Looks like R&H Hall may finally demolished:
I remember a kind of off road cycling course developed there from piles of earth and rubble. Lots of fun in the late 70s/early 80s!
I have been hearing this repeatedly about this site for 40 years has changed hands so many times but never developed. Anyone know if housing or apartments are to be built?
Yeah , north esk is a bit useless if youre going to force every bus/coach to detour into a north esk park and ride ,and then out again , probably easily add 10 mins plus to every bus passing through-
The only way the south docks works is if it connects directly with kent by pedestrian bridge , and if the cork light rail mahon to balincolig ever takes off ,
Personally i always thought it should be midleton to ballincolig light rail , cobh to mallow heavy rail with a couple of stops in each north and south docks
It's a missed opportunity. And the remaining location at North Esk isn't ideal.
The problem with the South docks is the lack of connection to rail. You could get rail/light rail/intercity rail at Tivoli and Blarney. (With a lot of investment and vision!)
Yeah I think they still need some city centre based buses overnight but maybe some can be based outside Capwell. Certainly the intercity/coaches.
It would make sense for BE to move out beside the Black Ash P&R and sell Capwell then also another P&R at Tivoli.
I was a bit shocked how little thought was put into bus / coach / rail crossover at dunkettle , and the provision of an n40 orbital bus
Yes it would have been an extra complication , but its the main transport hub in cork.. seems bonkers to exclude it from public transport change over,
I get your point about lack of local residential,
Although if that was to be the aim somewhere in the south docks ? Theres probably more development land there than anywhere else in the city,
Yeah Sloterdijk is well outside the city centre, and it's a dedicated transit hub. An intermodal hub at an edge of the city, functioning as a dedicated "local" station to encourage development, basically. It sits between the city and an industrial centre (the port, in Amsterdam).
The idea is that there's space available a short distance outside the city for all modes to swap. These then become very attractive areas for investment in hotels, offices, etc because you have a high frequency of all public transport converging at one location.
You could do it at Horgan's quay but it would bring lots of cars in the low road, so it'd be better to do it slightly further out at Tivoli instead. What you could do then is build out Tivoli with residential slightly further away from that point, like 200m+ from the station. Ideally we'd have one in Blarney too.
Dunkettle would be almost preferable other than the fact the the only remaining space at Dunkettle is designated as "County" rather than "City", so I think we're fully on the same page. The city centre station and coach transfer hub then would be different only in that they don't do cars: and the cars are encouraged to stay slightly outside the city.
I was going to say this, BÉ want to retain Capwell for at least some of their buses, as their route starting point. It's more a question of how many absolutely need to be Capwell-based. And Tivoli is actually not a terrible location as a starting point either.
There's very little preserved in there, the big red brick building is all pretty modern inside. Probably just the facade would need to be kept at most I'd imagine.
I assume those buildings are preserved as they go back a long time to the railway days.
It is a prime site but also makes sense for Bus Eireann for the buses that serve the city center, im assuming their routes are all based around where the buses start so even the extra fuel of having a depot outside the city would add up fast enough as well as if future electric buses don't have the range to easily cover these routes from a base outside the city center.
I cant say i know much about sloterdijk, but i cant see much logic in having a coach station ,intercity train ,outside the city centre like that ,
Personally i would have gone with dunkettle as an interchange ,
Another reason why such a move would make sense is that the 2 hectare Capwell Rd site would surely be a prime development opportunity.
That said, the BÉ unions would kick up a big fuss.
Thanks both!
Seems a shame it's only temporary. Hopefully it means Capwell will get done up a bit but aside from building a multi-story car park for staff, I don't really know what more they can do.
Tivoli looks like a good location for a bus depot.
I can't imagine a better location in Cork than the east of Tivoli to act as a multi-modal interchange like Sloterdijk or something: bus plaza, inter-city and commuter trains and a P&R and an urban and inter city cycle network all transiting the same point, with a big employment hub to the East, and massive potential for dense high-rise development for employment, housing and hotels. I could have stopped at "Sloterdijk": the East of Tivoli looks to me like our best opportunity to create this in Cork.
