Look at de state of Cork, like!

Postby anto » Thu May 06, 2004 10:33 pm

Originally posted by lexington
Hey lads! How's it going? The Guy & Co site on Cornmarket Street is actually owned by the O'Donoghue/Ring families, they own the Munster Joinery in Ballydesmond near Mallow and a string of hotels in Killarney including the lovely Killarney Plaza. Money is no object! They applied for PP for 80 apartments and 7 retail units pretty much along the same design as the original hotel they'd planned 3 years ago. It's a shame the hotel didn't get the green-light - it was aesthetically beautiful and would be a far greater asset than more apartments to Cork.


So why didn't it get permission?
anto
Member
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 12:58 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby lexington » Sun May 16, 2004 11:19 pm

Corporation Housing residents behind the Guy site objected to the scale of the project (at 6-storeys) and they were helped out by - who else? - An Taisce. The Bodega bar also objected. But the street is now worse off because of petty-short sightedness. 80 apartments has become the revised solution. Ugh! The hotel would have been SO much better. And of the Corp Housing residents? There is only one permanent resident remaining. Typical!
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby phil » Mon May 17, 2004 9:36 am

Originally posted by lexington
And of the Corp Housing residents? There is only one permanent resident remaining. Typical!


Have they been booted out so that the Corporation can make more money off the land?
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby lexington » Mon May 17, 2004 12:17 pm

I don't think so. A lot of the residents were OAPs - and they'd been there since the red-brick houses were built in the late 1950s/early 60s. As far as I know and don't quote me on this, but a lot of the residents left either to move in with family or simply passed on. I understand the sentimental element to their objections but the developers had made generous incentives to the residents ( one of the residents themselves told me this, but refused to tell me what exactly it was) in order to compensate for construction disruption - but even those objections may have passed if it wasn't for good ole An Taisce jumping on the bandwagon. I swear, I understand the relevance of An Taisce, but it seems they have nothing better to do with their excessive time than hold back the progress of our cities. Shouldn't city planners worry about the appropriate development of our cities and not An Taisce? Let them raise appropriate arguments with relation to Protected Structures and leave it with City Planners to decide thereafter, not go running to An Bord Pleanale everytime a new development is proposed.
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby bunch » Wed May 19, 2004 8:53 am

thank god that hotel proposal was rejected, it was TERRIBLE. it was something along the lines of a red-brick confusion of mock georgian and other bits thrown in, cheap, poorly designed. i saw the model in city council's office a few years back and it was really poor and would have been a disrace if it were permitted. also, the site is more suitable for retail and residential, there are far better sites for quality hotels in the city. as far as i knew residents in the 'old labourers dwellings' as well as bodega people objected purely on the basis of loss of amenity i.e. light. in general, i think an taisce, and other residents are entitled to object, and by the way, it had significant local support from street traders etc. in the end, i believe cornmarket street has been 'saved' in this regard, and hopefully, the current application, due fairly soon, will represent a more attractive and interesting addition to the streetscape.
bunch
Member
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 12:00 am
Location: cork

Postby lexington » Sun May 23, 2004 4:08 pm

Well the problem is, the Bodega predominantly operates at night - as it is a late night bar - so where is their problem with light? Their restaurant hadn't come into operation at the time of objection. And also, the residents of the Corp Housing predominantly objected on the grounds that they would be adversely affected during construction at that the development would heed further large scale developments. The problem here is that, the residents were given binding assurances from Rockfell Investments and City Council that any disruption (ie. temp loss of water) would be rectified by alternative supply immediately and construction would be restricted to suitable hours in consultation with residents. On top of generous compensation agreements. Now that permanent residency of the area is significantly reduced it seems that the residents lost out in the long run. Cornmarket lost because instead of a much needed city centre hotel with able conference facilities AND adjoing retail mall, they are now faced with more overpriced apartments (80 in toll) that most normal people just can't afford. The addition of 7 only retail units was thrown in by Rockfell to appear more agreeable to the City Council's development strategy for the area which had earmarked the site for Higher-Order retail development. Instead, they are now getting a half-assed novelty attachment to facilitate the real monster, apartments. The building itself is an almost identical replica of the original hotel design. So all in all, I strongly disagree with you that the new development (based on residential purposes) is better. Its worse. There is now no hotel, no conference facilities, no parking and no retail centre. I am aware most traders (Con Dennehy notably) supported the original project but are now more weary of this new development.
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby lexington » Sun May 23, 2004 4:19 pm

