cork docklands

@kite wrote:

🙂
What I meant by direct type labor is that Tom McCarthy’ Mills development and his and Tom Kelly’s Kingsley development are been directed by their own management team.
Any snags or penalties fall back on the owners, not the builder, engineers etc. An unusual way of doing business on developments of this size I would think?

Gotcha! Wasn’t too sure on what you meant.

Interesting stuff on the docklands Lex. Its nice to see some progress. The pace does seem to be heating up, I just hope this materialises with imagination and applications.

Great info about the docklands lexington, thanks.

That said, given the way most upcoming developments are being eviscerated in transit through planning, are we going to see a more lenient/adventurous approach for the South Docklands? I’d much prefer to see a variation in height too, rather than a cluster of 6-10 story cuboid blocks. A little variety in materials used wouldn’t go far astray either.

Incidentally, is the riverside along the docks currently private property? I’d love to go for a stroll down there to the Marina walk, just to take a look close up, but I don’t know if it’s off limits. (And no smart comments about going for a stroll down the docks either lads! 😉 )

Does the docklands have any existing retainable building stock, or is it all going to be cleared?

the odlums building could be redevloped, interesting facade. R&H hall could be redeveloped as well, but it’d be a lot of work. most of the rest is sheds and silos.

Yes the Odlums building reminds me of the OXO tower building in London. It wouldnt be bad idea to preserve a little of what is in the docklands to remind people of it’s formor purpose.

I’m not as keen to hold on to the R&H Hall silos. I’ld rather destroy them and build similar sized buildings in their place. I also dont like them as I had a dream recently in which the silos were the Ministries in the book 1984 by George Orwell which I was reading at the time. I was taken in to the silo and had my eyebrows shaved and they replaced my teeth with popcorn. So If it means that those dreams wont re-occur i’m all for destruction of them

The Odlums building looks as if it could be converted into really nice and modern apartments. Keep the facade, do up the interior and you’ve got what they’ve been doing in Liverpool for years. I’ve never really noticed how nice that building was, but those photos show it’s beauty. I don’t think there is much hope for R&H Hall…… although I always thought that if they lit it up at night with coloured lights, it might look pretty cool.

that concrete building pictured would be a great museum(modern, transport ?) there is a similarly orwellian hulk in london that was transformed.

But no chance of that happening here in ould ireland.

Odlums looks like a two stage building – anyone know the history?

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

Odlums looks like a two stage building – anyone know the history?

Yeah, it looks like a late 19th C. bottom with a 1920s/30s piece put on to the top of it.

I can also see the resemblance to the Oxo building in London. The Oxo is a very interesting set-up, as it is operated by the Coinstreet community builders. The building is mainly social housing with commercial enterprise used as a source of funding.

http://www.coinstreet.org/

@a boyle wrote:

that concrete building pictured would be a great museum(modern, transport ?) there is a similarly orwellian hulk in london that was transformed.

But no chance of that happening here in ould ireland.

Hang in there – these things take a lot of time and while nothing seems to be happening on the ground in the Docklands an awful lot of deals are being done behind the scenes.As with the planning prosess in this business you have to be patient.Imaginative proposals are in the pipeline.

@phil wrote:

Yeah, it looks like a late 19th C. bottom with a 1920s/30s piece put on to the top of it.

I can also see the resemblance to the Oxo building in London. The Oxo is a very interesting set-up, as it is operated by the Coinstreet community builders. The building is mainly social housing with commercial enterprise used as a source of funding.

http://www.coinstreet.org/

The top part of the cork building looks fabulous, pity they weren’t side by side…

This is a landmark building on Kennedy Quay. The original grain store, the lower half of the building, was built some time in the late 19th/early 20th century. In 1934 the top portion was added when R&H Hall, JW Green & Co. and Suttons installed a flourmill in the building.

The key to the attraction of this building is the integration of its two halves, the harmonious transition from traditional to modern warehouse. In the 1934 extension, care was taken to provide some continuity from the original design to the new. This continuity can be seen in the vertical emphasis created by the lower windows and continued to the upper wall windows where the brick piers are aligned with the lower piers. The elevation is arranged symmetrically around the middle where an Art Deco limestone moulding symbolically joins the two parts of the building. The moulding may be an abstraction of four sheaves of corn. (Harrington & Miller c. 2000)

Is the Odlums building listed? I’d hate to think that it might actually be knocked down. As for the museum a boyle, I can see where your coming from. It could be made into the Battersea or Tate Modern of Cork.

that is a large building , and as such extremely valuable . You would have to get a petition going now , or at least the support of some tds (suspect that fianna fail would be more usefull 🙂 🙂 🙂 )

Other wise it is unrealistic to expectic to become a museum or gallery or anything but appartments. You would need to secure a half decent amount of art in the first place. (almost all the museum/and galleries are bursting with stuff, they are in the pale however —- good luck !!!)

