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

fonecrusher1

Its funny how the bleeding heart 'new buildings are evil' crowd aren't at all as passionate about getting these issues flagged with local authorities. I mean the cohort who automatically and vehemently object to anything new because its eroding the character of Cork. Is the maintenance / restoration of such "historically important" buildings not as whinge worthy? :pac:

Dermo123

Here it is, the latest building proped up with iron girders.

the beer revolu

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Its funny how the bleeding heart 'new buildings are evil' crowd aren't at all as passionate about getting these issues flagged with local authorities. I mean the cohort who automatically and vehemently object to anything new because its eroding the character of Cork. Is the maintenance / restoration of such "historically important" buildings not as whinge worthy? :pac:

That's some leap you've made there!

whisky_galore

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Its funny how the bleeding heart 'new buildings are evil' crowd aren't at all as passionate about getting these issues flagged with local authorities. I mean the cohort who automatically and vehemently object to anything new because its eroding the character of Cork. Is the maintenance / restoration of such "historically important" buildings not as whinge worthy? :pac:

Lol.

You can have old buildings that aren't falling down. Something called maintenance?
A new building will fall apart too if you do fcuk all with it.

questionmark?

Dermo123 wrote: »

Here it is, the latest building proped up with iron girders.

Ah jasus! That is disgraceful to see in the middle of what's meant to be a modern and rich city!

[Deleted User]

whisky_galore wrote: »

Lol.

You can have old buildings that aren't falling down. Something called maintenance?
A new building will fall apart too if you do fcuk all with it.

He's right though. If they put half as much effort into complaining about the lack of maintenance, as they do development, we'd be better off

the beer revolu

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He's right though. If they put half as much effort into complaining about the lack of maintenance, as they do development, we'd be better off

Who exactly are "they"?
Who exactly is "we"?

People have different opinions on stuff. Don't try and make people who have different opinions to you responsible for bad stuff that they have, literally, nothing to do with.

It's pretty worrying double think.

Blame people you don't like for everything?

blindsider

Without getting in to an argument, I think it's fair to say that organisations such as An Taisce are regular objectors to new developments, but do nothing to progress/promote the maintenance of old buildings.

That's not double think, (or 'newspeak', or anything else Orwellian either) and I'm not blaming anybody.

I also think the building owners (followed by local government) must bear most of the responsibility here.

smurgen

If a building that looks structurally damaged and left to rot for years collapses and kills a pedestrian the owners should be charged with manslaughter.

whisky_galore

smurgen wrote: »

If a building that looks structurally damaged and left to rot for years collapses and kills a pedestrian the owners should be charged with manslaughter.

Until it falls down on top of a judge's wife and kids that probably won't happen.

[Deleted User]

the beer revolu wrote: »

Who exactly are "they"?
Who exactly is "we"?

People have different opinions on stuff. Don't try and make people who have different opinions to you responsible for bad stuff that they have, literally, nothing to do with.

It's pretty worrying double think.

Blame people you don't like for everything?

They: An Taisce et al
We: Society in general, not having buildings falling down

the beer revolu

blindsider wrote: »

I also think the building owners (followed by local government) must bear most of the responsibility here.

I can certainly agree with the above.

I don't believe that enforcement on maintenance of old buildings is within the scope of An taisce.
Perhaps it should be. Or perhaps it is already someone else's job.

But trying to blame anyone other than those tasked with the job of enforcement and the property owners is, imo, just fueling division in development and conservation discussions.

[Deleted User]

the beer revolu wrote: »

I can certainly agree with the above.

I don't believe that enforcement on maintenance of old buildings is within the scope of An taisce.
Perhaps it should be. Or perhaps it is already someone else's job.

But trying to blame anyone other than those tasked with the job of enforcement and the property owners is, imo, just fueling division in development and conservation discussions.

But that's the thing. They'll block and hamper any development of these derelict buildings, while using none of their vocal clout to push government to enforce maintenance

Markcheese

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But that's the thing. They'll block and hamper any development of these derelict buildings, while using none of their vocal clout to push government to enforce maintenance

Will they ?
Ive never heard of an taisce trying to block the maintenance or restoration of a building ..
I've heard of many buildings being deliberately left go derelict, and then claim that they have to be knocked because they're derelict ..

[Deleted User]

Markcheese wrote: »

Will they ?
Ive never heard of an taisce trying to block the maintenance or restoration of a building ..
I've heard of many buildings being deliberately left go derelict, and then claim that they have to be knocked because they're derelict ..

I think they meant 'block development' rather than 'block maintenance'.

Not sure is Taisce the body we need, for this.

Should be the local authority IMO, with powers of entry and inspection, and orders to make good property at risk. Derelict register should become more a work programme than list.

blindsider

I don't want to side-track too much, however, according to An Taisce's own web-site:

https://www.antaisce.org/our-mission
"Over the past few years, we have been widening the organisation's original mission from ‘the protection of built and natural heritage’ to a more encompassing vision including a focus on ecosystem resilience and biodiversity enhancement as essential to sustain human community and wellbeing." (My highlights etc)

Maintenance of older buildings, especially those with historical significance and value seem to be targeted here. I also note that they have widened their mission, but not replacing it - therefore the original mission still stands.

It's worth noting that An Taisce are a charity, not a statutory body.

[Deleted User]

Yeah they position themselves as a state body and people (journalists) rarely challenge them on this.
As such it is fine to call out the fact that they scream blue murder during a development phase, slowing everything down, but don't use their voice to enact change around building maintenance (which would actually protect heritage)

Markcheese

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah they position themselves as a state body and people (journalists) rarely challenge them on this.
As such it is fine to call out the fact that they scream blue murder during a development phase, slowing everything down, but don't use their voice to enact change around building maintenance (which would actually protect heritage)

So it's an taisces fault that the local authority don't do anything about land hoarding and building maintenance.. ??

[Deleted User]

I'd be reluctant to see a non statutory body having enforcement powers over private property - especially the likes of Taisce.

This is a failing of the local authority, either through lack of power or an unwillingness to use what power may be available to them.

blindsider

My last post on this topic....

Trying to start arguments about whose fault this is is meaningless bickering IMO.

Lots of organisations are stakeholders here and they all need to assume some responsibility. 3 important ones have been highlighted several times:

Building owners
Local authority
An Taisce (see my post above for their Mission statement)

It would be great if someone could move this on to the next stage - identifying how to address the issue.

the beer revolu

blindsider wrote: »

My last post on this topic....

Trying to start arguments about whose fault this is is meaningless bickering IMO.
.

Says the guy blaming a heritage charity for not enforcing the law!

[Deleted User]

Markcheese wrote: »

So it's an taisces fault that the local authority don't do anything about land hoarding and building maintenance.. ??

Oh FFS, talk about looking for the flippant argument.

An Taisce position themselves as the self appointed guardians of the country's "heritage" yet are conspicuously quiet in preventing degradation

TheChizler

Cork City Council have a section on their website for reporting dangerous buildings, worth doing if anyone spots anything, no chance of them becoming proactive any time soon but they can't ignore it completely then.

https://www.corkcity.ie/en/council-services/public-info/customer-service-requests/dangerous-structures/

blindsider

the beer revolu wrote: »

Says the guy blaming a heritage charity for not enforcing the law!

Monty Python's argument sketch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ

might keep you happy for a bit! :rolleyes:

Apogee

Examiner article on Ford site development:
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/spotlight/arid-40198110.html

snotboogie

Planning appealed for the proposed leasureplex hotel on MacCurtain Street. Decision due in April. Seems to be a mixed response to this proposal and no way this was starting construction before April anyway so may not be a bad thing for ABP to have a second look at this.

questionmark?

snotboogie wrote: »

Planning appealed for the proposed leasureplex hotel on MacCurtain Street. Decision due in April. Seems to be a mixed response to this proposal and no way this was starting construction before April anyway so may not be a bad thing for ABP to have a second look at this.

Any details on what the objection(s) is out of interest?

marno21

questionmark? wrote: »

Any details on what the objection(s) is out of interest?

It’s from the residents association of Bridge House which is the protected building of apartments on the quay side of Brian Boru Street.

Not sure of the ins and outs of the objection but you can put 2 and 2 together based on that information alone.

rounders

marno21 wrote: »

It’s from the residents association of Bridge House which is the protected building of apartments on the quay side of Brian Boru Street.

Not sure of the ins and outs of the objection but you can put 2 and 2 together based on that information alone.

Height blocking natural light and lack of parking provided for the hotel if I remember correctly is the local residence issue

There is also someone commenting on poor attempts to maintain the architectural merit of the current building

Jcomm114

Hoping to buy a house next year, would anyone know if there are any new builds due to be available early next year? Either new developments or new phases of current developments.

Would ideally be looking at Cork city, Ballincollig or Blarney. Probably looking for 3/4 bedroom house, with a budget being around 400k.

Not sure anything I can see on Daft hugely appeals to me at the moment/ is affordable so would be great to know if there is anything due to come online soon that I can register my interest for?

(Not sure if this is the right thread, or if it should have it’a own)