In addition, An Taisce has the primary purpose with relatin to planning, to raise awareness of the potential loss of what THEY deem architecturally significant buildings of a historic nature. Here's my problem: John Mannix, whose Mannix and Culhane shop on 40-42 Washington Street, has proposed the development of a much needed over basement, office, parking, retail and apartment development measuring 6-storeys (similar to th height of the rest of Washington Street). Anyone who knows the shop knows that it is only a ground floor premises (completely out of sync with the rest of the street), [REMOVED IN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INAPPROPRIATE INFORMATION - MY MOST SINCERE APOLOGISES]. However An Taisce have objected, why? Because, the development would adversely affect the present structure (which does NOT exist, it collapsed and is now a horrid ground floor make-shift structure), because it is unsuited to the district (the building by Conveney & Assoc. has been designed in keeping with the red-brick style buildings of Washington Street) and because in is of inappropriate height overshadowing other significant buildings in the area (the building is of a similar height to its previous form and of surrounding structures). Tell me, is this fair? Free speech yes, but hindering progress. Cork has been riddled with more development stallments due to An Taisce, than almost any other Irish city. (that is a quote from Cork Business April 2004)
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby PVC King » Sun May 23, 2004 5:48 pm

Originally posted by lexington
In addition, An Taisce has the primary purpose with relatin to planning, to raise awareness of the potential loss of what THEY deem architecturally significant buildings of a historic nature.


An Taisce do not compile the list of protected structures this is the function of the Councils, however An Taisce has been known to draw the proposed elimination of protected structures to the attention of who ACTUALLY make the decisions on planning.



Originally posted by lexington
Here's my problem: John Mannix, whose Mannix and Culhane shop on 40-42 Washington Street, has proposed the development of a much needed over basement, office, parking, retail and apartment development measuring 6-storeys
(similar to th height of the rest of Washington Street).


Office vacancy rates are 15% and there are massive developments in retail going up on Lee side, that argument is a crock

Originally posted by lexington
over basement, office, parking, retail and apartment development measuring 6-storeys
(similar to th height of the rest of Washington Street).


How many six storey modern spec buildings currently exist at this location?



Originally posted by lexington
Anyone who knows the shop knows that it is only a ground floor premises (completely out of sync with the rest of the street), this is because a few years back, the poorly maintained structure of the original 5 storey Mannix and Culhane building collapsed after intense bad weather killing a young Cork girl and paralysing her boyfriend.


The Fenian St argument resurfaces yet again, the owners of that building should be facing corporate homicide charges, it simply isn't acceptable to allow buildings deteriorate into a condition where they fall into the street.

Originally posted by lexington
In an attempt to replace it with decent building, John Mannix has issued this new development proposal. However An Taisce have objected, why? Because, the development would adversely affect the present structure (which does NOT exist, it collapsed and is now a horrid ground floor make-shift structure), because it is unsuited to the district


The owners had the option to reconstitute the existing building line within two years of the 'Collapse' without requiring planning permission.

Originally posted by lexington
(the building by Conveney & Assoc. has been designed in keeping with the red-brick style buildings of Washington Street) and because in is of inappropriate height overshadowing other significant buildings in the area (the building is of a similar height to its previous form and of surrounding structures).


The design obviously didn't come off as anticipated, inappropriate height and over shadowing are valid arguments if they exist, make no mistake if the claims are bull An Bord Pleannala will dismiss them.

