping centres. They've no interest in amenities or making it an experience. They want people to drive in, park up, buy a few bits and get out. The city is dying as a result of utter mishandling.

Not sure if this is entirely an accurate reflection on Cork City Council's apart from their vision about Patrick Street being focused on opening retail while not welcoming cafés, restaurants, public bars, hotels etc; and it may have been well intended in order to prevent a repeat of a similar situation as O'Connell Street in Dublin where the standard dropped with amusement arcades, fast food/takeaway outlets, souvenir shops etc; all over Dublin's main street.

The council have been sending very mixed messages on the use of private car transport over the years - Cork City Council (formerly Cork Corporation) built or facilitated the building of several multi-storey car parks in the city centre since the mid-1980's, earning revenue off disc controlled on-street car parking, and park by phone.

In latter years, Cork City Council has been discouraging "the private car" by introducing other measures such as:
Ban on private cars entering certain zones/streets such as: Patrick Street, Oliver Plunkett Street etc; during certain times of day.
Loss of traffic lanes originally designed for shared use in favour of: (i) Cycle lanes and (ii) Bus Lanes
Increases to disc parking price and shorter time zones etc;

I think the council needs to actively engage with all interested parties such as residents, customers, landlords, businesses still trading in the city centre before they go away to formulate their plans. Council then needs to bring people along with them before they unveil/activate new measures as this way it may have better buy-in from a majority of those living and working in the surrounding community.

By the time the dust settles on COVID-19/Coronavirus (and this could take a long while to run yet) and the climate change carbon emissions debate is also going to remain on the agenda which will require a whole re-think on retail and commerce and how we use public spaces.

I would completely agree that the Council could have done a much better job in how they approached and rolled-out the Pana car ban and other changes. Council eventually offered some measures like free/reduced parking at some multi*story car parks to cushion the inconvenience but a proper consultation with all the stakeholders in advance would have demonstrated respect and goodwill towards the traders who were still trying to recover and survive after a number of very challenging years.

SleetAndSnow · 29-06-2020 1:40pm

https://www.reddit.com/r/cork/comments/hhywrz/long_overdue_and_hopefully_it_stays_this_way/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

Nice to see some music etc playing on the street

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 1:43pm

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

In latter years, Cork City Council has been discouraging "the private car" by introducing other measures such as:
Ban on private cars entering certain zones/streets such as: Patrick Street, Oliver Plunkett Street etc; during certain times of day.
Loss of traffic lanes originally designed for shared use in favour of: (i) Cycle lanes and (ii) Bus Lanes
Increases to disc parking price and shorter time zones etc;

I think the council needs to actively engage with all interested parties such as residents, customers, landlords, businesses still trading in the city centre before they go away to formulate their plans. Council then needs to bring people along with them before they unveil/activate new measures as this way it may have better buy-in from a majority of those living and working in the surrounding community.

I wouldn't at all agree that in recent years the Council have been discouraging car use. If anything it is the opposite. Examples:
- they regularly use their social media channels to promote free and reduced cost parking in the city (this is even before Covid) whereas public and active transport rarely if ever get mentioned. Check out the council official account today - first tweet of the day is about free parking in the city centre:

.

- Patrick Street bus lane is de facto not enforced,
- cycle lanes are not enforced leading to numerous issues with cars being dumped in cycle lanes all over the city with no enforcement (too many examples of this but check Twitter daily for examples),
- even recent pedestrianisation efforts at Paul Street and Tucket Street are not managed or enforced - cars continue to drive down these streets at will,
- OPS was depedestrianised to facilitate cars during the Covid lockdown (fair enough you might say) with no consultation period but pedestrianisation and cycling improvements go through a quasi planning process that has taken weeks/months to get going with very little output.
- There's a total of 14km of bus lanes in the City Council area. 14km is not even worth talking about and there's not much more cycling lane length in the city so I wouldn't at all agree with your point saying that there has been: Loss of traffic lanes originally designed for shared use in favour of: (i) Cycle lanes and (ii) Bus Lanes. Can you point out all these traffic lanes lost to cycling lanes for instance?

The Council is very much pro-car, there can be no doubt about that. Another example includes refusing to use the variable message system signs around the city for public and active transport updates - they are used exclusively to tell motorists about car parking spaces, the temperature and road closures aimed at motorists.