I have to say that odlums buildings does not get the pass mark from me , tear it down . (it is possible that is looks better in the flesh ! )

@A-ha wrote:

Is the Odlums building listed? I’d hate to think that it might actually be knocked down. As for the museum a boyle, I can see where your coming from. It could be made into the Battersea or Tate Modern of Cork.

It would appear that it is listed. It would seem to be the only building with such status on Kennedy Quay.

http://www.corkcity.ie/ourservices/planning/record_protected_structures.shtml

Thank God, I’m really after taking a liking to it. I can only imagine what it would look like if it was renovated. It would make a good museum, but apartments seem to be written all over it.

i was walking over patricks bridge the other day and looking down out the harbour and just thinking when the docklands really gets going and the r &h buildings and that area starts to be renovated its going to look class! Thats hoping the council dont think small in planning and high rise apartments play some part!

What is the timeframe for completion of the Water Street bridge? I seem to remember construction starting in 2007 was proposed at one point, is that still feasible?

Without that bridge, a redeveloped docklands will be quite painful for people in the Albert Rd area with all the extra traffic generated. Issues like that can raise local residents hackles unnecessarily.

Also, there’s likely to be an increase in the level of traffic truning right off Albert St. This could jam up through traffic on the South Link Road. Would it not make more sense to force Docklands/Blackrock bound traffic down Eglinton St and Albert Quay (Has it been renamed?) ?

@lexington wrote:

Section One: The Maxol Group entice prospective Docklands developers with Site Sale!

😮 The Maxol Group, the Irish oil company owned by the McMullan family, have instructed agents CB Richard Ellis to offer their prime 0.3 acre docklands site bordered by the junctions of Centre Park Road, Victoria Road and Monahan’s Road for sale. The site, which is zoned for Mixed-Use Development, stands and the gateway to the docklands proper and offers a fantastic opportunity to provide a building of prominence and stature which marks the entrance to Cork’s South Docklands area. The closing date for Tenders is July 7th 2006, unless previously sold. The prospect of a striking landmark building is available to the successful bidder who may, subject to planning discussions, even avail of a slender, glazed tower element on the north-eastern corner of the site rising up to as much as 10-storeys (with the remainder of the development subject to the guideline height of 6-storeys). Justification for such a privision may be based on the site landmark/gateway location – subject to a strong design standard and planning discussions. However the Maxol site is also well positioned to form an important piece of a possible site assembly which may include the Shell Petrol Station to the south, yard to the west and warehousing again to the south – offering full sweep of this corner, gateway junction of Centre Park and Monahan Roads.

The site is highlighted below in yellow.

Sounds great but who wants to bet the 10-storey element will get cut back to 6.

Six! The way things carry on in this country it will probably be made into a bungalow. I still don’t know how Eglinton St. is being built…. 80m including the spire (someone must have been given a brown envelope).

@A-ha wrote:

Six! The way things carry on in this country it will probably be made into a bungalow. I still don’t know how Eglinton St. is being built…. 80m including the spire (someone must have been given a brown envelope).

:rolleyes: Steady on now,,there are enough tribunals going on in Dublin….don’t involve Cork?:o 😮

any news on Docklands and the tender on the Maxol site?

(This is also an effor to keep this thread going – splitting up the Cork Devt thread wasnt great in my humble opinion)

in the examiner today, 20,000 sq ft warehouse fronting Albert Quay adjacent to the IAWS silos, up for sale by auction on Oct 11 with guide price €4.5m.

I got to visit the Cardiff Bay development recently and it got me wondering about what we would like to see in Cork Docklands. So far, what has been done there has been mostly for recreational use with plenty of bars, cafes and restaurants, tours of the bay, Techniquest, a theatre, a planned national sports centre etc. Although, I had an opportunity to talk to one of the planners who said that they would be looking to put in more employment based development in the future.

In comparison with the dreariness which is the IFSC it really opened my eyes as to what could be achieved in an urban redevelopment project like this.

Traditionally, in Ireland, we have been poor at providing recreational amenities and I fear a situation in the docklands where we have dense office development with some apartments and little of interest otherwise.

Considering there are similar proposals for Galway (and presumably elswhere) I had even considered starting a separate thread on this topic.