Originally posted by lexington
Tell me, is this fair? Free speech yes, but hindering progress. Cork has been riddled with more development stallments due to An Taisce, than almost any other Irish city. (that is a quote from Cork Business April 2004)


Going by Liffey Valley Cork developers have about as much vision as Ben Dunne that is why developments have been red carded, if architectural standards rose to say Shay Cleary's level you might get more quality buildings,

Who are Cork Business?
PVC King
 

Postby bunch » Mon May 24, 2004 9:12 am

lexington,

i disagree that a residential/retail mix is less attractive than a hotel - , the proposal, as far as i know, does not include car parking facilities, which is pretty desirable in this central location. my point was that there are far better central locations than cornmaket street for a large scale hotel development with conference centre etc., in terms of accessibility etc. In addition, i dont think that the planners, in this case, can have regard to whether the apartments are overpriced or not, they will sell for what people are willing to pay for them surely. by the way, i have not seen the proposal so i have no idea about design issues and whether the scheme has progressed from the original, but from what you are saying i am not too optimistic. also, the bodega operates from 12.00 and does significant trading during daytime so i think thay would have had genuine concerns.

in relation to what you have said about the mannix proposal, i completely agree, and in addition, as a prominent corner site, one would think that there is a need for a structure with a bit of height at that location.
bunch
Member
 
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 12:00 am
Location: cork

Postby lexington » Tue May 25, 2004 6:13 pm

Just to reply to Dispora,

Office vacancies in Dublin and Nationally are at 15% - the take up rate in Cork since 2002 has bucked this trend, with take-up in developments such as No.5 Lapps Quay, 21 Lavitts Quay and Howard Holdings 100Million Euro City Quarter project selling out within only a few months after their market launch. Generally in the vacancy rate in Cork, according to the Sunday Business Post property section only 4 weeks ago, was below 8% at a citywide level and that demand for new, high-quality open plan offices in the city centre was still in demand. But also the John Mannix project consists of other elements besides offices.

The average building height along Washington Street is 5.23 storeys.

The owners of the collapsed building were brought to court - the full details of which I am unclear of - but I do know new building quality requirements were introduced as a result of the tragedy by the then Cork Corporation.

The design in my opinion of John Mannix's project aren't wildly imaginative but befitting to the area.

There is, in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development on Washington Street, is only one new, 6-storey office development (right across the street actually).

The location of the Mannix project is one in much need of development. Anyone familiar with the location will testify to this. Especially at such a prominent site.

And although I agree Liffey Valley is externally rancid, Cork developers have become, at least in their own city, become increasingly aware of the pressure being enforced on them to come up with projects of a far greater architectural standard - advocated strongly by City Manager Joe Gavin, and influential media outlets such as the Evening Echo - 21 Lavitts Quay, John Hornibrook's Camden Quay project, Frinailla's Grand Parade Plaza, O'Flynn Construction's forthcoming No. 6 Lapp's Quay - and Paul Kenny's revised South Main Street project - all reflect this.
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby sw101 » Wed May 26, 2004 12:31 am

An Taisce do not compile the list of protected structures this is the function of the Councils, however An Taisce has been known to draw the proposed elimination of protected structures to the attention of who ACTUALLY make the decisions on planning.

those who actually make the decision on planning in relation to protected structures are well aware as to their protected status...they do however have the oppurtunity to allow development or replacement of these structures where appropriate


Office vacancy rates are 15% and there are massive developments in retail going up on Lee side, that argument is a crock

15% vacancy(even though it's not accurate) can never be a deciding factor in refusing permission for office development. modern attractive offices will attract 100% occupany and drag up the percentages in a general area. filling up a few more thousand square metres of rented floor space is much more achievable than ramming businesses into the vacant 15%, which is invariably the dregs of the available space.