In any case the new City Development Plan is currently in pre-plan consultation until the 21st August and would encourage everyone to make a submission. https://consult.corkcity.ie/

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 1:47pm

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

https://www.reddit.com/r/cork/comments/hhywrz/long_overdue_and_hopefully_it_stays_this_way/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

Nice to see some music etc playing on the street

Terrible waste of car parking spaces there.

Captainsatnav · 29-06-2020 1:47pm

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

https://www.reddit.com/r/cork/comments/hhywrz/long_overdue_and_hopefully_it_stays_this_way/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

Nice to see some music etc playing on the street

That's fantastic. See - some traders don't live in the 1970s.

titan18 · 29-06-2020 2:49pm

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

I think the council needs to actively engage with all interested parties such as residents, customers, landlords, businesses still trading in the city centre before they go away to formulate their plans. Council then needs to bring people along with them before they unveil/activate new measures as this way it may have better buy-in from a majority of those living and working in the surrounding community.

This is where I slightly disagree. It should be open to a lot more than that. A lot of the traders were campaigning for the patrick street ban to be overturned for example, or for increased parking in the city centre. Atm in particular, a lot of businesses will be thinking short term and how to survive this year and next year. We shouldn't put the long term development and strategy for the city on pause though to do things that might be short term beneficial but long term detrimental.

Long term, the city needs better public transport and more green areas imo. With the amount of offices going up, it's going to be even more of a nightmare if we don't sort out transport. You can't have everyone driving in to all the planned offices going up in the quays. It would be impossible.

City centre needs to be designed as well so that people want to spend time in there, rather than get in and get out. Then as people are sitting around, they might go, oh I needed to buy a pair of shoes, or some stationery etc they'll go visit the shops.

Is there anywhere anyone wants to relax in there atm? It's basically walk to UCC or Fitzgeralds park. Someone mentioned the old FAS site there earlier which I think was earmarked for a hotel and office block. Do we really need more office blocks atm (especially in this WFH climate potentially changing how we work longer term), and whilst I do think we need more hotels, would we be better served by a park there. Opening out on to the quays and with a lot of businesses around there that could take advantage of the increased people there, would that not help revitalise that part of the city centre more than a hotel would.

Even look at Debenhams and Merchant's Quay atm, atm past Brown Thomas is dead. Are we better served by another store going in there (if there's one looking to take that space) or a proper reimagining of it. Likewise the North Main Street shopping centre and Paul Streets ones. There's very little there bar some supermarkets and some smaller shops.

We'd be better off reimagining what we want instead of just more shops.

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 3:33pm

titan18 wrote: »

This is where I slightly disagree. It should be open to a lot more than that. A lot of the traders were campaigning for the patrick street ban to be overturned for example, or for increased parking in the city centre. Atm in particular, a lot of businesses will be thinking short term and how to survive this year and next year. We shouldn't put the long term development and strategy for the city on pause though to do things that might be short term beneficial but long term detrimental.

Long term, the city needs better public transport and more green areas imo. With the amount of offices going up, it's going to be even more of a nightmare if we don't sort out transport. You can't have everyone driving in to all the planned offices going up in the quays. It would be impossible.

City centre needs to be designed as well so that people want to spend time in there, rather than get in and get out. Then as people are sitting around, they might go, oh I needed to buy a pair of shoes, or some stationery etc they'll go visit the shops.

Is there anywhere anyone wants to relax in there atm? It's basically walk to UCC or Fitzgeralds park. Someone mentioned the old FAS site there earlier which I think was earmarked for a hotel and office block. Do we really need more office blocks atm (especially in this WFH climate potentially changing how we work longer term), and whilst I do think we need more hotels, would we be better served by a park there. Opening out on to the quays and with a lot of businesses around there that could take advantage of the increased people there, would that not help revitalise that part of the city centre more than a hotel would.

Even look at Debenhams and Merchant's Quay atm, atm past Brown Thomas is dead. Are we better served by another store going in there (if there's one looking to take that space) or a proper reimagining of it. Likewise the North Main Street shopping centre and Paul Streets ones. There's very little there bar some supermarkets and some smaller shops.

We'd be better off reimagining what we want instead of just more shops.

