nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Cork developments

snotboogie

I noticed that the Limerick equivalent is a very popular thread over on their forum so I thought I might get one going here. To kick things off I'll list the bigger current projects I can think of:

Under Construction

Navigation Square: Four building office development on the former Navigation House site on Albert Quay. 310,000 sq ft of office space for up to 3000 employees. First phase to be completed Feb 19'

89-90 South Mall: 50,000 sq ft office, 5 storey office building.To be completed in December 18'

Dalata Hotel South Mall: Six storey hotel, 165 beds. To be completed in December 18'

Various Student Accommodation: Western Road and Beamish site are under construction, Crows Nest has planning and should start soon, Square Deal is facing appeals, Coca-Cola site on the Carrigrohane Road has had planning for over a year but nothing has happened? O’Riordans Joinery, Gillen House on Farranlea Road, Model Farm Road/Melbourne Road and Copely Street are all at various stages of planning and/or limbo.

Planning/Appealed

Horgan's Quay: Office Space for 5,000 employees, 200 apartments, 136 bed hotel and 3000 sq metres of restaurants and retail. Got planning permission in March but it was appealed by Port of Cork. Uncertain when the final decision will be. Construction on the Hotel will hopefully begin in Q4 this year with the office and apartments commencing in 2019.

Sullivan's Quay: 6 storey Office & 193 bed 4 star Hotel. Planning granted and immediately appealed. Given that demolition is nearly complete I'd expect this to go into construction as soon as planning is granted. Potential hold up over the height of the hotel, at 12 storeys and 47 metres, it is set to make the top 20 tallest buildings in the state if completed. An Taisce not happy.

Former Victoria Hotel: Knocking much of the Victoria and rebuilding to the back and refurbishing the original historic front/facade and to integrate the two sections into a new high order retail unit, of 25,000 sq ft, over four floors. Rumoured to be taken over by Zara. Planning granted in Feb, nothing happened on site since.

Metropole Redevelopment: €50m redevelopment of the Metropole Hotel to include a new five-storey boutique hotel on Patrick's Quay. Planning granted with amendments in March. No date for work to start.

Wilton Shopping Centre: €100 million revamp proposed. Mistake made in planning permission. In the process of resubmitting.

In Limbo

Event Centre: 6000 all seater multi purpose event centre with a tourist brewery experience. Arguably the most controversial construction project in the history of the city. After a bleak 6 months at the back end of 2017 there have been two instances of positive murmurs from the Government and BAM in January 2018 and April 2018. Construction allegedly to start in Q4 2018 but there are still conflicting and contradictory statements from all parties involved. Most would be shocked to see this start in 2018.

Anderson Quay/Camden Quay/Trinity Quarter: All have had planning for years with no work on site. Camden Quay allegedly had some work going on last week but I'd be shocked if it was related to the actual construction. I can't see any of these sites being developed as per their current proposals.

Concept/Pre Planning

Docklands Tower: 40 storey mixed use tower with the redevelopment of the existing customs house warehouses into cultural, tourist and retail space. By a mile the most ambitious development in Ireland. Announced over one year ago and no sign of a planning permission application yet, allegedly waiting for the Docklands development plan this summer to rezone heights for the site. If we don't see a planning application by the end of the year I'd be worried.

Ford Distribution Depot: Put on sale last week. Former site of the extremely ambitious Atlantic Quarter. Major development opportunity

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

AugustusMinimus

Tomtom364 wrote: »

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

The footpath looks just as narrow in those plans.

chalkitdown1

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The footpath looks just as narrow in those plans.

The huge walkway on the opposite side will make up for it you'd imagine. You can see a crossing to it behind the bus in the render.

thomas anderson.

That footpath is plenty wide, I use it everyday

Treviso

How much footfall do you expect to go down that footpath. It's wide enough.

who_me

munstermagic11 wrote: »

That looks fantastic!

It really makes me think it's a shame we see so little use of stone in new, modern buildings.

(Note - I'm not saying we make classical style cut-stone buildings from now until the end of time. ...or until Cork floods due to global warming... But just some use of stone like this, in combination with modern glass styling, can be absolutely stunning.)

who_me

Treviso wrote: »

How much footfall do you expect to go down that footpath. It's wide enough.

A hell of a lot.

3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.

Treviso

who_me wrote: »

A hell of a lot.

3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.

They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

namloc1980

Treviso wrote: »

They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

There's plenty of space there. The opposite side of the road on the quayside is going to be huge.

Treviso

namloc1980 wrote: »

There's plenty of space there. The opposite side of the road on the quayside is going to be huge.

Thats for the planned boardwalk and pontoon area, which IMO the wider the better. There will be 5 pedestrian crossings available should anyone feel trapped by these "narrow" footpaths.

hans aus dtschl

Treviso wrote: »

Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

Go for the second driving lane, thanks.

I'm not convinced it's needed at present, though I don't have access to traffic counts here.
In any case the priority is always pedestrians first, then cyclists, public transport and private motors, in that order.