How many six storey modern spec buildings currently exist at this location?

few...and it's a poor reflection on the development plan and planning policies in the area that this is so. i assure you it's not for the want of trying on the part of the developers/architects concerned

Going by Liffey Valley Cork developers have about as much vision as Ben Dunne that is why developments have been red carded, if architectural standards rose to say Shay Cleary's level you might get more quality buildings,

"Cork developers" is such an idiotic generalisation that this comment deserves less than my derision.

once again you've shown yourself to be a high-lighter of patently obvious and previously-discussed problems diaspora...one day i'm sure you'll come through with the solution...but probably not in my lifetime
sw101
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 3:01 pm

Postby GregF » Wed May 26, 2004 9:14 am

Saw Corks skyscraper aka the seat of bureaucracy the other night on the news....looming in the background as the local FF candidate hung on for his life as he swung outta last years English Grand National Winner. .....jaypers, when is it ever gonna get that much needed makeover.....what a horrible building!
User avatar
GregF
Old Master
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

cork county hall

Postby prc » Wed May 26, 2004 9:33 am

the much needed makeover is well under way, much of the building is now unoccupied with departments moving to different locations while a refit takes place, planning authority have gone to model farm road etc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the follow is from cork co co website

An invited competition organised by the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland and the Management Team at Cork County Council was held in September 1999 for the general refurbishment of the County Hall along with the provision of additional office accommodation. There were five architectural practices in the competition which was won by Shay Cleary Architects, Dublin.
The winning scheme provides an innovative solution to the facade of the tower by introducing a skin of glass louvres which respond to differing climatic conditions and allow the tower to provide a high quality naturally ventilated working environment for the first time. It is further intended to fit out the existing building to present day office standards.

A six storey extension will provide additional office space while a new concourse/foyer joins these two elements together and houses a new Council Chamber and elected members accommodation.

A new multi-level carpark building will be constructed on the south western portion of the site, a part which is presently occupied by the temporary library building.

A general rearrangement of the present on-site parking along with tree planting is also envisaged.

The scheme was presented to the Council on 28th July, 2000 and at that meeting received the necessary approval to proceed with further design development with a view to lodging a full planning submission to Cork City Council.

When complete, the finished project will provide high quality office accommodation for up to 600 people.
prc
Member
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:59 pm
Location: Cork

cork county hall

Postby prc » Wed May 26, 2004 9:38 am

Image
prc
Member
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:59 pm
Location: Cork

80 Million Euro Cork Docklands Project

Postby lexington » Wed May 26, 2004 6:44 pm

Don't know if you heard the news, but a report in the Irish Examiner today by Tommy Barker, described the proposed 80 Million Euro Water Street Dockland project destined for Cork. The project is being launched today with planning permission being sought from this week on with Cork City Council. The project is being developed by Werdna Ltd owned by the Limerick based McMahon Family who own a large Building Supplies Group. Murray O'Laoire are the firm behind the design, Sean Kearns being principal architect.

The development will consist of 400 residential units between 3 blocks, the centre of which is a tower over 19-storeys high, taller than Cork County Hall. The tower is proposed to provide a landark gateway into the city along the quays. The development also consists of an IT Centre, Restaurants, Creche, Cafes, Boardwalk, Private Dock Facility and recreational area.

The designs are in the Irish Examiner today (26th May 2004). Undoubtedly there are going to be objections, it is Cork after all and Cork fears height, but if people have a bit of foresight, the project may get the go ahead, considering EIS and sustainability. It's a nicely designed facility, but nothing we haven't seen before. But it would be a striking addition to the Cork Docklands Development.
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby PVC King » Wed May 26, 2004 7:22 pm

Originally posted by sw101

those who actually make the decision on planning in relation to protected structures are well aware as to their protected status...they do however have the oppurtunity to allow development or replacement of these structures where appropriate


No question there on appropriate being the opperative word, observation from all quarters is required.

Originally posted by sw101
15% vacancy(even though it's not accurate) can never be a deciding factor in refusing permission for office development. modern attractive offices will attract 100% occupany and drag up the percentages in a general area. filling up a few more thousand square metres of rented floor space is much more achievable than ramming businesses into the vacant 15%, which is invariably the dregs of the available space.


The point was made that offices were in under supply, the market is above equilibrium at present there fore that argument doesn't exist. The opposite is also correct good planning and appropriate design is the decider in architecture and planning not market demand.