The quays provide a huge opportunity to make the city a better place to live in and visit. Currently the quays are essentially either car parks, wide busy roads or a bit of both. For a city built on a river there is very little use made of the river. Unfortunately the recently approved Morrisson's Island flood defence scheme shows very little imagination and essentially is more of the same. The road and car parking is retained and the wall height increased on the quayside. It's better than what's there now but is yet another huge missed opportunity.

AwaitYourReply · 29-06-2020 4:58pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

I wouldn't at all agree that in recent years the Council have been discouraging car use. If anything it is the opposite. Examples:
- they regularly use their social media channels to promote free and reduced cost parking in the city (this is even before Covid) whereas public and active transport rarely if ever get mentioned. Check out the council official account today - first tweet of the day is about free parking in the city centre:

.

- Patrick Street bus lane is de facto not enforced,
- cycle lanes are not enforced leading to numerous issues with cars being dumped in cycle lanes all over the city with no enforcement (too many examples of this but check Twitter daily for examples),
- even recent pedestrianisation efforts at Paul Street and Tucket Street are not managed or enforced - cars continue to drive down these streets at will,
- OPS was depedestrianised to facilitate cars during the Covid lockdown (fair enough you might say) with no consultation period but pedestrianisation and cycling improvements go through a quasi planning process that has taken weeks/months to get going with very little output.
- There's a total of 14km of bus lanes in the City Council area. 14km is not even worth talking about and there's not much more cycling lane length in the city so I wouldn't at all agree with your point saying that there has been: Loss of traffic lanes originally designed for shared use in favour of: (i) Cycle lanes and (ii) Bus Lanes. Can you point out all these traffic lanes lost to cycling lanes for instance?

The Council is very much pro-car, there can be no doubt about that. Another example includes refusing to use the variable message system signs around the city for public and active transport updates - they are used exclusively to tell motorists about car parking spaces, the temperature and road closures aimed at motorists.

In any case the new City Development Plan is currently in pre-plan consultation until the 21st August and would encourage everyone to make a submission. https://consult.corkcity.ie/

IMHO I have found that our City Council has been sending mixed signals on the whole issue of private cars in the city centre for many years.

I say this because they adopted almost two contradictory strategies whereby; they started building Multi-Storey Car Parks and later permitted other commercial providers to do likewise including one by city hall itself. Then they decided to organise a Park & Ride service which is not orbital or of much advantage for those residents/commuters in key areas of the city such as the north-side of the city.

I also accept the irony as the same local authority promotes their own parking schemes which makes no sense if they had been trying to encourage everyone (i.e.) pre-COVID-19) to use public transport, walking, cycling etc; rather than driving though the city centre.

To appease all of this they imposed a ban on private cars entering Patrick Street and Oliver Plunkett Street during certain hours which was unsuccessful so; they had to be pull back after a backlash and was only re-introduced some time later along with a suite of inducements in the form of Free Parking at certain multi-storey car parks. It's like they are talking out of both sides of their mouth which does not display a coherent approach to an ongoing issue. They announced they would be extending disc parking hours in residential areas of the city like Grattan Street (in the Marsh area) as a result of additional traffic being re-routed away from Patrick Street when the ban hours are in effect.

Yes, the whole issue of enforcement is always a concern when Bye-Laws apply whether it is traffic rules enforcement such as the Pana Ban, parking in cycle lanes, public litter, dog fouling etc;

Patrick Street lost traffic lanes due to much wider pavements installed in early 2000's although; I do not think any cycle lane was installed despite all the space to do so! (Perhaps this was subsequently changed as I've not walked the street for a while).

Examples where Cycle Lanes replaced shared traffic lane include but not limited to:

* Sullivan's Quay had a cycle lane installed - one traffic lane was lost to facilitate it - fact
* French's Quay same applies
* Proby's Quay same applies
* South Main Street same applies
and so on

At the end of the day, the City Council cannot change to completely car-free environment in a relatively short period of time as the funds are just not there to provide a LUAS light rail, more extensive bus lane corridor on all roads etc as soon as desirable. Meanwhile the city council also have an obligation to inform all those who need to drive into the city centre where they can park in order to facilitate a more flowing city centre rather than create additional gridlock within the current system as imperfect as it is. Electronic signage displays, use of social media like twitter etc; can assist with this communication. Council have to strike the right balance and are unlikely to keep everyone satisfied especially; when they go to make changes that effect people's daily lives.