Also, I’ll try to put up some pictures of the Cardiff Bay Development when I recover the cable that connects my camera to the computer. The Millenium Centre is a stunning building and the National Assembly (the Assembly itself, not the godawful assembly offices behind it) also deserves to be seen.

😮 Concerns were rightly raised at a recent meeting by Cork City Councillors regarding foot dragging by some stakeholders on the proposed city docklands development.
Issues raised included the passing of five years without serious planning applications being lodged, and the prospect of another five years or so before the first stakeholders blink and take what is on offer money wise rather than wait to see if a few more euro can be extracted.(CCC’s lack of a determined blueprint for the area may have a lot to do with this deadlock ?)

CIE, and the Port of Cork were mentioned at this meeting, POC member Cllr.Colm Burke raised the issue of POC needing 150 million to relocate to the lower harbor (up from 110 million from when the POC made a submission to CCC some months ago), meanwhile the POC listed building on Custom House Quay is at the point of collapse.
It may be worth more as a site than to restore / redevelop this historic Cork building?

City Manager, Joe Gavin stated that out of the 8 major stakeholders involved in the docklands, 3 had reached the point of appointing architects and engineers to put forward proposals. BUT some Councillors said that this may be too little too late if Haulbowline Island gets the nod for an IFSC centre as proposed, which would probably make the docklands the biggest white elephant and waste of money in the states history!!
😮

Have the City Fathers not noticed that we live in a market economy? The fact that, during an unprecedented economic boom, no investor reponded to what was on offer in the Docklands Plan might indicate that the problem lies with the Plan and not with the stakeholders. The Docks have real potential if the Plan has market realism but anyone who believes that an isolated cul de sac like Haulbowline could become a new IFSC has completely lost the plot.

@Dieter wrote:

Have the City Fathers not noticed that we live in a market economy? The fact that, during an unprecedented economic boom, no investor reponded to what was on offer in the Docklands Plan might indicate that the problem lies with the Plan and not with the stakeholders. The Docks have real potential if the Plan has market realism but anyone who believes that an isolated cul de sac like Haulbowline could become a new IFSC has completely lost the plot.

I agree, i also feel the problem with the docklands is the lack of a comprehensive plan that contains adult type joined up thinking.
Having different councillors / officials batting for different stakeholders is not putting the city first.
Many in CCC feel, as you do that Haulbowline is a complete non runner.

@kite wrote:

meanwhile the POC listed building on Custom House Quay is at the point of collapse.
It may be worth more as a site than to restore / redevelop this historic Cork building?

I assume that this is the bonded warehouse building.

I’m sure it would be worth more as a site for offices than in its current incarnation. But, from the heritage perspective and the need to maintain building variety in the Docklands it needs to be preserved. If it is in so much danger, the city council should consider a CPO on the site.

Does anyone have a pic of the POC listed building on Custom Quay handy? I can’t quite picture it! 😮

@rebel_city wrote:

Does anyone have a pic of the POC listed building on Custom Quay handy? I can’t quite picture it! 😮

You will find a photo here rebel_city http://www.corkpastandpresent.ie/corkimages/misc-bonded.shtml

@jungle wrote:

I assume that this is the bonded warehouse building.

I’m sure it would be worth more as a site for offices than in its current incarnation. But, from the heritage perspective and the need to maintain building variety in the Docklands it needs to be preserved. If it is in so much danger, the city council should consider a CPO on the site.

It would be a waste to the city as offices / commercial development – just imagine those buildings restored and the extensions demolished, original roof and canopies restored,restaurants,cafes’art galleries,exhibitions on there and useable to the public ! Lots of similar projects in Copenhagen and they are a fantastic addition to a city with few visitor attractions like a maritime museum would fit in nicely there.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

It would be a waste to the city as offices / commercial development – just imagine those buildings restored and the extensions demolished, original roof and canopies restored,restaurants,cafes’art galleries,exhibitions on there and useable to the public ! Lots of similar projects in Copenhagen and they are a fantastic addition to a city with few visitor attractions like a maritime museum would fit in nicely there.

Would question the commercial viability of them but would like to see that, would also like to see some apartments in there to ensure animation throughout the week

@jdivision wrote:

Would question the commercial viability of them but would like to see that, would also like to see some apartments in there to ensure animation throughout the week

Saw some sketches a few years ago for a 30 storey tower on that site which were appaliinig.
If the same buildings were in such a great location in Dublin could you imagine them being neglected and awaiting development for so long ?

