Developments in Cork

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Wed Nov 05, 2008 12:51 pm

and so say all of us, they were hopping mad the docklands forum didnt include any councillors. I was looking at South Docks plan (how sad is that) and it basically pulls from 11 plans that were done previously e,g, national spatial strategy, CASP and all that craic. South Docks is seriously detailed , looks quite good but its just the frustration you feel that this could be one of many lovely plans and nothing might happen.

Docklands forum was meeting quite regularly for a while and seemed to be getting things done, the search for funding seems to be next and forms and proposals have to make it safely through various government depts (so you can imagine how thats being fast tracked....) and then hits the EU. Faint hopes i suppose that the bridge funding might come from the EU borrowing . So bad though, if the airport had been monitored correctly, the money would be there for the bridge. And where are CIE with the masterplan for HOrgans quay?
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:47 am

mccarthys have gone back in for planning on the jacobs island site, they have cut down the size from 15,000 sqm to about 11,000 sqm, gone in for 1 storey higher, looks like still no sign of leisure center, prev refused by Bord Pleanala for too much retail with Mahon point already nearby, traffic congestion and wouldnt suit the residential area
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby bosco » Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:14 am

A memo from the Roads Engineer dated 11th September 2007 states that the site is [deficient in car parking and recommends a number of standard conditions.


A very detailed memo from Council planning policy section broadly
welcomes the proposed development but outlines a number of concerns
regarding to what is considered to be an excess of parking provision


Is this standard fare in these reports?
bosco
Member
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:55 am

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:45 am

Bord Pleanala decision on the Oral Hearing into the Beacon Medical groups proposal for a hospital on the CUH grounds is due today
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Jim Comic » Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:05 pm

heard Totarch may be closing their cork office
Jim Comic
Member
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:17 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby bosco » Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:33 pm

Pug wrote:Bord Pleanala decision on the Oral Hearing into the Beacon Medical groups proposal for a hospital on the CUH grounds is due today


Deferred again.
bosco
Member
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:55 am

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Leesider » Sun Nov 30, 2008 5:30 pm

Does anyone know what is the development on the Lee Rd?? Think there was an engineering firm in there before.
Leesider
Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:38 pm
Location: Back on Leeside

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:46 am

decision re Ken Mahons application to put 44 apts on that contentious piece of green , disputed as "open space", in Bishopstown is due from Bord Pleanala today
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby bosco » Tue Dec 23, 2008 12:53 am

Pug wrote:decision re Ken Mahons application to put 44 apts on that contentious piece of green , disputed as "open space", in Bishopstown is due from Bord Pleanala today


Was only announced in recent days I think. Refused. Is that all his avenues exhausted now?

Re the Lee Rd, that's Bowen Construction's former offices, think it's apartments being built there now.
bosco
Member
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:55 am

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Tue Dec 23, 2008 10:08 am

didnt someone post something in this thread a while back that Ken Mahon could seek compensation, due to the confusion in zoning or something, based on the number of units he was refused? hence applying for 44 apts after already being refused for 4 houses
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby sovereign12 » Sat Jan 10, 2009 2:29 pm

quick question, anybody got any up to date info on the proposal for jacobs island and the blackpool development???
sovereign12
Member
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:29 am

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby the hawk » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:17 pm

Pug wrote:didnt someone post something in this thread a while back that Ken Mahon could seek compensation, due to the confusion in zoning or something, based on the number of units he was refused? hence applying for 44 apts after already being refused for 4 houses


Yes. It seems that the board refused permission on the basis that the application was in contravention of policy NHR 11 of the development plan as ameded. The "as amended" may prove to be costly for the council as the planning act and case law provides for compensation where a refusal is based on an amended plan, provided the applicant acquired his/her interest in the land prior to the amendment and the application was consistant with the pre-altered plan.Variation no.5 to the cork city development plan was made in order to refuse permission on the land.
the hawk
Member
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 11:02 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby jungle » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:46 am

Rather than paying him compensation, the council should argue that he owes them money because they helped him to avoid a huge loss!
jungle
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:11 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:29 am

the hawk wrote:Yes. It seems that the board refused permission on the basis that the application was in contravention of policy NHR 11 of the development plan as ameded. The "as amended" may prove to be costly for the council as the planning act and case law provides for compensation where a refusal is based on an amended plan, provided the applicant acquired his/her interest in the land prior to the amendment and the application was consistant with the pre-altered plan.Variation no.5 to the cork city development plan was made in order to refuse permission on the land.


well first of all, if that happens, someone in the planning office would have to explain themselves if public funds have to be used to compensate the developer and the planning department didnt cop on to the fact that they might have to pay him.