AwaitYourReply · 29-06-2020 5:23pm

titan18 wrote: »

This is where I slightly disagree. It should be open to a lot more than that. A lot of the traders were campaigning for the patrick street ban to be overturned for example, or for increased parking in the city centre. Atm in particular, a lot of businesses will be thinking short term and how to survive this year and next year. We shouldn't put the long term development and strategy for the city on pause though to do things that might be short term beneficial but long term detrimental.

Long term, the city needs better public transport and more green areas imo. With the amount of offices going up, it's going to be even more of a nightmare if we don't sort out transport. You can't have everyone driving in to all the planned offices going up in the quays. It would be impossible.

City centre needs to be designed as well so that people want to spend time in there, rather than get in and get out. Then as people are sitting around, they might go, oh I needed to buy a pair of shoes, or some stationery etc they'll go visit the shops.

Is there anywhere anyone wants to relax in there atm? It's basically walk to UCC or Fitzgeralds park. Someone mentioned the old FAS site there earlier which I think was earmarked for a hotel and office block. Do we really need more office blocks atm (especially in this WFH climate potentially changing how we work longer term), and whilst I do think we need more hotels, would we be better served by a park there. Opening out on to the quays and with a lot of businesses around there that could take advantage of the increased people there, would that not help revitalise that part of the city centre more than a hotel would.

Even look at Debenhams and Merchant's Quay atm, atm past Brown Thomas is dead. Are we better served by another store going in there (if there's one looking to take that space) or a proper reimagining of it. Likewise the North Main Street shopping centre and Paul Streets ones. There's very little there bar some supermarkets and some smaller shops.

We'd be better off reimagining what we want instead of just more shops.

Walking to UCC, Fitzgerald's Park at the Mardyke or the new proposed Marina Park is healthy exercise despite not being right bang in the city centre.
If Bishop Lucey Park between Grand Parade and South Main Street was cleaner, safer and much better policed, this should also assist in terms of green area for relaxation. The nearby board walk at the end of the South Mall can also be extended up towards Parliament Bridge and beyond it in later phases for relaxation. There should be scope for more similar relaxation areas over by the Custom House and along other parts of the city's quays.

You are not going to see the current Debenhams unit become a green space anytime soon. The Roche family still own it and as landlords will probably hope to earn rent from another anchor tenant or multiple tenants if it is to be subdivided into smaller units.

Not sure if all of the proposed office blocks pre-COVID-19 will materialise if demand drops should working remotely from home becomes the norm post COVID-19 as there is also the low carbon emissions argument and having all those employees commuting to/from outside the city. Things may need to settle down for a while before investors make final decisions so I expect many developments may be on a go slow for quite some time- same will probably apply with the Cork Events Centre project.

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 5:41pm

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

IMHO I have found that our City Council has been sending mixed signals on the whole issue of private cars in the city centre for many years.

I say this because they adopted almost two contradictory strategies whereby; they started building Multi-Storey Car Parks and later permitted other commercial providers to do likewise including one by city hall itself. Then they decided to organise a Park & Ride service which is not orbital or of much advantage for those residents/commuters in key areas of the city such as the north-side of the city.

How is this contradictory? No one solution is a silver bullet. Every city requires a layered approach to solve various issues - especially traffic and transport. Having multi-storey car parks and P&R is not contradictory in any way but complimentary. The main issue here is they only developed a single P&R site and stopped there.

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

To appease all of this they imposed a ban on private cars entering Patrick Street and Oliver Plunkett Street during certain hours which was unsuccessful so; they had to be pull back after a backlash and was only re-introduced some time later along with a suite of inducements in the form of Free Parking at certain multi-storey car parks. It's like they are talking out of both sides of their mouth which does not display a coherent approach to an ongoing issue. They announced they would be extending disc parking hours in residential areas of the city like Grattan Street (in the Marsh area) as a result of additional traffic being re-routed away from Patrick Street when the ban hours are in effect.

The OPS pedestrianisation has been a roaring success since it happened in 2005 and the street won a prestigious UK & Ireland "Great Street Award" in 2016. Not sure why you think it was a disaster to be honest.