As for commercial viability a mixed use development of museum,restaurants,cafes & bars in an area which is taking off at the moment anyway.Apartments would require parking.Ban cars and restore the excellent cobbles as a public space.Bars etc would keep it annimated in the evenings.
As ever in Cork all it needs is a bit of imagination but things take SO much longer in Cork which can be frustrating but maybe in the longer term benificial as if some of the schemes that I have seen for that area including the Lower Glanmire Road came to fruition the place would be destroyed.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

It would be a waste to the city as offices / commercial development – just imagine those buildings restored and the extensions demolished, original roof and canopies restored,restaurants,cafes’art galleries,exhibitions on there and useable to the public ! Lots of similar projects in Copenhagen and they are a fantastic addition to a city with few visitor attractions like a maritime museum would fit in nicely there.

And in fact, they are one of the few buildings in the docklands worth retaining – perhaps Odlums and a few individual buildings on Victoria Rd as well – so it makes it all the more important that they aren’t allowed to decay.

Like jdivision, I wonder if entirely devoting it to restaurant/cafe/gallery use is completely viable. Possibly that could be used for the ground floor. The upper floor might be effetively used as an incubator unit for new media and design, which could also give a showcase retail element to the ground floor.

On the subject of the building itself, is the canopy an original feature of the building or a later addition?

@jungle wrote:

And in fact, they are one of the few buildings in the docklands worth retaining – perhaps Odlums and a few individual buildings on Victoria Rd as well – so it makes it all the more important that they aren’t allowed to decay.

Like jdivision, I wonder if entirely devoting it to restaurant/cafe/gallery use is completely viable. Possibly that could be used for the ground floor. The upper floor might be effetively used as an incubator unit for new media and design, which could also give a showcase retail element to the ground floor.

On the subject of the building itself, is the canopy an original feature of the building or a later addition?

AFAIK the canopies are original as you can see the stonework on the northern facade where slots were allowed for the supports which are now missing and would have been similar to the southern elevation.

As for media design – excellent idea but getting the buildings restored and open to the public should be an urgency as they are visibly decaying.With the Elysian and other develpopments in the area it would be a fantastic opportunity as occupiers and office workers would like to get near the water and socialise etc away from the “sterility” of all the new construction in the area.

The Odlums buildings are protected and will be retained with apartments on upper levels as I have seen on a proposal.

@jungle wrote:

And in fact, they are one of the few buildings in the docklands worth retaining – perhaps Odlums and a few individual buildings on Victoria Rd as well – so it makes it all the more important that they aren’t allowed to decay.

Like jdivision, I wonder if entirely devoting it to restaurant/cafe/gallery use is completely viable. Possibly that could be used for the ground floor. The upper floor might be effetively used as an incubator unit for new media and design, which could also give a showcase retail element to the ground floor.

On the subject of the building itself, is the canopy an original feature of the building or a later addition?

POC sent a letter to Cork Bonded Warehouses on 24th March 2000 reminding CBW that under the terms of the 1918 Lease under which they hold the property there is an obligation on them that they “will well and substantially repair cleanse maintain amend and in good and tenantable repair order and condition keep the said premises and all new buildings and works which may at any time during the said time be erected on and all additions made to the said premises and the fixtures therein and the walls fences vaults roads sewers drains and appurtenances thereof with all necessary reparations cleansings and amendments whatsoever (damage by fire excepted) and the said premises so repaired cleansed maintained amended and kept as aforesaid will at the expiration or sooner determination of this demise quietly yield up to the Lessors together with all additions and improvements made thereto in the meantime and all fixtures of every kind in or upon the said premises or which during the said term may be affixed or fastened to or upon the same ..”.
POC called on CBW to comply in full with the above covenant having regard to the terms of a letter from Mr. John Power, Building Control Officer, Cork City Council with particular reference to the south east corner of the premises and the Schedule of Dilapidations dated June 1999 which was served on them from the POC.

What has happened in the 6 years since that letter?, the building is in a worse state now than 2000
This fine building needs to be saved, before it’s too late.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

As for commercial viability a mixed use development of museum,restaurants,cafes & bars in an area which is taking off at the moment anyway.Apartments would require parking.Ban cars and restore the excellent cobbles as a public space.Bars etc would keep it annimated in the evenings.
As ever in Cork all it needs is a bit of imagination but things take SO much longer in Cork which can be frustrating but maybe in the longer term benificial as if some of the schemes that I have seen for that area including the Lower Glanmire Road came to fruition the place would be destroyed.