Presume though, even if compo had to be paid, he would only get compo for 4 houses, i.e. the original refusal.
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby the hawk » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:21 am

Pug wrote:well first of all, if that happens, someone in the planning office would have to explain themselves if public funds have to be used to compensate the developer and the planning department didnt cop on to the fact that they might have to pay him.

Presume though, even if compo had to be paid, he would only get compo for 4 houses, i.e. the original refusal.


What the act states is that if compensation is to be paid then it has to be equal to the value of the land prior to the making of the decision less the remaining value after the decision. It follows that if it is deemed to be compensable then planning should have been obtainable at some point during the lifetime of the plan. This would give it a value of at least the level of value assuming planning had been granted for the 44 units (and not 4) and also it seems at the value at the time of the making of the application and not at todays near worthless levels.
the hawk
Member
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 11:02 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:37 pm

the hawk wrote:What the act states is that if compensation is to be paid then it has to be equal to the value of the land prior to the making of the decision less the remaining value after the decision. It follows that if it is deemed to be compensable then planning should have been obtainable at some point during the lifetime of the plan. This would give it a value of at least the level of value assuming planning had been granted for the 44 units (and not 4) and also it seems at the value at the time of the making of the application and not at todays near worthless levels.


so how do you value open space? and if it can be shown that the decision to ensure open space is not redeveloped was only prompted by this decision, i.e. relates to open space in Cork in the future, then there would be no compo.

I suppose it comes down to whether it was decided to refuse based on the ground being open space, or whether the refusal was because the change in plan against the development of open space was in relation to this site
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby the hawk » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:54 pm

Pug wrote:so how do you value open space? and if it can be shown that the decision to ensure open space is not redeveloped was only prompted by this decision, i.e. relates to open space in Cork in the future, then there would be no compo.

I suppose it comes down to whether it was decided to refuse based on the ground being open space, or whether the refusal was because the change in plan against the development of open space was in relation to this site


Public open space would have a close to zero commercial value. The land was zoned as residential in the original development plan, and the variation proported to alter the zoning to Public open space use.The zoned use should in theory "trump" existing use., and if the land is indeed privately owned as claimed, then there must be constitutional issues arising from the assertion that the land is being designated for public use without compensation to the owner.
the hawk
Member
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 11:02 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby who_me » Thu Jan 22, 2009 7:17 pm

A bit off-topic, but this reminded me of another story which occurred recently in the Cork area.

Due to significant underground works going on in a certain urban area, a number of buildings sustained structural damage. As a form of/in lieu of compensation, the authority involved purchased one of these properties - a tiny, one story shack of perhaps 20 sq. m in size. The figure I heard quoted was 250K (primarily, I assume, because of the nature of the purchase, and also because of a favourable location).

Unfortunately, someone overlooked a tiny strip of pavement surrounding the building, less than a metre in width, which wasn't included in the sale. The owner is supposedly now demanding 500K for this narrow strip.

This has me raging. Firstly, that someone messed up in not buying all the land necessary. Secondly, that this person - even with the law on their side - is trying to fleece a cash-strapped authority for a large sum of money that could otherwise do a lot of good for that community.

Having said that, given the outstanding land is just a section of pavement which isn't large enough for any kind of development, do the council even need to buy it?
who_me
Member
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:15 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby lawyer » Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:38 pm

Is the absense of news (by those on the inside) on the Cork threads due to the fact that:
a) nothing is happening in Cork.
b) that the contributors are no longer with us
c) that since all Cork threads were put under one general heading, contributions did seem to slow down very much,
lawyer
Member
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:43 pm
Location: Cork

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:48 pm

a) flip all happening
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Radioactiveman » Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:29 am

I think its a combination of all three.
Some interesting developments:

1) Cork City Council has vetoed any zoning changes as part of its new development plan. Of particular interest is the decision not to rezone a portion of land close to the Mardyke for a UCC "Outreach Centre" - apparently for Cork's Northside!! A pointless building in the wrong place, if you ask me....I've written about it and posted images a while back on this thread.

