Cork developments

Mefistofelino · 26-11-2019 3:20pm

the beer revolu wrote: »

Built with public money!

That might be the pontoon belonging to Lee Boat Club you're thinking of, up near PUC?

IIRC, one of the CBC slips was part funded, but that was specifically to facilitate boat-trailer access for the emergency services (river rescue, coastguard etc.).

The other slip is there for a long while - its on the OSI Cassini map from the 1930s.

snotboogie · 26-11-2019 4:06pm

According to skyscrappercity an 80 apartment development from OCP has started by Lancaster Quay, expect a crane by January. Seems like that randomer on twitter was right, lets hope he was also right about the Prism

Markcheese · 26-11-2019 5:16pm

calnand wrote: »

There's slipways at Blackrock village.

Youre right, there's the 2 little slips at Blackrock village, at the pier... I forgotten about them,
Not great for big boats, and the basin is fairly shallow, but handy none the less...

the beer revolu · 26-11-2019 5:34pm

Mefistofelino wrote: »

That might be the pontoon belonging to Lee Boat Club you're thinking of, up near PUC?

.

You are correct.

calnand · 26-11-2019 6:56pm

Mefistofelino wrote: »

Public slipway in Blackrock is essentially unusable other than close to high tide. With all the upgrade work they did a couple of years ago, they never actually dredged the harbour so for much of the day, the slipway is high and dry. There are slipways at Cork Boat Club but they are private.

No issue with that today.

https://twitter.com/CorkSafetyAlert/status/1199374964635385862?s=09

snotboogie · 26-11-2019 9:58pm

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Private-company-seeks-to-build-753-new-homes-on-Corks-northside-Fears-infrastructure-wont-be-able-to-cope-ac485620-17c7-444a-b30d-639bfce3d670-ds

753 homes for Ballyvolane, 10 year planning permission.... Set to be logged this week with ABP

mrpdap · 26-11-2019 10:06pm

Mefistofelino wrote: »

That might be the pontoon belonging to Lee Boat Club you're thinking of, up near PUC?

IIRC, one of the CBC slips was part funded, but that was specifically to facilitate boat-trailer access for the emergency services (river rescue, coastguard etc.).

The other slip is there for a long while - its on the OSI Cassini map from the 1930s.

Correct
The slips at CBC are there a long time. They don’t have a dock.
The dock at Lee RC was built a few years ago, as far a I know its public.

hans aus dtschl · 27-11-2019 10:17am

snotboogie wrote: »

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Private-company-seeks-to-build-753-new-homes-on-Corks-northside-Fears-infrastructure-wont-be-able-to-cope-ac485620-17c7-444a-b30d-639bfce3d670-ds

753 homes for Ballyvolane, 10 year planning permission.... Set to be logged this week with ABP

ABP might approve it the way they approved the big development in Dunkettle/Glanmire: "approved as long as the Council - at some point in the distant vague future - upgrade the infrastructure to be able to cope with it".

The Glanmire development is about to open and none of the roads even have plans to be upgraded yet! It's genius.

hans aus dtschl · 27-11-2019 10:18am

Mefistofelino wrote: »

I'd like to see the calculated current speeds for the proposed tidal barrier. I suspect that due to the fact that the barrier opening is far narrower than the natural channel, speeds will be elevated.
This could make the barrier uncrossable much of the time for anything without a decent motor.

It's all in the OPW report actually, in fairness to them. They talk about the angle and dimensions of the barrier and their impact on the channel at various tides for these very reasons. Makes for good reading.

the beer revolu · 27-11-2019 1:46pm

mrpdap wrote: »

The dock at Lee RC was built a few years ago, as far a I know its public.

A public pontoon behind locked gates!!

mrpdap · 27-11-2019 2:59pm

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

It's all in the OPW report actually, in fairness to them. They talk about the angle and dimensions of the barrier and their impact on the channel at various tides for these very reasons. Makes for good reading.

Hi, Interesting, do you have a link to that section.

Mefistofelino · 27-11-2019 3:46pm

mrpdap wrote: »

Hi, Interesting, do you have a link to that section.

Link to report

Section 9 is what you are looking for -it looks at impacts of gates at the various proposed locations

mrpdap · 27-11-2019 3:51pm

Mefistofelino wrote: »

Link to report

Section 9 is what you are looking for -it looks at impacts of gates at the various proposed locations

Thanks

ShamoBuc · 27-11-2019 6:56pm

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

ABP might approve it the way they approved the big development in Dunkettle/Glanmire: "approved as long as the Council - at some point in the distant vague future - upgrade the infrastructure to be able to cope with it".