Cork’s nighttime hub is away from that area and silly though it may seen it’s quite hard to persuade people (not just in Cork, but everywhere) to walk away from established night time areas in order to visit new bars outside of it. Examples in Dublin include the IFSC and in London would be the old bonded warehouses next to Canary Wharf which have been converted into cafes and pubs. It’s no coincidence that these areas are both former docklands – so slight out of the city centre – and completely dead at the weekend and most weekday evenings. While I think the buildings in Cork would be superb for the purpose it would be hard for operators to make them work until further substantial development takes place in the docklands. Given the state of the building, it’s imperative that some form of redevelopment happens now. I would also recommend that somebody write to the building control officer about the state of the buildings or alternatively ring a councillor. Living in Dublin now I wouldn’t have an impact if I did either.

@jdivision wrote:

…Given the state of the building, it’s imperative that some form of redevelopment happens now. I would also recommend that somebody write to the building control officer about the state of the buildings or alternatively ring a councillor. Living in Dublin now I wouldn’t have an impact if I did either.

I for one will take your advice and write to the building control officer as in my opinion this is one of the finest buildings in the city, the outside is great but the interior is truly incredible.
Im not sure if CCC will take any notice of the letter as they are aware of the state of the bonded warehouses for years + they are supposed to be obliged not to let any building or site to fall into a state of dereliction under the Derelict Site Act. CCC are breaking the law by allowing this building to fall into a state of near collapse.:mad: 😮

Getting a councillor to campaign for it in d’Echo might also have an effect

@jdivision wrote:

Would question the commercial viability of them but would like to see that, would also like to see some apartments in there to ensure animation throughout the week

I think this is one site where we dont need a commercial investment. Let the public sector put their hands in their pockets and achieve something which is driven purely by civic pride.

@Dieter wrote:

I think this is one site where we dont need a commercial investment. Let the public sector put their hands in their pockets and achieve something which is driven purely by civic pride.

🙂 Absolutely right Dieter.
:rolleyes: CCC would be VERY slow to CPO this site or impose the conditions of the Derelict Site Act. with councilors fighting the POC corner and being members of the Port Board.
However if they did their homework they would realize that the POC can force the Cork Bonded Warehouses Co. (the tenants) to restore the building at no cost to the city or the POC under the dilapidation schedule contained in the lease.
It really is a bit “rich” for the POC to come into the City Council Chamber with their begging bowl to get the taxpayer to foot their move to the lower harbour when they allow a jewel of our city to fall into the state of the Custom House Quay site.:mad: 😡

I thought this link might be of interest to some users of archiseek. Lexington mentioned a Local Area Plan for the South of the Docklands, which I have posted a link to, but there is also loads of other information on the rest of the web page to have a look at.

Cork Docklands Economic Study

South Docklands Planning

General Docklands Page

😡 ABP have kicked to touch on the Water Street (Wendera ??) development yet again.
This whole planning application is turning into a complete farce.
If one of the Cork mafia had lodged those plans would the delay be as drawn out?:o

@kite wrote:

😡 ABP have kicked to touch on the Water Street (Werdna) development yet again.

My understanding is that ABP have called for a 2nd oral hearing for which you would imagine the 17 storey eglinton st tower that was granted now is precedent so ABP can hardly object too much any more?

DCC sale could boost buying power
Monday, 12 February 2007 17:55
NCB analyst John Sheehan says any sale of DCC’s 49% in homebuilder Manor Park would provide it with the scope to ‘dramatically step up’ acquisition activity or return cash to shareholders.

On Friday, DCC said it had sold a site in Sandyford for €40m as part of its strategy of generating shareholder value from its property assets ‘including its 49% stake in Manor Park Homebuilders’. Weekend press reports suggested DCC and 51% owner Joe Moran had reached agreement on how to proceed on the company’s future.

In a note this morning, Mr Sheehan described Manor Park as ‘an extremely valuable asset’, which accounts for the bulk of the €350m in property assets held by DCC. ‘Manor Park has a large land bank and significant commercial and residential development potential over the medium term,’ the analyst added.

AdvertisementDCC shares jumped 50 cent to close at €26.70 in Dublin.

Will one of the Cork developers snap the site up like was done with South Wharf?

Manor Park Homebuilders for sale
Wednesday, 14 February 2007 16:14
It has been confirmed this afternoon that 100% of Manor Park Homebuilders, owned jointly by DCC and businessman Joe Moran, is for sale.

DCC has a 49% shareholding in the Dublin building firm, while founder Joe Moran owns 51%.

The owners have appointed Goodbody Corporate Finance and IBI Corporate Finance to carry out the formal sale process.

AdvertisementIn a statement today DCC said: ‘DCC will sell its shareholding if a price is offered which, in the opinion of the Board of DCC, is in the best interests of DCC shareholders. A further announcement will be made in due course.’

Reports have valued Manor Park’s land banks at €750m.

Recently filed accounts for the company show turnover increased to €148.2m in the year to the end of March 2006, from €117.8m the previous year.

Pretax profits rose more than 67% to €61.1m.

This effectively puts very high profile sites like the Kent Station redevelopment and the DeBlacham & Meaghar scheme on Dublin’s Thomas Street on the market; one wonders will one of the larger Cork developers buy in or will the project at Kent evaporate.

That would send out all the wrong signals.

If CCC approve this it could provide ammunition to those who call for the establishment of an independent Cork Docklands Development Authority as it is clear that temporary uses in such a gateway site don’t stack up and will hardly sway the owners of neighbouring sites who are considering development.

Takes Dublin to sort Cork out doesn’t it 😉

@kite wrote:

🙂 Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern is to announce tonight in the Rochestown Park Hotel that Cork Docklands redevelopment is to be elevated to a “National Project” status.

A national steering forum is to be set up to kickstart the 2 billion development of the area.

Hopefully after 7 years of inaction by Cork City Councillors things will finally happen in the docklands.

1. Cork docklands is now a National Project Status – firstly, so what. Secondly, why did it take so long to do something about it.

2. A national steering forum is to be set up. I thought we already had a Cork Docklands project team.

I’ll believe it when it happens.

National Project Status = FF election stunt = reannounce same project over and over again

@Pug wrote:

1. Cork docklands is now a National Project Status – firstly, so what. Secondly, why did it take so long to do something about it.

2. A national steering forum is to be set up. I thought we already had a Cork Docklands project team.

I’ll believe it when it happens.

On (1) It took so long because some in Government thought that Cork Councillors and officials could handle the project ( now they realise that they were wrong)

(2) Cork has a docklands project team, they travel the globe each year to look at best practice in foregin designs (they are experts in 5 star hotels if nothing else)

Quote, “I’ll believe it when it happens” I share your concerns:o

It takes money to sort Dublin out
As it would with any project the scale of cork dockands
And the purse is not kept down south:rolleyes:
Just a lot of false promises, but no infrustucture to facilitate development.
Its just a spade for cork and we dig and fall behind:(

Cork only has itself to blame. No point in pointing the finger at everyone else and blaming them for our multiple cock-ups and our associated chip on the shoulder. We have a city and county council that is nothing more than a talking shop and we elect TDs who tend to disappoint. Who is to blame for that? Surely not Dublin!

@corcaighboy wrote:

Cork only has itself to blame. No point in pointing the finger at everyone else and blaming them for our multiple cock-ups and our associated chip on the shoulder. We have a city and county council that is nothing more than a talking shop and we elect TDs who tend to disappoint. Who is to blame for that? Surely not Dublin!

I wouldn’t agree entirely but certainly the standard of Cork TD is shocking. Of the 10 city TDs, I’d only rate Dan Boyle and Michael Martin as national politicians – and only one of them seems to be performing. The others make me cringe when I hear them in the Dail. They can’t be the best advocates for Cork save for getting that troublesome fence at no. 57 fixed. Of the other city candidates this time out, you could possibly add Deirdre Clune and Michael McGrath (of the candidates I know of) as being at least half impressive.

If only we had more decent TDs we’d probably have a lot more seats at cabinet which in turn would help prevent Cork from being being urinated upon from on high as Cork has been for the last 10 yrs.

Bertie has made the Docklands a national project status. Quick straw poll – Does anyone think it will make a difference?

A good question would be how does this national project status for the docklands affect Minister Martin’s ‘dream’ for developing Cork Harbour?
Anybody agree that this new status has quite a bit to do with the facts that the natives are getting very annoyed with the lack of impetus and funding coming from our central government?

Nat Ross proposal for 104 pts and 3567 sqm of bus/technology space was refused but its the reason for the refusal is interesting – the Health and Safety Authority made a submission that the Gouldings Chemical plant was a danger to human health (should a major accident occur)

Bord Pleanala stated that the Seveso issue, now that the Gouldings Premises is covered by relevant regulations, has the potential to have serious consequences for the realisation of the City Council’s plans for the area. This is a matter that can only be resolved at local level between the City Council and the HSA in their preparation of generic land use planning advice in relation to the Gouldings Plant.

looks like even more delays

Progress Report on Cork Docklands.

