Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cork developments

Options
1262263265267268300

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭ofcork


    2nd crane gone up in blackpool as well.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭ofcork


    See also milfield garage being cleared out this morning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,925 ✭✭✭cantalach


    This nerd just got Rick-rolled by your nerdy signature...kudos.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭Pen Rua


    4 derelict properties on North Main Street have been CPO'ed by the city council.

    https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-40802430.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    How many apartments do we reckon will fit in there



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Great to see the council taking action like this but also im pretty sure they haven't given any thought into what they want to build there so those buildings will stay as they are for at least another 3 years especially if An Taisce roll along and say they can't be knocked down because they represent the post modern dereliction of our society and its values and should be preserved as is for future generations 😄

    In case you think I'm being mad they actually objected to the old junkie haven tax offices on Sullivans Quay from being demolished.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭airy fairy


    City council have CPO'd a few places that'll never see a thing built on it in the next few decades. How long have they land on the Mallow road, that spans quite a distance. Supposed to be for housing. North main st will be the same.



  • Registered Users Posts: 563 ✭✭✭rebs23


    Should be just sold off to those with the best proposal for redevelopment within a specified time frame.



  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Id imagine they will be gifted to one of the social housing bodies like Tuath, handing them over to a private developer would cause uproar.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,789 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    @iColdFusion That old junkie haven housed an art college on 2 floors and also provided art studios for well over a hundred artists, across 2 organisations. It had gallery spaces, drama spaces and an auditorium.

    I know it was divisive, but I genuinely liked the building. It, certainly needed investment and some tlc, but I don't see what was so bonkers about An Taisce wanting to preserve it.

    It's an empty lot now.

    I, for one, am glad that the conversation was had about preserving it. There are more ways than one of looking at almost anything and we should have these conversations.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Well everyone is entitled to their opinion but to me it was a concrete monstrosity located in what is otherwise a very historic part of Cork City, looking at it again in streetview it reminds me of an evil corporation's headquarters from Judge Dredd or Blade Runner.

    For a finish the council were begging BAM to demolish it because it had become a haven for junkies living there, dumping needles around the area, random fires and general shite.

    One of their projects managers did tell me a funny story of getting a security call out when it was demolished to find some hippy types types had scaled the fence and were trying to plant flowers in the concrete rubble 😄



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,824 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    I didn't mourn the building but do feel sorry about the ever shrinking available spaces for the arts community.

    There's so much BS around festivals at Ireland being great for music/dance/visual arts, in reality it isn't. This country would rather force people into 'proper' jobs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,774 ✭✭✭Apogee




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,450 ✭✭✭CorkRed93




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 32,421 CMod ✭✭✭✭ShamoBuc


    R and H Hall apartments has a nice ring to it.

    As far as the eyesore itself goes, the sooner it is gone the better.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,789 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    This is great news to me.

    While I suspect it will not be cost effective and will not happen, at least it is being considered.

    I find it interesting that I, and most people I know with whom I've discussed it with, like this building but the people who dislike it just can't seem to fathom that others do not share their view.



  • Registered Users Posts: 563 ✭✭✭rebs23


    In fairness it's a difficult building to like. The buildings that are proposed are much better looking and these buildings were built on what was once a public park so maybe there is an inbuilt historical dislike of the way these buildings simply ruined a nice area. These buildings and associated buildings were/are also responsible for a large amount of truck movements that simply have to get out of the city centre so we can create a more sustainable development pattern in our city centre. As for retro fitting them, it would be an absolute nightmare if they are even in half the state the developer claims they are. Concrete cancer, old rusted beams. If I remember correctly there were fires and explosions in them over the years?



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    There's definitely a line somewhere we need to draw between keeping something because it's been there ages, versus knocking it because it's ugly. I wouldn't be disappointed to knock that whole block and start afresh



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,789 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    Ugly is subjective. Therein lies the problem with these kind of arguments.

    To me, the R&H Hall buildings have a brutal beauty, as did the Government building on Sullivan's Quay. You may not agree but you can't say that I'm wrong (while being reasonable). I am far from alone in this opinion.

    Anyway, makes little difference as I can't see these buildings being preserved and the Sullivan's Quay building is gone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Jesus planners are so full of shite, the developers have told them it's a death trap and I assume provided engineers reports to back that up and the council are like "Yeah but can you not throw millions of euro at it to leave it uninhabitable instead of knocking it down and building something useful"

    You'd swear people wernt crying out for housing close to the city and the council's development plans aren't entirely based on stopping people commuting in!


    "It seems that R&H Hall is technically deteriorating as a structure and that its retention is not economically viable," planners wrote.

    "Given the successful re-use of some silos internationally it would be ideal that some elements of the silo illustrating its scale be retained to acknowledge its significance and keep a strong sense of place. A financial overview of the cost implications of retaining a full-height portion of R&H Hall through re-enforcement of the existing structure is requested to be provided to demonstrate the full implication of reuse of parts of the structure and this will better inform a decision."

    The Council said the section of the retained silo would not need to be habitable or even usable. "Most realistically at the very least would exist as an installation feature illustrating the original function of the building," the council said.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,789 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    I have 2 observations on the above comment;


    1. Developers will ALWAYS take the cheaper option. They are never going to willingly spend money on anything that does not generate income. They don't like preserving structures because it is costly. This is why we have planning stipulations and requirements.
    2. A housing crises should not be used as an excuse for weak planning.


  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    So why didn't the council buy this site and develop it themselves? We have a massive need for housing in walking distance to cities and the government would have given them a blank cheque?

    Answer: Council planners know nothing about actually building and soon enough we will see the effects of the end of the SHD option with planning grinding to a halt around the country and projects being delayed for years because local planners are arty farty pencil pushers who can't be fired and do everything in their power to make it look like they are busy.

    Seriously all this crap does is make projects unviable financially and drag them on longer than the need to, best case all that extra cost gets passed onto joe public in higher apt or office space prices, worst case delays it long enough until the next recession hits and nothing gets built, don't forget there was loads of talk about this site circa 2007 too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3 2Beamzplz


    Just curious but have you insight into the industry that would back up "always taking the cheaper option".

    Anecdotally from seeing comments online, those in favour of retaining tend to be those that rail against ubiquitous glass boxes. What's so special about this box grey concrete box?



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,368 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    I can see what the planners are doing, when these type of restorations are done well like the Gasworks in Dublin and the Battersea power station, they look great. This kinda feels like one of the planners saw something in an Architects magazine and was waiting for something half suitable to pop up and try to build it here.

    I appreciate beauty is subjective, but you don't hold onto something unsightly just because its old.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    The planners didn't say that r+h hall has to be kept or restored , they put forward that they'd like it to be included in a building ,

    The planners aren't the ones on site , checking structural integrity - nor designing a building to include the grain silo , they're planners and architects . if it could be done well then they'd be in favour of it ... End of ...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,789 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    Your last sentence made me laugh.

    It stated that you appreciate that beauty is subjective but then went on to demonstrate that you don't appreciate that at all!

    All in one sentence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,774 ✭✭✭Apogee




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,568 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Crane No 20 currently up in the city



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,774 ✭✭✭Apogee




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    Big news for the South docklands development. Not much can/could move ahead with the OCP plans (pretty much the centre city side of the South Docklands) as long as Gouldings are there; though obviously it'll be some time before they're ready to move out and the site can be remediated.



Advertisement