The Glanmire development is about to open and none of the roads even have plans to be upgraded yet! It's genius.

Genius is right. Build the houses, add God knows how much traffic onto the limited roads in Glanmire, then shut them for a time to improve the infrastructure thus creating absolute gridlock when they do actually do it.
Jokeshop in essence.
Proper cart before the horse stuff.

fonecrusher1 · 27-11-2019 9:20pm

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Genius is right. Build the houses, add God knows how much traffic onto the limited roads in Glanmire, then shut them for a time to improve the infrastructure thus creating absolute gridlock when they do actually do it.
Jokeshop in essence.
Proper cart before the horse stuff.

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't.

In fairness if we had to wait until the road infrastructure was sorted there'd be no houses built at all ever. I agree with you in principle but we're in the middle of a government nurtured housing crisis so they have to be built.

kub · 27-11-2019 10:08pm

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't.

In fairness if we had to wait until the road infrastructure was sorted there'd be no houses built at all ever. I agree with you in principle but we're in the middle of a government nurtured housing crisis so they have to be built.

This now is Cork City Councils issue thanks to their colleagues in the County.

When O'Flynn Construction went for planning, the City Council did object to this development due to the standard of roads down there, the lack of footpaths, cycle ways and public transport.

A typical County Council approach to development, build away and let infastructure follow in some cases decades later.

nyck04 · 27-11-2019 11:06pm

snotboogie wrote: »

According to skyscrappercity an 80 apartment development from OCP has started by Lancaster Quay, expect a crane by January. Seems like that randomer on twitter was right, lets hope he was also right about the Prism

What did Randomer tweet about the Prism?

snotboogie · 27-11-2019 11:39pm

nyck04 wrote: »

What did Randomer tweet about the Prism?

The tender had gone out. Refuted by a reputable contributer on this thread though

hans aus dtschl · 28-11-2019 10:52am

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't.

In fairness if we had to wait until the road infrastructure was sorted there'd be no houses built at all ever. I agree with you in principle but we're in the middle of a government nurtured housing crisis so they have to be built.

I disagree that the infrastructure would necessarily have caused a delay to opening that site. The developers' teams are in the ground there with a year and a half and the council haven't even submitted their designs to ABP yet, even though they were approved by council in July 2018.
So the developer designed a massive 600-house development, including all the utilities and even a change to the road at the entrance, but the council didn't go ahead with designing the very specific known required upgrades. And they sat on millions of euro worth of contributions for this infrastructure.

It isn't just new roads that they're missing: it's also footpaths, pedestrian crossings and other cheap simple infrastructure.

The whole development got approval based on the notion that only 40% of homes there would have a car, but the ONLY infrastructure in place is a road entrance onto a narrow walled road with no hard shoulders.

So I don't buy the council line that "we have to open it without infrastructure because there's a housing crisis". The infrastructure should be long finished by now and bedded in.

hans aus dtschl · 28-11-2019 11:06am

kub wrote: »

This now is Cork City Councils issue thanks to their colleagues in the County.

When O'Flynn Construction went for planning, the City Council did object to this development due to the standard of roads down there, the lack of footpaths, cycle ways and public transport.

A typical County Council approach to development, build away and let infastructure follow in some cases decades later.

Correct on all fronts.

It'll happen again with Waterrock in Midleton: Council approved another big design focused around a train station and a sales pitch of "sustainable transport" and "no extra traffic", but they dropped the train station from the plans after the approval.
Nobody follows up afterwards to check that the "infrastructure" that allowed approval for the development actually exists in practice.

I do not understand how it's allowed. It's abuse of the planning system: the traffic models submitted and what gets built are totally different. Deliberately so.

fonecrusher1 · 28-11-2019 11:48am

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

The infrastructure should be long finished by now and bedded in.

Yup welcome to Ireland. This is the land of "shoulda, woulda, coulda" I'm not going to defend their trademark total lack of planning diligence for a second but as i've said if you waited for the roads to be up to scratch there'd be nothing built. Its a mess but houses still need to be built.

questionmark? · 28-11-2019 11:58am

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

Correct on all fronts.

It'll happen again with Waterrock in Midleton: Council approved another big design focused around a train station and a sales pitch of "sustainable transport" and "no extra traffic", but they dropped the train station from the plans after the approval.
Nobody follows up afterwards to check that the "infrastructure" that allowed approval for the development actually exists in practice.

I do not understand how it's allowed. It's abuse of the planning system: the traffic models submitted and what gets built are totally different. Deliberately so.