2) Meanwhile, across the walkway (literally 20 metres away) CCC are nearing completion of their new Skate Park. While I have to admire the skill of the workers who put this together - it really looks like they put a lot of thought and research into it, it will need a lot of trees and soft landscaping to repair the damage it has done to the walkway. I think the plan is to outlaw skating in the City Centre once this is finished - a hopeless idea. The whole culture of skating means that the skaters are unlikely to skate where the council tell them!

3) Out on the Western Road, the new UCC "IT" building is all but complete on the old Dog Track site. Word from de college is that (a) it will no longer just serve an IT use - anything goes in this economic climate and (b) there's no money to open it at the moment. The massive UCC crest on the front wall is very impressive.

4)The Bodega on Cornmarket St. is getting a multi million euro makeover (badly needed) to return it to former glories. St. Peter's Market (as it previously and now futurely will be known) should add to the street which has already seen massive development with TK MAXX on the other side. CCC have recently put out to tender for builders to implement a refurbishment plan for the street and street furniture (including market stalls - cue endless complaining from stall holders) designed by none other than Beth Gali.
As much as I love her work on Patrick St, Grand Parade and Oliver Plunkett St., unless CCC drop Gali pretty soon, the city is going to look very much the same all over.

5) CCC have signed deals with well known Coffee Shops to open the two kiosks on Grand Parade as Coffee shops. Despite one of the kiosks (at least) being inappropriately positioned, it seems there is nothing we can do to change it.

6) Nearby, Frinailla are rumoured to be stalling big time on their commitments to the City Library site. They have permission (albeit with some modifications) for a mixed use development on the site, including a major new City Library. At the moment they are also sponsoring the City Library's "Year of the Constant Reader" http://www.constantreader.ie

7) Things seem to be slowing down at the other end of the Grand Parade too. BAM (formerly Ascon and Rohcon) have got permission from ABP to demolish Government Buildings and replace with another mixed use development (with hotel and "tower" element - can you call it a tower when it just has 10 storeys?)
A spokesperson for the company was recently quoted as saying (and I quote from memory): "We're pleased with the grant of permission. We hope to start work really soon - by the end of the year maybe!"
By the end of the YEAR??? and they call that quick?


Most of the above people will already know about. I just thought it might be useful to summarise a few things.
Radioactiveman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Cork, Ireland

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby jungle » Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:42 am

Some people might also have some interest in this thread, which for some reason has been put in the Dublin section.
jungle
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:11 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby corkdood » Wed Feb 11, 2009 9:46 am

lawyer wrote:Is the absense of news (by those on the inside) on the Cork threads due to the fact that:
b) that the contributors are no longer with us
,



Since Lexington left the Cork forum has not been the same. He had the inside track on everything that was going on in Cork development and planning circles. It would be interesting to hear his take on the current economic climate and how little has been achieved in the city in the last few years.

If you're out there Lex come on back - we miss you!
corkdood
Member
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 12:40 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby Pug » Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:28 am

might be interesting to note that cork city council, despite an objection lodged by the NRA to the councils grant of permission to O' Callaghans proposal for Jacobs Island, have compared the South Ring Road to the Peripherique around Paris. The NRA say the roads cant cope as it is, let alone with a new development, but the councils traffic division seem to think it can. The council say they are formulating a new transport plan for the area. It appears however, the NRA are not included in the group formulating that plan.
Pug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:50 pm

Re: Developments in Cork

Postby lawyer » Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:10 pm

John Cleary Developments have been granted planning permission for change of use of office and retail showroom facility at City Gate Office Campus, Mahon to provide a 102 bed inpatient private medical clinic facility.
lawyer
Member
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:43 pm
Location: Cork

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland