Winthrop Arcade
- This topic has 34 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
[align=center:1nx9x179]
[/align:1nx9x179]
Cork City Council have requested further information from Tober Investment Company regarding their proposals for the unique Winthrop Arcade. The plans were to remove the arcade element completely, and replace with two stand-alone retail units – one facing Winthrop Street and the other facing on to Oliver Plunkett Street.
The proposal brought a very strong rebuttal from An Taisce and others given the very unique nature of the existing building – it was the first covered shopping arcade in Ireland…basically, the first shopping centre/mall in the country. The interior consists of 8 small glass fronted retail units facing on to the pedestrian arcade with linear and octangal roof lights over. Cast iron columns, bronze-framed glazed and timber framed glazing and ornate clock are just some of the unique features in the building which was built in 1926 after the burning of the city.
The current proposal would remove the individual units, shopfronts, glazing, etc. (with some reassembled to form token decorative features in the new units). The impressive curved glazing to the facades would be replaced with modern glazing and doorways.In my opinion, this represents the ripping out of the heart of the building. Why protect the mock-tudor facade if you demolish the internal fabric which makes the building unique in this country. A blind acceptance (as the pre-planning talks with CCC suggest) that these changes must be made is ill-thought out and devoid of any concept of diversifying our retail offering. With blocks of retail space about to become available on Patrick Street, there is little demand for the relatively small spaces which this proposal will produce. What is in demand is small, unique and boutique retail spaces for small entrepreneurs and producers – as evidenced by the upsurge in craft and farmers markets, and the continuing success of the English Market. With a small bit of imagination, these units would provide an excellent and unique shopping experience for locals and shoppers alike.
As the An Taisce submission notes:
“the building is unique in the city and the loss of the fixtures and fittings would be tragic and avoidable, what is required here is some imagination whereby the existing building is maintained and uses compatible with its scale devised with some craft-type industry in conjuntion with the Craft Council where the product is show-cased in the existing units”.Despite its resigned attitude in pre-planning, lets hope CCC has a little more imagination than we sometimes give it credit for. If not, I suspect An Bord Pleanala will be involved.
I’m afraid if Cork loses this, then you can forget any credibility that this is a city with even the slightest pride in its heritage. From all I’ve read, it looks as though you ahve a City planning department that is simply in thrall to developers and has no clear vision whatsoever about how the City should look. The Council should tell this developer that possession does not imply the right to do whatever you like and there is a strong case for spot-listing all the elements in the arcade as a matter of urgency.
PS Beware the mysterious fire in the middle of the night or ‘accidental’ demolition by one of the developer’s opos.
It needs to be re-marketed, and properly promoted, not gutted and turned into yet another faceless, boring retail unit.
This is an apalling suggestion , the arcade has such potential , how anybody could advocate its destruction is completely beyond me . Surely the planning dept will reject this.
Well, having access to a pile of borrowed money doesn’t mean that you have any taste, other than in your mouth.
I’ve never seen a more ridiculous suggestion. One of the few interesting and unique things in Cork and they want to get rid of it. If I were Cork city council, I’d actually be encouraging developers to build more arcades. There’s already a precedent with the English market and whatnot, and it could really add a huge amount of charm and uniqueness to the city.
Why would you want to destroy this amount of Zone A space to create a really standard box where you’d value off Zones C + D for the majority of space?
In a good market the arcade would surely attract a premium as being a quirky building to have in one’s portfolio.
I can well understand that one may get frustrated dealing with local independents in the current climate but in the medium term this proposal would destroy a lot of value.
A pavement license for tables and a change of use to coffee operator from the CC may assist greatly in fixing the LTV
I agree with johnglas – spotlisting is called for – I cannot believe Winthrop Arcade is not protected – which would include the interiors in any case.
This is unbelievable.
This kind of suggestion makes me sick to the bone. There are only a few little gems left in our city, and if developers are allowed destroy these for any reason at all then shame on you CCC. Let’s hope the new generation of architects, planners and others involved in the structure of our city have more compassion for our city’s heritage and less want to fill their pockets. We need more protection laws and more stringent penalties where accidental fires or structure damage happens. Remember that church on Jones’ Road in Dublin that was demolished after it was ‘protected’.
