whisky_galore wrote: » A lot of poor-mouth boo hooing over being small business owners, just sell them on. Jesus, use it or lose it.
Dbu wrote: » Here you go Easy to find onlinehttps://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/owner-blames-crash-for-dereliction-on-corks-historic-spine-932989.html
Captainsatnav wrote: » Why cryptic? Nothing wrong with stating who it is?
Dbu wrote: » Its well know who owns these buildings and his name has been mentioned on both 96fm and Red fm on numerous occasions Lives is a mansion on Maryborough hill
whisky_galore wrote: » https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/owners-of-derelict-buildings-in-cork-given-month-to-remove-metal-support-beams-981379.html I'd like to know who owns these places and why they let them get into this state?
Rhys Essien wrote: » Would I right in saying that the decision on the Sextant tower will be before the end of this month.
ShamoBuc wrote: » Expecting something to be done in a couple of months when several ministers from Cork didnt deliver for Cork in over 2 decades. No pressure then.
Deleted User wrote: » Progression on CMATS, Cork/Limerick Motorway, NRR will be telling. How is judging them on their commitments a set up?
ShamoBuc wrote: » The proof of the last 20 years will not be undone in a couple of months time, nor will it ever be forgotten. Talk about setting someone up for a fall.
Deleted User wrote: » Again, proof will be in the next few weeks/months.
namloc1980 wrote: » Cork had a senior government minister at the cabinet table for the last 22 years between Martin and Coveney. They didn't exactly excel themselves at delivering infrastructure for Cork. I wouldn't be expecting anything now either.
Deleted User wrote: » And, should they end up in government, the proof will be in the eating
snotboogie wrote: » O'Laoghaire has been very vocal on public transport in Cork throughout his last term
Captainsatnav wrote: » I didn't realise that - just checked it out. Thanks for pointing that out. Silver lining!
namloc1980 wrote: » Of the big 3 parties SF and FG specifically committed to funding CMATS in their manifesto. FF (despite the two main men in the party being from Cork) made no reference in their manifesto. The majority of the FF transport plan revolves around more roads.
Captainsatnav wrote: » That's the grasping of any nettles re CMATS and Ireland 2040 put off for months now until a government is formed and unless the Greens are part of that government I feel CMATS is b0llixed.
Deleted User wrote: » Well most areas of Cork returned SF so let's see if they are as "Green" as they espouse
WoolyJumper wrote: » Really that soon? Glanmire traffic is already bad enough and none of the proposed road upgrades in the area have been done.
rounders wrote: » Don't think there is a specific way to measure that. Can really only assume that if students are moving away from houses to purpose built properties that there is some degree of improvement
Douglas Eegit wrote: » Are all these student apartments which are planned, in the middle of construction or recently completed having the desired impact and freeing up properties for private residential occupancy?
Apogee wrote: » http://planning.corkcity.ie/AppFileRefDetails/1938385/0 Design drawings previously posted here.
snotboogie wrote: » Going forward: Updated best case schedule: Q4 2019: Victoria Hotel, Kelleher Tyre's Student, Morrison's Island Hostel
Cork City Planning wrote: Permission...for the construction of a residential development of 25 no. student apartments, consisting of 154 no. bed spaces and all ancillary site works at the former Kelleher's Tyres service centre, Victoria Cross Road, Cork. The proposed development represents an alteration to a development permitted by Cork City Council planning reference 18/37795 and proposes an additional 5 no. student apartments over that previously permitted. The proposed development provides for the demolition of the existing commercial building and the construction of an 8-storey apartment block consisting of 4 no.4-bedroom apartments, 3 no. 5-bedroom apartments, 8 no. 6-bedroom apartments, 5 no. 7-bedroom apartments, 5 no. 8 bedroom apartments with ancillary common room and office/reception. The proposal includes plant/service rooms, bin storage area, laundry, bicycle storage, a rear vehicular service entrance, shared garden areas, rooftop terrace, and a landscaped riverside amenity.
who_me wrote: » Great to hear! But - and I'm not being a misery guts, honest! - that's still a fraction of the new office capacity. Adding a thousand or so units across all residential developments, and 10,000+ new office capacity if all are finished; means a net negative for the accommodation shortage. Plus, if the offices are central and the residential developments are all suburban, it adds pressure too to the traffic and/or public transport systems. (It's Friday. I'll shut up and be happy now).