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

Yes, the whole issue of enforcement is always a concern when Bye-Laws apply whether it is traffic rules enforcement such as the Pana Ban, parking in cycle lanes, public litter, dog fouling etc;

It's more than a concern to be fair. They simply don't bother enforcing them. Therefore motorists feel entitled to park in cycle lanes, bus lanes and on footpaths all over the city with little or no risk of being fined for it.

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

Patrick Street lost traffic lanes due to much wider pavements installed in early 2000's although; I do not think any cycle lane was installed despite all the space to do so! (Perhaps this was subsequently changed as I've not walked the street for a while).

And much the better for it. Does anyone really want to go back to the days of narrow footpaths and cars parked all over Patrick Street??

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

Examples where Cycle Lanes replaced shared traffic lane include but not limited to:

* Sullivan's Quay had a cycle lane installed - one traffic lane was lost to facilitate it - fact
* French's Quay same applies
* Proby's Quay same applies
* South Main Street same applies
and so on

Again much the better for it. Shared traffic lanes don't work for vulnerable road users such as cyclists going up against buses, trucks and cars etc. The streets aren't just for those inside a 2 tonne metal box. Motorists need to understand that. No to worry anyway as the cycle lane on Sullivan's Quay is being done away with by the OPW flood works. Motorists can celebrate that.

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

At the end of the day, the City Council cannot change to completely car-free environment in a relatively short period of time as the funds are just not there to provide a LUAS light rail, more extensive bus lane corridor on all roads etc as soon as desirable. Meanwhile the city council also have an obligation to inform all those who need to drive into the city centre where they can park in order to facilitate a more flowing city centre rather than create additional gridlock within the current system as imperfect as it is. Electronic signage displays can assist with this communication. Council have to strike the right balance and are unlikely to keep everyone satisfied especially; when they go to make changes that effect people's daily lives.

Nobody is suggesting a car-free environment is put in place in a short space of time. But other road users must be accommodated and facilities put in place for them i.e. cyclists, pedestrians, public transport. The city isn't just for people to drive around in their cars and to hell with everyone else. You say they must strike a balance but you bemoan the loss of precious road space for cars to what is in essence a paltry amount of cycle and bus lanes that are there.

who_me · 29-06-2020 5:45pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

Don't know who owns it but it could be lovely little micro park facing onto the river. It's been derelict for as long as I can remember.

Yeah a park would be great there. Right by the pedestrian bridge which leads up to Shandon (IMO, an area that's crying out for more attention), and could get more foot traffic along the Coal Quay / Cornmarket St. to and from the park too.

There were plans for a small but tall-ish building there (6 floors or so?) previously, though I thought it stood out like a sore thumb in that location.

AwaitYourReply · 29-06-2020 5:51pm

who_me wrote: »

Yeah a park would be great there. Right by the pedestrian bridge which leads up to Shandon (IMO, an area that's crying out for more attention), and could get more foot traffic along the Coal Quay / Cornmarket St. to and from the park too.

There were plans for a small but tall-ish building there (6 floors or so?) previously, though I thought it stood out like a sore thumb in that location.

Yes, the plan for a tall building on this relatively small site does ring a bell and I think it was first mooted before the Celtic Tiger period ended. I just hope the site is tidied up and put to use as something beneficial even if it is just in the interim as the status quo looks bad.

Curb Your Enthusiasm · 29-06-2020 6:08pm

Cork City Council's pedestrianisation plans for Paul Street in response to COVID19 haven't been going very well, with motorists pulling back the crappy signs and driving down the street anyway, allowing little space for social distancing. No enforcement whatsoever.

Taken yesterday afternoon:

Really not good enough at all.

titan18 · 29-06-2020 6:08pm

AwaitYourReply wrote: »

.

You are not going to see the current Debenhams unit become a green space anytime soon. The Roche family still own it and as landlords will probably hope to earn rent from another anchor tenant or multiple tenants if it is to be subdivided into smaller units.

I think there should be something different done with it rather than just shops. Maybe a food hall on the second floor similar in style to the TimeOut markets in other cities (not that TimeOut would come here but we can take the concept). Tbf, id take a food hall anywhere. Feels like it fits perfect considering English market is one of the main tourist attractions

Feels like the days of shops being a city centre are dead. Lots of us buy online which reduces potential customers, and it's not like theres a load of interesting shops there anyway.

namloc1980 · 29-06-2020 6:16pm

Curb Your Enthusiasm wrote: »

Cork City Council's pedestrianisation plans for Paul Street in response to COVID19 haven't been going very well, with motorists pulling back the crappy signs and driving down the street anyway, allowing little space for social distancing. No enforcement whatsoever.