How this nonsense proposal even got beyond an initian pre-planning meeting with the planners is even a bigger mystery to me.
Then again C.C.C. does not do much for the appearance of the city with some quays with fine bollards and boardwalks etc and the balance in poor states i.e. the state of the lanterns on Patricks Bridge is a disgrace.
These arcades are all over Paris and some over 100+ years old and full of little shops and artisans – this proposal is cultural vandalism.
city planners approved the monstrosity that is Victoria Cross. :eek:That tells you a lot. 😡
@ramiro wrote:
This kind of suggestion makes me sick to the bone. There are only a few little gems left in our city, and if developers are allowed destroy these for any reason at all then shame on you CCC. Let’s hope the new generation of architects, planners and others involved in the structure of our city have more compassion for our city’s heritage and less want to fill their pockets. We need more protection laws and more stringent penalties where accidental fires or structure damage happens. Remember that church on Jones’ Road in Dublin that was demolished after it was ‘protected’.
We’ve had our fair share in Cork too.
The developer’s speciality seems to be a fire that happens to destroy the building. If it wasn’t for the libel laws, I could list 7 or 8 sites that burned down in mysterious circumstances.
@jungle wrote:
We’ve had our fair share in Cork too.
The developer’s speciality seems to be a fire that happens to destroy the building. If it wasn’t for the libel laws, I could list 7 or 8 sites that burned down in mysterious circumstances.
If you say that 7 or 8 buildings burned down and that this seemed “mysterious” to you, without implying that anybody did it, I don’t think that’ll be libellous. So name away.
@rumpelstiltskin wrote:
If you say that 7 or 8 buildings burned down and that this seemed “mysterious” to you, without implying that anybody did it, I don’t think that’ll be libellous. So name away.
while i think we all sympathise with the sentiment, it’d be better to hold your counsel regarding mysterious fires.
suffice to say, we all suspect it has happened around cork and other cities.
the link below gives guidance on the issues of libel and defamation
http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/01/06/libel-laws-in-ireland/
The John Barleycorn Hotel in Glanmire was a mysterious fire wasn’t it.
Oh dear.
The track record of planners v arcades in Dublin does not bode well, with the Grafton Arcade entirely incorporated into M&S in recent times.
I wouldn’t really compare the Grafton Arcade to this for three reasons;
1. Values; there was a lot more money on the table in Grafton Street, given the way retail was valued the entrance space lost was worth far too much money, not to mention M & S being unable to expand in any other direction. Not saying this part of Cork is cheap, but at 2% yields that part of Dublin wasn’t far off 5th Avenue levels at that time!
2. Use; the grafton Arcade featured a number of retailers who would never have renewed their leases as their were no agglomeration benefits for the mishmash of retailers who made a big mistake going there in the first place. If this recession has tought me anything it is that excluding food / craft (only in tourist meccas) use; that retail shopping centres and arcades where the units are all zone A space don’t work as service charges required to run them are disproportionate to the net rents received from an investor point of view, assuming the retailer only looks at occupancy cost and not whether its rent, rates or service charges; the costs get deducted from the rental level they are prepared to pay. However if you combine very small units as in this case and fill them with complimentary uses then you acheive a multiple minimum rent premium.
3. Aestetics, Grafton Arcade was a tired 1970’s mall with no real natural light, this in contrast is a period arcade in the vein of Paris or a less grand version of the Burlington Arcade at the end of Cork Street W1 near Old Bond Street London.
Tough times at present but if this could survive this cycle it has a Ballymaloe inspired arcade written all over it. 😀
UPDATE:
CCC have granted ‘conditional’ planning permission for this development – after some very minor modifications by way of further information.
It’s still a terrible idea!
I would imagine an appeal to ABP will be forthcoming from An Taisce who were originally opposed to this ‘development’.This decision has been appealled to ABP by An Taisce. Result expected March 2010.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