AugustusMinimus

Treviso wrote: »

They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

It’s a lot narrower than in front of 1 Albert Quay. A lot.

namloc1980

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

Go for the second driving lane, thanks.

I'm not convinced it's needed at present, though I don't have access to traffic counts here.
In any case the priority is always pedestrians first, then cyclists, public transport and private motors, in that order.

Is it??? If that were true we wouldn't have cycle lanes being routinely used as car parks around the city, or a nearly year long uproar over a partial bus lane on Patrick Street.

chalkitdown1

who_me wrote: »

A hell of a lot.

3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.

Are you expecting the 3000 people to be on the footpath at the same time? lol

There's plenty room there and triple on the other side of the road. What are we even arguing about here? It's a non-issue.

who_me

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

Are you expecting the 3000 people to be on the footpath at the same time? lol

There's plenty room there and triple on the other side of the road. What are we even arguing about here? It's a non-issue.

At or around 9am, lunchtime and 5/6pm, yes, I do.

Quite a lot more, actually, since that's just the number in Navigation Square. And this quayside will be the most direct route from the South Docklands towards the existing city centre, I'd expect most of the foot traffic from there to pass along Albert Quay.

Apologies if this argument doesn't interest you. Perhaps you should consider not arguing, if that is the case? Just a suggestion.

Treviso

who_me wrote: »

At or around 9am, lunchtime and 5/6pm, yes, I do.

Quite a lot more, actually, since that's just the number in Navigation Square. And this quayside will be the most direct route from the South Docklands towards the existing city centre, I'd expect most of the foot traffic from there to pass along Albert Quay.

Apologies if this argument doesn't interest you. Perhaps you should consider not arguing, if that is the case? Just a suggestion.

Most people will use the boardwalk when coming from the Docklands.

From passing there earlier, they did indeed widen the footpaths. I presume they were restricted by how much they could, by having to use the existing structure facade.

One Albert quay's footpaths are wider because the building is further back from the river

hans aus dtschl

namloc1980 wrote: »

Is it??? If that were true we wouldn't have cycle lanes being routinely used as car parks around the city, or a nearly year long uproar over a partial bus lane on Patrick Street.

Believe me, I'm with you 100% on this.

I was saying the priority in an ideal world is pedestrians first etc.

snotboogie

Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?

leahyl

snotboogie wrote: »

Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?

It's an absolute farce :mad:

CHealy

snotboogie wrote: »

What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about?

The current delay, and all further delays until it has been officially axed, are the various stakeholders trying their very best to wriggle their way out of this event center. Its very clear BAM/ Live Nation/ Government/ City Council have no interest in proceeding with a center that is not viable. Thats the hard truth.

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?

Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
Public money is cheap at the moment.

Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

snotboogie

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
Public money is cheap at the moment.

Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

It would invalidate the tender process.

Rebelbrowser

snotboogie wrote: »

It would invalidate the tender process.

But the only people who could act on foot of this (I think) would be OCP as the disappointed other tenderer and I really doubt they would. In fact I think they have publicly said they wouldn't at some stage?

I wonder what effect the NCH debacle might have here? BAM obviously copped a lot of bad publicity on that. On the one hand might that make them more likely to plough on with the Events Centre to avoid further bad publicity? Alternatively the public spat with Leo Varadker could make them even less inclined to go ahead with the Events Centre...

Hopefully the former not the latter!

Roger Hassenforder

snotboogie wrote: »

It would invalidate the tender process.

The whole tender process is questionable.
Live nation on both competing bids, goes to "redesign" to make it more viable on being awarded one of them...

Markcheese

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
Public money is cheap at the moment.

Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

Just give bam another 10 million,
And another, and another
Shure at that rate we might as well build a children's hospital...

Roger Hassenforder

Markcheese wrote: »

Just give bam another 10 million,
And another, and another
Shure at that rate we might as well build a children's hospital...

True
Should have pulled the plug went it went back to design.

flo8s967qjh0nd

Too late now. Too many politicians (ok, one in particular) have staked their reputation on this. In effect, signing a blank cheque for the developers. This is too big to fail, but that's no guarantee it won't.

PreCocious

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
Public money is cheap at the moment.

Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

The problem is that the tenderers didn't stick to their price and are relying on councilors saying "ah sure it's only 10m more,. it's worth it for Cork boy".

We're at the stage where other tenderers and those who didn't tender are thinking "Hmm, the subsidy was larger than expected".

BAM should be told to pack their bags.

mire

It will be interesting to see if the applicants submit a response to the further information request as part of the planning application. That will tell a lot. Either this project is viable or it's not. The real cost of this, and the viability of the project, was known a long time ago.

Dbu

And construction costs are rising by the week

snotboogie

mire wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if the applicants submit a response to the further information request as part of the planning application. That will tell a lot. Either this project is viable or it's not. The real cost of this, and the viability of the project, was known a long time ago.

I don't know why they went to all of the effort to submit the planning in October only to then balk at the relatively smaller job of providing additional information. Something has turned BAM off this in the interim.