Taken yesterday afternoon:

Really not good enough at all.

Not surprising really. The Council are just useless. And why the hell does anyone need to drive their monster BMW SUV down narrow streets like that. Ridiculous.

Curb Your Enthusiasm · 29-06-2020 6:37pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

Not surprising really. The Council are just useless. And why the hell does anyone need to drive their monster BMW SUV down narrow streets like that. Ridiculous.

Weeks of public consultations to put a bog standard 'no entry' sign in the middle of the street. Pathetic really.

Paul St should have been permanently pedestrianised years ago. Daunt Sq as a whole really needs it tbh.

Infuriating.

Meanwhile, in Dublin, they're doing great, big things to improve the public realm for pedestrians and cyclists alike, and doing it super fast too, without a sniff of public consultation:

http://twitter.com/DubCityCouncil/status/1277588940913065984?s=19

Apogee · 29-06-2020 6:54pm

opus wrote: »

This sight greets me every time I walk into town, has anyone come any plans to do something about the eyesore in front of the Bridewell Garda station?

It's listed on the derelict sites register:

https://corkcity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=470fc563b7344acf9aa14038090ebf3d

namloc1980 · 30-06-2020 9:49am

.

Looks great in fairness. About a million times better than cars parked on the street. Unbelievably though there's a number of people moaning about this on social media.

CHealy · 30-06-2020 9:57am

That entire block of side streets between OPS and South Mall, including OPS should be pedestrianised. I cringe when I see cars creeping their way up past the GPO on a packed Saturday, theres very few cities in Europe that would have it. Same as Paul St, where in the name of god are these people going?

Cork likes to think its a nice small city but in reality it has the attitude of the rural village when it comes to these topics. Its always a case of "where can I leave my car" instead of scenes like we saw on Princess St last night. The one that always gets to me is Oliver Plunket St, that should be from top to bottom a hub of outdoor stalls and dining with street covers.

whisky_galore · 30-06-2020 10:18am

WhoElse wrote: »

This is 100% accurate. Friends moved away years ago and considered coming back to Cork. They couldn't believe how poor the parks/playgrounds are around the city. In Waterford even tiny towns maintain green spaces better and usually have decent playgrounds in range.

To be fair, Fitzgerald's park is lovely. But it gets the investment as a form of tokenism, "see we have a lovely park". One maintained park, for the whole city.

A lot of hoo hah and overspend on a grounded "sky garden" you'd swear Michaelangelo designed it.

opus · 30-06-2020 2:31pm

namloc1980 wrote: »

Looks great in fairness. About a million times better than cars parked on the street. Unbelievably though there's a number of people moaning about this on social media.

Took a walk along it at lunchtime, doesn't work so well in the rain as only one table was occupied. Looks great though, hopefully it stays.

Walked past the Beamish development also & one thing I don't see any start on are the promised new bridges. Hope they haven't been quietly forgotten about.

bingo9999 · 30-06-2020 2:39pm

That reminds me of a question I have wanted to ask in the past - when you get planning permission are you obliged to build it all? Or is it up to that limit? i.e. if they dont build the bridges are they in violation of the planning?

calnand · 30-06-2020 2:51pm

bingo9999 wrote: »

That reminds me of a question I have wanted to ask in the past - when you get planning permission are you obliged to build it all? Or is it up to that limit? i.e. if they dont build the bridges are they in violation of the planning?

I think they were arguing the council should build the bridges at one stage.

But as far as I know, not building something in the approved plans is not a violation, only changes.

ofcork · 30-06-2020 2:53pm

I would imagine so the bridges would have been part of the application.

snotboogie · 30-06-2020 3:56pm

whisky_galore wrote: »

A lot of hoo hah and overspend on a grounded "sky garden" you'd swear Michaelangelo designed it.

Around this time last year a parklet sprung up in the city and I swear there was a thousand twitter posts praising it. It was nice and all but it was like something you'd build in your own back garden.

Cork developments

Comments