They dropped the station at water rock? Where did you hear that out of interest?

hans aus dtschl · 28-11-2019 12:21pm

questionmark? wrote: »

They dropped the station at water rock? Where did you hear that out of interest?

Good question: I can see that the Part 8 report of the Chief Executive still specifically includes the train station. I don't remember where I heard that they are moving ahead without it "for now". So perhaps wait until I provide proof before taking it as truth.
I must say also, that I think the design with the train station included is pretty good.

omicron · 28-11-2019 1:53pm

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

Good question: I can see that the Part 8 report of the Chief Executive still specifically includes the train station. I don't remember where I heard that they are moving ahead without it "for now". So perhaps wait until I provide proof before taking it as truth.
I must say also, that I think the design with the train station included is pretty good.

Are there any plans for specific housing developments gone through for water rock or is it all still a broad area plan with no specifics or timeline?

hans aus dtschl · 28-11-2019 3:23pm

omicron wrote: »

Are there any plans for specific housing developments gone through for water rock or is it all still a broad area plan with no specifics or timeline?

As far as I'm aware the only published docs are the LAP and the supporting infrastructure so far.
The LAP section starts from page 57 here:
http://corklocalareaplans.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/East-Cork-MD-LAP.pdf
Specific housing types/densities on the site are detailed between there and the map of same, which is on page 75.

Take it with a pinch of salt though because Council rarely adhere to these plans. The approved Part 8 plan and LAP disagree with each other and the Cork Cycle Network Plan (CCNP). For instance the LAP sends a cycle route through the middle of the housing development, the CCNP sends it on a direct E-W axis alongside the railway line, and the Council-approved Part 8 plan sends it along the main trunk road of the development (effectively reducing it to a "footpath with paint" and conferring no advantage on active travel users over motorists, in contravention of DMURS).

So what I'm saying is that the LAP will give you an idea, but there's nothing specific published as far as I'm aware.

In terms of timelines, they need the Part 8 infrastructure to sort out the groundwater issues and get machinery in, before they can start housing phase A. They were talking about Q4 2019 for the start of that. At a guess they started the designs in something like March.

omicron · 28-11-2019 4:08pm

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

As far as I'm aware the only published docs are the LAP and the supporting infrastructure so far.
The LAP section starts from page 57 here:
http://corklocalareaplans.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/East-Cork-MD-LAP.pdf
Specific housing types/densities on the site are detailed between there and the map of same, which is on page 75.

Take it with a pinch of salt though because Council rarely adhere to these plans. The approved Part 8 plan and LAP disagree with each other and the Cork Cycle Network Plan (CCNP). For instance the LAP sends a cycle route through the middle of the housing development, the CCNP sends it on a direct E-W axis alongside the railway line, and the Council-approved Part 8 plan sends it along the main trunk road of the development (effectively reducing it to a "footpath with paint" and conferring no advantage on active travel users over motorists, in contravention of DMURS).

So what I'm saying is that the LAP will give you an idea, but there's nothing specific published as far as I'm aware.

In terms of timelines, they need the Part 8 infrastructure to sort out the groundwater issues and get machinery in, before they can start housing phase A. They were talking about Q4 2019 for the start of that. At a guess they started the designs in something like March.

Presumably like every other housing development in Midleton it's dependent on the expansion of the sewage treatment facilities/pumping?

hans aus dtschl · 28-11-2019 5:17pm

omicron wrote: »

Presumably like every other housing development in Midleton it's dependent on the expansion of the sewage treatment facilities/pumping?

The development was not explicitly linked to a WWTP expansion from the Part 8 or LAP. But it does go to Midleton WWTP according to the LAP. The Part 8 will go ahead, but the actual housing needed further liaison with Irish Water during detailed design as of March 2019. I don't know what stage detailed design is at though.

Connections to Irish Water infrastructure or any alterations to Irish Water infrastructure will require agreement with Irish Water prior to commencement...[of the wastewater pumping station works]

opus · 28-11-2019 9:19pm

Was always wondering when that fairly large site (looked like a builders yard) would get developed.

Planning granted for new homes on Evergreen Road despite local opposition

Markcheese · 28-11-2019 9:29pm

omicron wrote: »

Presumably like every other housing development in Midleton it's dependent on the expansion of the sewage treatment facilities/pumping?

Isn't that supposed to either done within a year or 2?

Patrick 1959 · 02-12-2019 3:46am

Has Anybody heard anything on the Prism ?

Cork developments

Comments