Advertisement
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Cork developments

1267268269270271273»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,042 ✭✭✭ questionmark?


    More apartments for non students would be very welcome!

    However, the students flat's are needed not just for students but to get them out of house shares to free up those accommodation types for regular Joe's.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,649 ✭✭✭✭ whisky_galore


    This assumes that regular Joe students will be able to afford these bespoke apartments!



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,019 ✭✭✭✭ namloc1980


    A lot of students can't afford these fancy new apartments and still rely on the older accomodation types so nothing or very little is being freed up. The private purpose built apartments are crazy expensive and very much aimed at foreign students.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,019 ✭✭✭✭ namloc1980




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,696 ✭✭✭ fonecrusher1


    What a pest. Needs to be legislation in place to fast-track getting this crap dismissed much much quicker. Frustrating.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,957 ✭✭✭✭ the beer revolu


    What if the objection has merit and is in the interest of the greater good?

    I'm not saying that this is the case here, but the idea that all objections to developments are crap and should be dismissed quickly, is rather concerning.

    I see a worrying trend where all objectors are seen as crackpots who are against progress. Robust planning is vital and we don't have a great history of sound urban or rural planning in this country.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,696 ✭✭✭ fonecrusher1


    Yeah 'if', if the objection has merit.... I'm all for them, absolutely. Who said anything about all objections to developments should be dissmissed? Certainly nothing in my post suggesting that. There doesn't seem to be one here from what I can see - an objection with merit that is. He's being a pain in the arse and its only going to delay badly needed residential units and put money in solicitors pockets.

    On the subject of crackpots, its just a shame that you can get one objecting to something simply for sake of objecting (thinly veiled with various claims) and unfortunately current legislation deems it necessary to process this stuff for months in the courts.

    I'm all for legimate objections - Obviously we have to have that. But that's just not the case here from what i can see. Load of rubbish imo. No doubt this will probably get resolved with some minor changes requested by ABP to make it go away. Its just a shame it'll take months to get sorted.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,957 ✭✭✭✭ the beer revolu


    Thing is, spurious objections without merit carry no weight and don't hold up the process. There has to be a valid reason behind any objection with regard to the county development plan.

    Judicial reviews are another matter and can bevery costly so, generally, they are not taken lightly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,640 ✭✭✭ Timing belt


    he will be paid to drop objection after awhile and made sign a NDA so the public never hear about it. That’s what’s really crazy about the country…All they need to do is change legislation that makes the objector pay all costs if the objection is unsuccessful. That way a quick resolution could be hammered out for legit objections and the professional objectors that don’t even live in the area wouldn’t bring as many stupid cases because they would be landed with a massive bill.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,957 ✭✭✭✭ the beer revolu


    As I understand it, anyone taking a judicial review can be held liable for the costs.

    Sometimes a judge can decide that the review was in the public interest and costs can be divided differently.

    Also, an objection either has merit or it doesn't. Where the person is from is irrelevant.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,703 ✭✭✭ Mav11


    "Mr Kenny’s challenge has been brought on grounds including that the decision amounts to a material contravention of building height objectives contained in the Cork City Development Plan."

    This is a big problem all over the country. County and City Councils produce Developments Plans at great expense, after public consultation and then feel that they have the power to ignore these same plans to keep some developer sweet and happy.

    Maybe we need more Mr. Kenny's, with the balls to challenge the arrogance of these various Councils???



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,658 ✭✭✭ Markcheese


    Or if a proposed development is clearly in contravention of a plan , there should be a clear process to show why that individual development is in the public interest , ,( possibly with a council vote )

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 185 ✭✭ DylanQuestion


    It's called a material contravention. The report they did on it is here. It isn't as simple as An Bord Pleanala just completely ignoring the Development Plan

    Here is what the 2015 development plan (now outdated as the new one was put into place the other day, but relevant for this planning) says about tall buildings:

    “Tall buildings can play a visual role as landmark buildings and can make a positive contribution to the skyline of a city. Due to the visual prominence and strategic significance of tall buildings their design must be of a high standard. There are large areas of the city where tall buildings are unsuitable given the potential conflicts with the character, grain, and the amenity enjoyed by users of adjacent sites. In particular, high buildings should be avoided in the historic areas of the city. The City Council has identified Docklands and South Mahon as areas with the potential to accommodate high buildings. Maps 2, & 7 in Volume 2 specify those locations. All other areas of the city are not considered appropriate for tall buildings. Such development will be resisted in areas of special and/or significant character in the city i.e.:

    • The City Centre (within the 1869 boundary);

    • The North and South River Lee Channels (west of Docklands);

    • Architectural Conservation Areas;

    • Other historic areas of the city of architectural and historic character (including the old city approaches and the villages enveloped by city expansion);

    • The suburban areas of the city (apart from locations specified in the Plan);

    • Areas of significant landscape value (including Landscape Preservation Areas and Areas of High Landscape Value)”. [emphasis added]"



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,703 ✭✭✭ Mav11


    It would seem to me that we know that:

    1. There has been a complete failure of planning in this country.
    2. ABP hasn't exactly covered itself in glory particularly in relation to Cork connections.

    BUT:

    Section 4.2 and 4.2.1 of the material contravention document, if allowed by the High Court, would make a complete joke of any type of planning or negate the usefulness of any and all development plans (4 to 15 stories).

    Will be interesting to see how the High Court swings on this!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,598 ✭✭✭ Apogee


    TII have appealed planning permission for the hotel/office development in Jacob's Island citing the impact on safety of the N40

    Camden Place alterations (removal of rooftop restaurant + addition of long stay suites) given OK by planners




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,649 ✭✭✭✭ whisky_galore


    The foreign students with wealthy mommies and daddies that UCC want to attract to the detriment of students from poorer backgrounds they pretend to care about.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭ sok2005


    You can take foreign out of that sentence and then it strikes just as true.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,598 ✭✭✭ Apogee


    Pete_Cavan has posted on the ports thread how the enabling works for Marino Point are now out for tender. This presumably confirms that any appeals have fallen by the wayside.




  • Registered Users Posts: 8,749 ✭✭✭ Shedite27


    Jacobs Island one is a bit odd is it? You can't build there because our ring road can't handle the extra traffic? I've seen objections like that for smaller roads but that's probably the best served location for cars in the city.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,640 ✭✭✭ Timing belt


    No doubt they will be built and parking will be removed from developers plans at the councils request in an effort to reduce the number of cars on the road but no reliable alternative transport will be provided besides a bicycle shed in the new development.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,086 ✭✭✭ CorkRed93


    can anyone tell me whats being done to that bar/restaurant (i think is what it was) that is across from the old square deal building on washington st. lot of work being done to it, looks like its being clad atm



  • Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭ Douglas Eegit


    There's a bit of history with the building. I think CAB were involved and that's why it was empty for the last 10 years. It's now finally been sold and hopefully someone here will be more knowledgeable on the future plans.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,318 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Faith


    Oh, was that the place that had the kind of back terrace along the river? What was that called again?


    /edit: Indigo, I found it on Google.



  • Registered Users Posts: 158 ✭✭ getoutadodge


    "The foreign students with wealthy mommies and daddies that UCC want to attract to the detriment of students from poorer backgrounds they pretend to care about."

    This is the model all the third level institutes are going with. Irish students can go to the back of the queue or go to sunny Glasgow. It explains the rush to build (too expensive for Irish) student accommodation blocks all over the place. In the summer they can be leased out for summer rentals to a totally different market maximising yield or off loaded in block to the refugee agency. Another bonus is a huge pool of intl students added to the labour pool to do the jobs "irish dont want to do...bla bla" suppressing labour costs. Properly trained ....and most importantly paid (with pensions contributions) .. barmen, retail staff etc are so 1970s.

    A win win win



  • Registered Users Posts: 185 ✭✭ DylanQuestion


    There is a casino/arcade thing going into one of the ground floor units on the Washington Street building. I'd prefer to see the whole thing knocked and rebuilt, it's not nice looking to me



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,598 ✭✭✭ Apogee


    Unfortunately, it looks like Marino Point is still stuck in planning after all

    But a plan to relocate a fertiliser plant from the south docklands in Cork city centre – freeing up a tranche of development land – to a new facility at Marino Point shows just how challenging the delivery of big ambitious projects can be. The fertiliser plan is currently stalled in the planning process after objections from local residents.

    “It looks like we won’t even know the outcome until next year. Meanwhile, they’re bagging fertiliser in the middle of Ireland’s second city,” says McGettigan.




Advertisement