1. Business and Implementation Plan

The need for a Business and Implementation Plan was identified in the Cork Docklands Economic Study.
The BIP is the next step in the process of implementation of the Docklands LAP. It will bring together the various elements of the project under three themes of Product, Planning and Infrastructure. The BIP will focus on the integration of the above issues into a single document and will provide a “roadmap” for the implementation of the project in conjunction with the main stakeholders. It will, along with dealing with the traditional areas for the City Council of planning framework and infrastructure provision, focus on the product issues including such areas as product development, funding and finance, marketing and promotion.

Consultants are being engaged through a public tender process to assist the Docklands Directorate in the preparation of the Plan. Ten consortia submitted tenders and this has been short-listed to three which will be interviewed on April 2nd next,
The preparation of the plan will commence in mid-April and should be complete by mid July.

2. Showgrounds C.P.O.

The CPO on the Cork Showgrounds and the adjacent land was confirmed by An Bord Pleanala on February 10th 2007. Notice of the making of a Confirmation Order was served on the interested parties on March 1st 2007. There are now 8 weeks from March 1st within which a judicial review can be sought by interested parties.
A Notice to Treat can then be served. This requires the person on whom it is served to state, within a month, their interest in the land and details of the compensation required. If arbitration is required, compensation is fixed as at the date of the Notice to Treat.

3. Contaminated Lands Study

The study has now been completed in early 2007. The study indicates low levels of contamination throughout substantial areas of the docklands with a small number of “hot spots” identified. However, they are not a significant problem and the contamination levels are such that they can be dealt with in a reasonable manner.
The report will be made available to the landowners and developers.

4. Funding

The process of identifying key projects that will benefit from funding by the National Development Plan 2006-2013 has commenced. Funding needs will be clarified when the South Dock Local Area Plan is published.
The priority projects to be funded by the Gateways Fund will be set out once the relevant procedures are issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

5. Tidal Flooding Study- Lee Catchment Flood Risk and Management Study
This study is progressing and the consultants have been focusing on the issues for docklands. They recently completed a Relative Impact Analysis which demonstrates that the protection of docklands by raising levels on the perimeter does not adversely impact areas in the City. The next analysis which is due in the next month or so is to give advice on the levels to which the perimeter should be raised to afford a level of protection from a surge tide and sea level rise in accordance with best practice.

6. Cork Docklands National Forum

The Taoiseach recently announced the establishment of the Cork Docklands National Forum. It is anticipated that this body will co-ordinate responses at Government Department level to issues arising from the development of the Cork Docklands.
This approach was a recommendation made in the Cork Docklands Economic Study.

7. North Docks Local Area Plan

A meeting has been organized between the Policy Section of the Planning and Development Directorate, the Docklands Directorate and the owner of two areas of land zoned for the purpose of providing pocket parks in the North Docks area with a view to progressing the matter of adequate public open space provision in the area.

8. Cork Docklands Economic Study

The Cork Docklands Economic Study is currently being prepared for printing and will be widely available in April.

9. Water Supply Study

The Water Dept is preparing a brief to undertake a preliminary report for the supply of water to the Docklands. Delays have arisen from the recent change in procurement of consultants. It is expected that the consultants will be appointed by August 2007.

10. Planning Decisions

The first step in the delivery of the North Docks Plan was marked in December 2006 by the announcement of the grant of permission for the Water Street development following a grant of permission by Cork City Council in April 2005 and a lengthy appeal process which included an oral hearing. The permitted development includes for approx 211 apartments as well as a number of retail units, crèche the re-use of the Port of Cork building for offices a quayside amenity area and a public plaza.
More recently planning permission was refused for an application by Manor Park Homes on the eastren portion of the Horgan’s Quay site. Permission had been sought for the construction of 276 no, residential units, 8 no. retail units, 2 no. commercial units, 3 showroom units, a crèche facility, and a temporary access road to serve a future railway concourse. Permission was reused by Cork City Council given the lack of a comprehensive approach by the applicants / landowners to the redevelopment of the entire strategic Kent Station/Horgan’s Quay lands as well as serious design issues which could not be rectified under this application. The main deficiencies of the application were outlined in earlier posts.
The principle of a phased redevelopment of the Horgan’s Quay / Kent Station lands was fully supported by the planning authority. However in any possible reapplication it was stated that the onus would be on the applicants, in conjunction with the landowners, to submit an urban design masterplan for the entire Kent Station/Horgan’s Quay landholding. In addition the key urban design issues referred to above would be required to be resolved in a manner acceptable to the planning authority.

There could be an interesting situation developing in Cork Docklands as a result of Doyle Groups possible takeover of Irish Continental.

To fund the bid, Doyle Group would have to either sell their land holdings in Cork Port or use it as collateral for a loan. In the first scenario, this could see substantial development land (valued at 250million) getting released in the port area.