Originally posted by sw101
few...and it's0 a poor reflection on the development plan and planning policies in the area that this is so. i assure you it's not for the want of trying on the part of the developers/architects concerned


I quite like that area of Cork it has its own identity. I am sure that improvements are possible, but how many developers are willing to bankroll high quality architectural projects?


Originally posted by sw101
"Cork developers" is such an idiotic generalisation that this comment deserves less than my derision.

once again you've shown yourself to be a high-lighter of patently obvious and previously-discussed problems diaspora...one day i'm sure you'll come through with the solution...but probably not in my lifetime


You are right it is a hugely tiring argument new and shiny is beautiful and heritage is boring, and An Taisce killed the Celtic Tiger from the Ivory Towers (connected by rope bridge) in Christchurch and Dublin 4.

There is no solution to planning simply an ongoing process of analysis and trade offs. Architectural standards are rising because any old crap won't clear the planners like it once did.


[/B][/QUOTE]
PVC King
 

Postby lexington » Thu May 27, 2004 7:48 pm

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1188339&issue_id=10920

That's the link with pictures and the story on the new proposed Water Street development in Cork. Not very inspired but exciting nonetheless. And that 19-storey centre-piece building will provide a striking entrance to the city.
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby Irishtown » Fri May 28, 2004 2:14 am

Exciting, definately. I wish I could see a larger photo so we could see more detail, but that'll come with time hopefully. I hope it gets permission.
Irishtown
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:59 pm

Postby Paul Clerkin » Fri May 28, 2004 2:48 am

Do you understand the word "exciting"? ;)
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Postby Andrew Duffy » Fri May 28, 2004 9:12 am

It looks exactly the same as Spencer Dock. Is Murray O'Laoire turning into Scott Tallon & Walker?
Andrew Duffy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby Irishtown » Fri May 28, 2004 2:20 pm

Originally posted by Paul Clerkin
Do you understand the word "exciting"? ;)


:) Haha, well it is exciting. I mean Cork may get another highrise. Thats something exciting.
Irishtown
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed May 19, 2004 5:59 pm

Postby PVC King » Fri May 28, 2004 6:32 pm

Where is Stira for this one?
PVC King
 

Postby sw101 » Fri May 28, 2004 7:28 pm

i'm hoping that was the dublin office of mola that came up with the "master" plan. cake anyone? yick...

if they go ahead with producing such repetitive tat of the type found all over dublins river banks i might just have to leave
sw101
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 3:01 pm

Werdna Ltd Cork Docklands Development at Water Street

Postby lexington » Sat May 29, 2004 8:04 pm

Yeah I know it's very Spencer Dock-ish, but when you consider the location along the Cork Docklands, it would, in prespective look very well along the quays considering the other proposals for the Docklands - if they come to fruition.

Some other projects for the Docklands I've been lucky enough to get access to, are genuinely exciting - architecturally and otherwise. One project, when it is, if it is, formally announced by its developer is going to have people talking big time. It's of a similar height to the Water Street project by Werdna Ltd.

MOLA have produced some nice work, like the new front elevation of the Cork Opera House - but it does seem to have the odd architectural sigh (ie. UCC Biosciences Building) and doesn't the new Cork School of Music on Union Quay (also by MOLA) seem to resemble the Gate Multiplex on Bachelors Quay (designed by Derek "Snooze" Tynan, developed by Eymet)?

I think this, Water Street, is a good MOLA and Werdna project though, I really hope it gets through the Planning Process positively.

And on the subject of Scott Tallon & Walker, how do they keep getting work???

(Although, I do have to say, their design for the 100million euro City Quarter by Howard Holdings on Lapps Quay - is turning out to be far more aesthetically pleasing in real-life than its design drawings. Credit where credit is due. )
lexington
Old Master
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:31 pm

Postby sw101 » Sat May 29, 2004 8:10 pm

i thought it was MOLA that did the gate no? as far as i know they did the new facade anywho...might be wrong
sw101
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 3:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron