Cork developments

TheChizler

And depending on how they do it the apartments might be even smaller now.

Outkast_IRE

Once it's not more student accomodation it's welcome

AugustusMinimus

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Once it's not more student accomodation it's welcome

Why would you put student accommodation in that location?

Outkast_IRE

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

Why would you put student accommodation in that location?

I am just pointing out all the residential accomodation under construction in the wider city area is student accomodation , so some accomodation for workers and families is sorely needed.

Sure the 208 uses it as one of its main hubs now , tonnes of students come in from east cork and mallow via the rail and get the bus onwards so it's not far fetched .

lisasimpson

questionmark? wrote: »

Apogee wrote: »

Cork City Planning wrote:

Permission for alterations to 4 no. residential over ground floor blocks containing 216 no. 'Build-to-Rent' units as permitted under TP 17/37763 as part of the redevelopment of a site at Horgan's Quay, Railway Street, Lower Glanmire Road, Cork as a mixed use development. The proposed alterations include modifications to the internal and external configuration of the permitted residential development to provide for a single conventional apartment building ranging in height from 7 to 10m floors over ground floor and which is an increase in height from the 6 to 10 floors over ground floor permitted. At ground floor level, changes will include the relocation of the cre to the corner of Railway Street and Alfred Street and an increase in its size from 189m2 to 206m2, reduction in the area afforded to ancillary ESB Station, switch rooms, meter rooms, and ancillary service areas to accommodate an increase in facilities management and ancillary amenities for the residents of 400m2, reorganisation, relocation and increase in area of the 5 no. retail units from 1,139m2 to 1,265m2. The alterations to the ground floor also make provision for a decrease in the number of parking spaces and for the increase and relocation of bicycle parking. At upper levels it is proposed to amalgamate the 4 no. residential blocks into a single apartment building and internal alterations will result in an increase of 86 no. apartments to a total of 302 apartments. Alterations to the Old Railway Station (Station Master's Building) includes its refurbishment, partial demolition and change of use to provide for ancillary amenities for the residents of the residential building. The proposed development consists of the carrying out of works to a protected structure (PS178) Old Railway Station (Station Master's Building).

http://planning.corkcity.ie/AppFileRefDetails/1938265/0

86 extra apartments to 302 total, increase in size for retail units, decrease in parking, increase in bike parking. All sounds good and suitable for that site.

Hope its approved. Development like that needs to be encouraged in the city centre plus would bring some life to the city centre after 6pm

questionmark?

Very interesting to see that the developer wants to increase the number of residential units. Potentially positive indication about viability of residential accommodation in the Docklands. My only concern is that this is now being described as a single conventional apartment building. Replacing four blocks. I'm worried that this will just be one big lump rather than something interesting in urban design terms.

It does mention upper level. Does that suggest it will be seperate buildings joined at the top few levels? Be interesting to see the design.
Without a doubt more residential accommodation is needed in the core city area.

TheChizler

lisasimpson wrote: »

Hope its approved. Development like that needs to be encouraged in the city centre plus would bring some life to the city centre after 6pm

It's already approved, this is an application to increase the density of the existing permission.

Patrick 1959

I wonder will the Jacob Island development start after the Dunkettle upgrade is completed . My guess is after completemen.

questionmark?

Patrick 1959 wrote: »

I wonder will the Jacob Island development start after the Dunkettle upgrade is completed . My guess is after completemen.

Anybody know if the 25 storey tower has passed the potential appeals period?

namloc1980

NIMBYs are out in force about the N28 upgrade.

Group challenging decision to upgrade N28 to motorway status

If they are successful this could seriously scupper the Port of Cork relocation and subsequent redevelopment plans for the entire docklands.

AugustusMinimus

namloc1980 wrote: »

NIMBYs are out in force about the N28 upgrade.

Group challenging decision to upgrade N28 to motorway status

If they are successful this could seriously scupper the Port of Cork relocation and subsequent redevelopment plans for the entire docklands.

This is fairly old news.

It’s a ludicrous suggestion by RTÉ that they represent up to 10,000 people. Nothing but fiction.

namloc1980

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

This is fairly old news.

It’s a ludicrous suggestion by RTÉ that they represent up to 10,000 people. Nothing but fiction.

The fact the judicial review is starting tomorrow makes it fairly up to date news.

Judicial reviews in Ireland can take a ludicrously long time (Apple data centre in Galway for example), so even if they aren't successful the amount of time that will be wasted is scandalous.

kub

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

This is fairly old news.

It’s a ludicrous suggestion by RTthat they represent up to 10,000 people. Nothing but fiction.

Seems most of what the NIMBY's have said is fiction, there is a thread dedicated to it here:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057734629

Brussels Sprout

namloc1980 wrote: »

NIMBYs are out in force about the N28 upgrade.

Group challenging decision to upgrade N28 to motorway status

If they are successful this could seriously scupper the Port of Cork relocation and subsequent redevelopment plans for the entire docklands.

I like the video in that where the planners are basically shown responding to the complaints of the NIMBY-guy

who_me

questionmark? wrote: »

It does mention upper level. Does that suggest it will be seperate buildings joined at the top few levels? Be interesting to see the design.
Without a doubt more residential accommodation is needed in the core city area.

Really? I'd love to see what they're planning. Anything other than a big monolithic block would be nice.

Tomtom364

questionmark? wrote: »

Anybody know if the 25 storey tower has passed the potential appeals period?

Permission was granted in October. Appeal period is 4 weeks.

Markcheese

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

This is fairly old news.

It’s a ludicrous suggestion by RTÉ that they represent up to 10,000 people. Nothing but fiction.

Well it is UP TO 10,000,
They probably got a couple of thousand Facebook likes...

AugustusMinimus

Markcheese wrote: »

Well it is UP TO 10,000,
They probably got a couple of thousand Facebook likes...

Just over a thousand.

whisky_galore

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

Even more perplexing is the amount of people in this thread that take issue with buildings with glass, as if it's a bad thing to allow light into a building.

They look like sterile, characterless things. Probably age badly too when the gloss wears off and they aren't cleaned regularly. With a bit of ingenuity I'd say you could admit light into a building without it looking like a bland fish tank.

whisky_galore

mrpdap wrote: »

Regarding the R&H Hall building, there are infinite possibilities for a good artist and a bag of (spray) cans
http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2011/03/extreme-murals-painted-buildings.html?m=1

Id like if Cork could follow Waterford's lead with the Waterford Walls. They look great when well done. The electrical junction boxes were nice but now starting to get weathered and scrawled on by lesser talents.

questionmark?

Tomtom364 wrote: »

questionmark? wrote: »

Anybody know if the 25 storey tower has passed the potential appeals period?

Permission was granted in October. Appeal period is 4 weeks.

I haven't heard of an appeal have you? Any idea if this is going to go to construction?

Apogee

In light of discussion about retention/incorporation of older buildings...



credit: https://twitter.com/NoonanJoe/status/1098621156704305152

j8wk2feszrnpao

Apogee wrote: »

In light of discussion about retention/incorporation of older buildings...



credit: https://twitter.com/NoonanJoe/status/1098621156704305152

That looks fantastic!

chalkitdown1

Apogee wrote: »

In light of discussion about retention/incorporation of older buildings...



credit: https://twitter.com/NoonanJoe/status/1098621156704305152

Stunning re-use of the old facade.

The first reply under that tweet is just awful. People like that are the reason nothing gets built. Thankfully that's changing finally.

TheChizler

Gosh I don't think I ever noticed that beautiful frontage before, looking back at streetview it was totally let down by the surrounding space.

ShamoBuc

And the new bridge will be named after Mary Elmes. Being assembled in Carlow, and should be officially opened in early June. It will be a nice addition to the quayside I think.

questionmark?

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

Apogee wrote: »

In light of discussion about retention/incorporation of older buildings...



credit: https://twitter.com/NoonanJoe/status/1098621156704305152

Stunning re-use of the old facade.

The first reply under that tweet is just awful. People like that are the reason nothing gets built. Thankfully that's changing finally.

"Has been ruined" Did that person not see what was there before!!!!

MrDerp

questionmark? wrote: »

"Has been ruined" Did that person not see what was there before!!!!

I’m slightly disappointed. I thought the original renders had a more prominent use of the facade, but now it seems sunken into the building.

I guess losing the side walls (I believe they crumbled away) has taken away from the effect some what, they should have built some new stone work either side of the facade to replace it.

That said, I’m all for keeping a facade, I just think it should have stood out more from the building, it’s swallowed a bit by the cantilevered floors overhead now.

AugustusMinimus

They could do with widening the foot path a meter or 2. Walked down there over the weekend and it’s quite narrow for somewhere which will have a lot of footfall.

Tomtom364

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

They could do with widening the foot path a meter or 2. Walked down there over the weekend and it’s quite narrow for somewhere which will have a lot of footfall.

That looks to be addressed in the proposed plans for the road
linked earlier