cork docklands

cork city council have apparently commissioned a study into the feasibility of a tunnel from the south link road directly to the docklands. The South Docklands Access tunnel would be a 1 way from the south link to monaghan road. Travel from the docklands to the south link would be on the roof of the tunnel. Interesting.

Not many objections to the Howards Atlantic Quarter at all, the Seveso thing is an issue. Still, it might get someone off their behinds to confront the issue and get the Seveso sites tidied up as they are going to affect the whole docklands otherwise. Might be a few tweaks but no way will the city council stop this one, imagine the development contributions they would be turning down. Not a hope.

yeah – will do well not to go to Further Info with project of that size – Seveso sites the issue i’d say

Howard Holdings have been asked to submit further information to CCC regarding the Atlantic Quarter proposal.

@kite wrote:

:mad:Thanks to Cork City Councils total incompetence I think it is safe to say; Cork Docklands RIP.

Kite, you’ll have to explain yourself on that one, I’ve had a look at the Further Info required and would have had a much more optimistic view. I’m not an engineer or developer but I dont think there is anything insurmountable there bar changing the mix to more residential, which might be tricky in current downturned market.

The Seveso site is definitely a stall for time by City Council as the developers were simply asked to explain how the Seveso site issue would not affect them. Even more positively, I think the height of the 3 residential towers was agreed in principle with some small few floors knocked off, the retail / office buildings appear to require 1 floor knocked off and the rest of the info seems to be details required of the event centre, noise, traffic, waste management, lots of small detail

The issue will be whether the funding is granted for the new bridge and the further info request seems to hint at that, as the developers were asked for details as to how they would go ahead if the new bridge wasnt built for a while

Now that, is Fianna Fail procrastinating and Cork getting rubbish transport and infrstructure funding as per usual

Did the Health and Safety Authority submission point to a contaminated

The Seveso issue has nothing to do with contamination. And you is going off half cocked – many people on this board will know that there are a number of issues in play that have to be addressed before major developments can commence in the Docklands – and that these are mainly outside the gift of the City Council. And if I’m aware of this, as a complete outsider with no professional involvement in the sector, then might I humbly suggest that you should too, before blaming the City Council?

If you’re going to complain about the CC on anything, I’d focus on the dirty big swath of asphalt laid on Patricks Street.

@kite wrote:

,
Owen O’Callaghan’s interview in the Sunday papers yesterday is a load of bull !!
http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=Tribune%2FBusiness%2FBusiness+Week&id=87571&SUBCAT=Tribune%2FBusiness

May I ask why

In relation to the Cork Docklands, and the HH planning application, the HSA have advised against the granting of planning based on the information in the current application. It is a point blank advice against, with no provisos, suggested improvements or any mitigating measures. They do not suggest any conditions or changes which would change their advice.

In my opinion (and I am in favour of the development with the associated necessary infrastructure and public transport systems), this puts the planners in a tight corner, with no wriggle-room. How can they “overrule” or “override” the clear unambiguous advice of the HSA? Will the planners independantly take the responsibility for the possibility of a Seveso-type accident when the HSA (the specialists in the field) have advised against? It would be a brave (foolhardy?) planner who is going to go on that solo run. Would it even be legal?

It would surprise me if the application is not refused, because the advice of the HSA does not allow for any conditioning-out of the risks. I can’t see how they can technically reconcile the contradictions present. Hopefully I will be mistaken.

@Pug wrote:

I’m not an engineer or developer but I dont think there is anything insurmountable there bar changing the mix to more residential, which might be tricky in current downturned market.

That works wonders for our city doesn’t it? In the absence of having anything resembling adequate public transport in and out of the city centre, we build large business parks on the edge of the city and loads of apartments in the city centre. Instead of creating demand and justifying a decent public transport system to bring workers and shoppers from suburban centres of population into the city, we try to encourage people to live in city centre apartments and commute out to semi-rural business parks.

Sure they could drain the Atlantic pond and build a multi storey on it, but better make sure the bridge is 20 lanes wide whenever it’s eventually built. It could even accommodate a spur off the Middleton monorail line.

I know where you are coming from on that, BUT I wish Howard Holdings and all the other stakeholders the very best of luck for the Docklands. What I am bitter about is the total incompetence of CCC in wasting 8 years on foreign junkets to see far away dockland regeneration when they should have been sorting out the contaminated land and other issues in Cork to help, not hinder the stakeholders.

@Steady wrote:

How can they “overrule” or “override” the clear unambiguous advice of the HSA? Will the planners independantly take the responsibility for the possibility of a Seveso-type accident when the HSA (the specialists in the field) have advised against? It would be a brave (foolhardy?) planner who is going to go on that solo run. Would it even be legal?

well the vibe from the thread seems to be that we all want the development done and we are all frustrated at perceived political interference holding it up. Kite, you are right in that funding should have been requested years ago and the Seveso issue sorted out while waiting for the funding.

The Docklands forum are due back to report to the Taoiseachs office in June apparently. The result of the gateway funding submission was due out by now. Why not contact a few city councillors and get them to ask J Gavin.

I take hope in the fact that planners didnt refuse it outright due to the HSA submission to advise against planning. The Seveso issue isnt going away until its fixed and until then HSA will object to everything which is them simply doing their job, I am sure City Hall are well aware of the Seveso issue and its probably down to who will pay for it and if its City Halls job, where will they get the money (6 million from Owen O Callaghan received during the year might help).

I’m assuming Bord Pleanala might get hold of this as well which might change things more as its in City Halls interest to grant planning. Then again, the very few submissions means it may not have to go to ABP. It’ll get there yet.

Then we have to worry about where the funding for the transport will come from. €1bn was pulled from the Transport 21 roads fund apparently.