This article from the Irish Examiner has it that Capwell is already overcapacity and this temporary (7 year) facility is urgently required to facilitate BusConnects. It’s the old Tata Steel site (previously J S Lister).
Its only a temp move, they have to be out of Tivoli again by 2030 and the planners banned them from putting in any infrastructure for electric buses so they have to leave. Capwell getting upgraded while they are moved out.
I hadn't realised that Bus Éireann were getting a depot in Tivoli! What's that about? Are they moving some portion out of Capwell? Thls looks like the start of some "real" non-port use of Tivoli, which is encouraging
That Dronehawk is like the Beach Boys. He/She gets around. Great footage
Interrupting with something vaguely on-topic, DroneHawk flies over of the sites of some current and forthcoming projects:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0v25fHykIxw
I have no objection to high rise developments taking place in Cork. A market for high priced and high rent apartments does exist but to say that government supports for housing should only go towards expensive forms of housing in developments over a particular number of floors is in my opinion nonsense. The number of housing units developed for the same value of direct government support will be much greater if this minimum number of floors concept you are promoting is not implemented. I think if tax payers are to help solve the crisis in the provision of homes in this country the investment should not be channeled towards the most expensive type of housing.
Explain what nonsense.
Every other city developed through high rise, why do you think cork is different and should only consume more land inefficiently by building low density housing and apartments. Cork has an ideal chance to do things different than the rest of the country and build large residential apartments in the city centre, which would lead to large office building to go with it.
Talking nonsense, what a joke that is. You reference a document that's sole focus is build cost comparisons but does not take in any other variables and value
People in suburbs don't want apartment blocks, the city centre should the area for apartment blocks. Instead you want urban sprawl thinking that's the long term solution, urban sprawl and more and more shopping centres that people drive to.
High Rise apartments actually make services cheaper. The referenced surveyors reports has to take in engineering designs to make those assumptions. You say most people don't want to live in high rise apartments, how do you know. People don't want to live in shoebox but would live in decent sized apartments
Who said it is a social housing tower
"I give up"
Great!
You have done nothing to show that the provision of these services to a high rise development would be significantly cheaper than simply using the existing infrastructure in less densely developed areas of the city where low rise developments could take place at lower cost.
I give up, your looking at this as a simple house build v apartment build, not looking at the additional sewage, water infrastructure, electricity infrastructure, road building, bus services, schools, land usage, economic activity etc etc etc, I could go on and on but you continue to look at this either tunnel vision
I have nothing against high density living for those who want to live there. Asking however for government subsidies for housing to only to be channeled for developments over a particular number of floors is wrong in my opinion as it will fail to deliver the volume of additional housing that is needed to overcome the current crisis in housing provision in this country.
There is no difference from living on the 6th floor vs the 20th.
High density is far better for a city centre. There's a reason why the main streets, of Cork, are full of empty units or bleak mobile phone or vape stores.
More people living in the city centre means more stores, restaurants, bars, theatres
Using existing land for low/mid is a horrendous idea and is why Dublin is in the **** it is.
"I could go on and on."
Yes you could go on and on talking nonsense if you want to.
The study had nothing to do with engineers and was done as I clearly stated by surveyors who were doing the study on building costs in Ireland. I don't see the social benefits of pushing people into high rise apartment living or see any significant non direct construction savings that you claim to exist.
There are plenty of serviced areas within the city bounds that have not been fully developed for housing and these can be developed with low to medium rise apartments at much lower cost and result in much more affordable housing at a lower total cost to the tax payer. There are already bus services to the edge of Cork city's suburbs so the entire cost of running a bus service for twenty years should not be attributed to just one new development. More users of these services paying for their use could make them more economically viable and self sustaining.
Well planned housing development is a multiyear exercise so I can't make sense of your point about single year budgetary exercise like a lot of the other points you have tried to make.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/196803dfa0698243a1e4321ab9efd141.svg)