Cork developments

TheChizler

D'Agger wrote: »

18months after an objection submission 'hours before the deadline'

Weeks, not months. Still too long IMO.

D'Agger

TheChizler wrote: »

Weeks, not months. Still too long IMO.

Sorry got confused between the 18 weeks and the 6 months another poster mentioned it would more than likely take - then mashed them together!

who_me

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but the scaffolding is mostly down now on the new Maldron on Parnell Place, looks great. The new, upper floors don't look great (set back, so you can't really see them from Parnell Place, but can from say Patrick's Quay), but the older facade looks nice.

who_me

Also, the Webworks (Eglington St., next to the Elysian & One Albert Quay) has sale agreed, for 16M.

Cork Boy 53

So it appears as if Ikea will not be opening any new stores in Cork or anywhere else for that matter in the foreseeable future.

http://feeds.examiner.ie/~r/iebusiness/~3/pF-qy7T1RNc/ikea-confirms-no-plan-to-open-further-irish-stores-883916.html

snotboogie

Very different descriptions of the exact same report from Savills in our two local newspapers:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/property/what-occupiers-want-space-883872.html

https://www.eveningecho.ie/businessnews/Cork-rents-49-cheaper-than-those-in-Dublin-eb67d0d1-8a2c-4ed6-82b0-144ec735bebd-ds

They seem to give vastly different occupancy rates and the Examiner has a far more positive spin. Also included is the news that the 40 storey will apply for planning in early 2019

Meursault

If An Taisce is a charity, who is supporting them? Everyone wants to preserve the heritage buildings, and prevent builders from throwing up any old sh*t for a quick buck, but these guys are taking the p*ss at this stage. That area is crying out for re-generation. It is a total eye sore with very few redeeming features. Hopefully this wont take that long for good sense to prevail and for this objection to be thrown out.

You get the feeling they are getting their shots in early for what will be the real game changer - the 40 storey building. They will be joined by other ne'er do well groups such as the Greens. It would be fantastic if it went ahead but I would be concerned that there will be enough stupid objections that the develops will walk away.

AugustusMinimus

The greens claim they are all for high density living which would allow better public transport.

Yet when these kind of proposals are put forward they are almost always opposed. The Green Party may espouse one thing but their luddite members go in a completely different direction.

Meursault

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The greens claim they are all for high density living which would allow better public transport.

Yet when these kind of proposals are put forward they are almost always opposed. The Green Party may espouse one thing but their luddite members go in a completely different direction.

Exactly. They have been beating the drum of public transport and urban renewal for decades, but when push comes to shove, they object to any buildings which are over 5 storeys high. They were all over the radio and newspapers, when it was announced that these develops intended to submit planning for the 40 storey building. This was before the actual plans were even submitted. They don't seem to get it, that you cannot have the desired public transport without the population density that comes with high rise buildings. While I would whole-heartedly support most environmental causes, i would never vote for them. They're total nimby hypocrites.

AugustusMinimus

Cork city can either go up or go out.

The Green Party appear opposed to both. They need to decide once and for all what they are for. They largely need to grow up and leave college campus politics behind.

There is plenty of brownfield in Cork which can be redeveloped for high density usage. This will support high density public transport and other public amenities. We don’t want to make the same mistake as Dublin with s plethora of 6 story buildings. They have wasted so much of their brownfield. Upwards I say, not outwards.

who_me

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Cork city can either go up or go out.

The Green Party appear opposed to both. They need to decide once and for all what they are for. They largely need to grow up and leave college campus politics behind.

There is plenty of brownfield in Cork which can be redeveloped for high density usage. This will support high density public transport and other public amenities. We don’t want to make the same mistake as Dublin with s plethora of 6 story buildings. They have wasted so much of their brownfield. Upwards I say, not outwards.

I'd disagree slightly. It's probably more accurate to say "Cork can go up a little, and out a lot. Or up a lot, and out a bit less". Buildings are going to get taller, and nothing on earth is going to stop urban sprawl (other than a financial collapse, or major disaster etc...)

Personally, I'd INFINITELY prefer 30-40 floor towers - assuming they're of a decent quality and not the slum apartments of the future - over sprawling, block-sized 6 floor monoliths. Once you reach about 5-6 floors your view of the city skyline is blocked anyway, so you might as well keep going up with a more narrow building, than have a 6 floor block that completely obstructs all view & light along that street.

I'm still not at all convinced about the location of the Custom House quay tower for many reasons, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. The Prism though - even though it's going to be my living room view if built - I do like. I hope that goes ahead.

mrpdap

who_me wrote: »

I'm still not at all convinced about the location of the Custom House quay tower for many reasons, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. The Prism though - even though it's going to be my living room view if built - I do like. I hope that goes ahead.

Agreed. I’d love to see The Prism go ahead, great use of the site.
Regarding The Customs House, I’ve no objection to 40 storeys, but not on that site, too out of proportion for the gateway to the city.

Are you mad. It's a perfect gateway to the city. What a signal of intent it would be

mrpdap

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you mad. It's a perfect gateway to the city. What a signal of intent it would be

Fairly sane. I think.
I’d love to see a dramatic, adventurous building on that site, something truly striking inspired by the city’s heritage and that exceptional location would be wonderful.
All we’re getting is 40 storeys.

AugustusMinimus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you mad. It's a perfect gateway to the city. What a signal of intent it would be

It would be a fantastic gateway building and what a signal of intent to those entering the city.

Give the 7:1 skyscraper rule, 40 stories would be quite tall for that plot of land.

mire

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you mad. It's a perfect gateway to the city. What a signal of intent it would be

There is a case to be made for a tall building at this location. However this idea of it being a signal of intent is a bit bizarre. I have no idea what that means or is supposed to mean. Is it some kind of notion that it tells people that cork is open for business? That sounds a little bit insecure.

mire

mire wrote: »

There is a case to be made for a tall building at this location. However this idea of it being a signal of intent is a bit bizarre. I have no idea what that means or is supposed to mean. Is it some kind of notion that it tells people that cork is open for business? That sounds a little bit insecure.

Shows that Cork isn't afraid of development, unlike Dublin. It's a signal that Cork will embrace actual high density, and that there will be a city based population for business and traders

j8wk2feszrnpao

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Shows that Cork isn't afraid of development, unlike Dublin. It's a signal that Cork will embrace actual high density, and that there will be a city based population for business and traders

Someone in An Taisce fainted while reading that.

MrDerp

D'Agger wrote: »

18months after an objection submission 'hours before the deadline'

Fúck An Taisce. As snotboogie mentioned, going to An Bord Pleanala here, whilst in their rights, is a large hole in the process in Irish planning. If there's pressure on the system to process these objections, leading to a delay that could actually surpass the build time on a project, then why isn't the system in place being reviewed?

They were always going to object on some grounds. I’m actually glad that this was the best they could muster at the 11th hour. If they’d gone in early it would have been a sign of stronger grounds.

It’s a pain in the arse, but if you tried to put in a classification system for grounds for appeal from the offset, they’d challenge the classification with judicial review.

As such is better to have an inspector comprehensively consider and treat each objection like it was the Eiffel Tower in your back garden

Slipperydodger

Would appreciate if you could fill out this survey about "The Brand of Cork". Thought that this was the most relevant forum for it! https://goo.gl/forms/5Mc0zlPonpReweGs2

lisasimpson

They are starting to loose their objections to projects. Their objection to the rubgy museum in limerick was thrown out recently hopefully something similar will happen here

Mardyke

lisasimpson wrote: »

They are starting to loose their objections to projects. Their objection to the rubgy museum in limerick was thrown out recently hopefully something similar will happen here

A rugby museum?!

Now that sounds like something worth objecting to. A.. rugby.. museum..?

PreCocious

Mardyke wrote: »

A rugby museum?!

Now that sounds like something worth objecting to. A.. rugby.. museum..?

They (and others) are objecting to a humongous building that doesn't gel with the rest of that street.

In Cork let's not forget that the Port of Cork objected to the Penrose development, the Idle Hour et al objected to Navigation House, Reardens (or one of those pubs) objected to student housing on the Beamish site and the Elysian management objected to One Albert Quay.

Objections shouldn't be viewed purely as someone throwing a spanner in the works, many times it's the only opportunity for those affected by a development to try and get things worked out and have an outcome that suits as many as possible.

EnzoScifo

PreCocious wrote: »

They (and others) are objecting to a humongous building that doesn't gel with the rest of that street.

In Cork let's not forget that the Port of Cork objected to the Penrose development, the Idle Hour et al objected to Navigation House, Reardens (or one of those pubs) objected to student housing on the Beamish site and the Elysian management objected to One Albert Quay.

Objections shouldn't be viewed purely as someone throwing a spanner in the works, many times it's the only opportunity for those affected by a development to try and get things worked out and have an outcome that suits as many as possible.

I don't disagree, but an Taisce has form for delaying projects by bringing them to an bord pleanala. The port of cork for instance withdrew their objection once they were satisfied. An Taisce would never do that.

kub

EnzoScifo wrote: »

I don't disagree, but an Taisce has form for delaying projects by bringing them to an bord pleanala. The port of cork for instance withdrew their objection once they were satisfied. An Taisce would never do that.

I think there was a little more to The Port Of Cork's objection to the Clarendon / Bam project, I recall a little before that talk of the Harbour Commissioners bringing Bam to court due to an issue with Bams own calculations regarding work they had undertaken for the Harbour Commissioners in Ringaskiddy.

who_me

PreCocious wrote: »

Objections shouldn't be viewed purely as someone throwing a spanner in the works, many times it's the only opportunity for those affected by a development to try and get things worked out and have an outcome that suits as many as possible.

I agree wholeheartedly. Objections can serve a very good and important purpose - they highlight weaknesses and flaws in a proposal. I've seen some terrible proposals in the city in the past - apartment buildings so packed in they couldn't fit stairwells so the only entrance was via external fire escape; or another similar one where several rooms didn't have any windows. Or proposals to build on the cities bridges. Or even build IN the river (building in a river already prone to flooding?). Or my favourite - there was an old, old plan for a Horgan's Quay development, which kinda forgot a national primary route had to pass through the site and proposed to just build in/on it.

IMO, the issue isn't the existence of objections, but the delays involved. Some objections certainly require a significant amount of time (e.g. archaeological surveys etc.), but others ("my view will be affected") should and could be handled in a day. I'm sorry, but if it ISN'T being handled that quickly, it's incompetence. Either on the part of those reviewing the objection, or those responsible for resourcing ABP.

If you told companies "You'll get a definite answer within a month. Though it might be a rejection", they'd be overjoyed. If they get a rejection that quickly, they can amend the plans and re-submit. But how can anyone do business where you get a vague "Ok, an objection came in. It may be a year before it's dealt with. It might be upheld, or not. And we can't guarantee new objections won't come in after that either....."

AugustusMinimus

who_me wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly. Objections can serve a very good and important purpose - they highlight weaknesses and flaws in a proposal. I've seen some terrible proposals in the city in the past - apartment buildings so packed in they couldn't fit stairwells so the only entrance was via external fire escape; or another similar one where several rooms didn't have any windows. Or proposals to build on the cities bridges. Or even build IN the river (building in a river already prone to flooding?). Or my favourite - there was an old, old plan for a Horgan's Quay development, which kinda forgot a national primary route had to pass through the site and proposed to just build in/on it.

IMO, the issue isn't the existence of objections, but the delays involved. Some objections certainly require a significant amount of time (e.g. archaeological surveys etc.), but others ("my view will be affected") should and could be handled in a day. I'm sorry, but if it ISN'T being handled that quickly, it's incompetence. Either on the part of those reviewing the objection, or those responsible for resourcing ABP.

If you told companies "You'll get a definite answer within a month. Though it might be a rejection", they'd be overjoyed. If they get a rejection that quickly, they can amend the plans and re-submit. But how can anyone do business where you get a vague "Ok, an objection came in. It may be a year before it's dealt with. It might be upheld, or not. And we can't guarantee new objections won't come in after that either....."

Except An Taisce are objecting to this for all the wrong reasons. Disgraceful.

https://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/An-Taisce-Prism-skyscraper-would-set-unfavourable-precedent--8017dfbf-5419-4bc8-9d81-8c3d3bfcbc47-ds

mire

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Except An Taisce are objecting to this for all the wrong reasons. Disgraceful.

https://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/An-Taisce-Prism-skyscraper-would-set-unfavourable-precedent--8017dfbf-5419-4bc8-9d81-8c3d3bfcbc47-ds

Precisely what is disgraceful about the content of their objection? By the way I disagree with their position on this project but they may have a point about something. As it stands, granting this permission might be contrary to the city development plan. The director of services rejected a recommendation for refusal by the senior planner. As is his right.

As I said I disagree with the objection. But I see nothing disgraceful about it. They are a heritage body who are complaining about the impact on the heritage of the city. What else would you expect them to do?

Slight overreaction from some quarters. People on here saying that they appeal everything over four stories.

Did they appeal Horgans quay?
Did they appeal on Penrose dock?
Did they appeal the elysian?
Did they appeal the 30 story towers in Docklands 10 years ago?

flo8s967qjh0nd

What we overlook of course if the slow process that An Bord Pleanala makes in dealing with these cases. If the government was serious about speeding up these developments it would properly resource ABP so that decisions could be made in all cases within a matter of weeks, not months.

who_me

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Except An Taisce are objecting to this for all the wrong reasons. Disgraceful.

https://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/An-Taisce-Prism-skyscraper-would-set-unfavourable-precedent--8017dfbf-5419-4bc8-9d81-8c3d3bfcbc47-ds

There's no such thing as "right" or "wrong" reasons, just different preferences and priorities.

I think An Taisce have every right to raise concerns, and it's up to ABP to decide if they have merit, and then if those objections should be overridden by the need for the project. They should be in a position to do this much, much more quickly.