@jungle wrote:

There could be an interesting situation developing in Cork Docklands as a result of Doyle Groups possible takeover of Irish Continental.

To fund the bid, Doyle Group would have to either sell their land holdings in Cork Port or use it as collateral for a loan. In the first scenario, this could see substantial development land (valued at 250million) getting released in the port area.

kite and jungle, thats brill info. Maybe you could email the City Council to let them know!!

Thanks for that Kite.

One issue you might clarify is the status of the tax breaks. These were approved in principle by Brussels, they have obviously been promulgated amongst the developers – I remember Greg Coughlan of Howard being quoted in the paper talking about adequacy or otherwise of the tax proposals – but I’ve never seen details of them, nor any mention of when they’ll be implemented.

We got EU clearance in October 2006 for tax breaks so why weren’t proposals in the December Budget or the Feb 2007 Finance Bill? I did disturbingly see an article by the Head of The Docklands project in City Hall in an IE “Pullout” on the Docklands last Jan which welcomed the EU approval and said that CCC would NOW start putting together proposals on same to Government (in other words, 3 months after EU approval CCC were now “starting” to put together proposals). Is CCC responsible for the delay or is it Government?

@jungle wrote:

There could be an interesting situation developing in Cork Docklands as a result of Doyle Groups possible takeover of Irish Continental.

To fund the bid, Doyle Group would have to either sell their land holdings in Cork Port or use it as collateral for a loan. In the first scenario, this could see substantial development land (valued at 250million) getting released in the port area.

The Doyle Group have confirmed that they have began the examination of the ferry company books with a view a takeover bid.
The review began at close of business Friday and is expected to last 4 weeks.

Several pieces in The Examiner on 27/4/07 on the docklands. Theres a mention of the 2 new bridges to be included in the South Docklands strategy (due to be published next month), and this piece;

“A MAMMOTH hotel, office, retail and residential development, three times bigger than Croke Park, will Be the largest construction project of its kind ever under taken in Cork once planning permission is secured.The docklands development plans, which include a 200-bedroomed hotel, will be submitted in July for approval.

The docklands has potential for seven million sq ft of non-residential development and for 10,000 units of residential development providing for a resident population of 20,000 and 25,000 jobs. The ambitious project, earmarked for a docklands site adjacent to Pairc Ui Chaoimh, is a joint venture proposal between property developers Howard Holdings and Tedcastle Group landowners.

The entire development covers 2.3 million sq ft a size equal to three times that of the GAA’s Croke Park in Dublin.”

Anybody got pics or a map?

How I miss Lexington …

Original plans :rolleyes:

Come on lads, conference centre.

Presumably it’s the attached, taken from

http://www.howardpropertyplc.com/hh/index2.htm

Bigger version:

@kite wrote:

@Aidan wrote:

Several pieces in The Examiner on 27/4/07 on the docklands. Theres a mention of the 2 new bridges to be included in the South Docklands strategy (due to be published next month), and this piece]

Joe Gavin going off on a solo run again, Councillors have told the Manager that they will not support bridges (even swing bridges etc) in the lower river as they want to maximize the potential of the river to the city.
Hope this will not end up being another spanner in the works that will cause a delay?

What does ‘maximise the potential of the river to the city’ entail? The design looks nice

@CasaNova wrote:

@kite wrote:

What does ‘maximise the potential of the river to the city’ entail? The design looks nice

Councillors are of the opinion that further restrictions to ships entering the city proper should not be put in place.(not even swing bridges etc.)

Looks ok, but …. where that new internal marina is showing by PuC, isn’t that where there’s a bloody big power station at the moment? Plus can you really see any of the Cork Developers digging up and flooding development land …. I’d love to see it, but history would tend to indicate that they’ll max out all the available land

@CasaNova wrote:

@kite wrote:

What does ‘maximise the potential of the river to the city’ entail? The design looks nice

Ah the “River” that ignored stretch or waterways that defines Cork city ignored by planners and developers alike.
See Merchants Quay and North Main St Shopping centres,Port of Cork Buildings behind the custom house falling down as their yards are used as a car park.No pavements,Seating,Trees at Georges Quay and Batchelors Quay amongst others,Cars parked right up to the Quay at the School of Commerce,dilapadated lighting at Patricks bridge,rotten balustrading and handrails,
The potential for Cork is the south facing stretch in front of the Clarion Hotel etc. compared to the mess in front of the Lapps Quay development.

Should we send the councillors on a few junkets to Bruge,Amsterdam or Hamburg to show them how a river(s) through a city centre works ?

@Spinal Tap wrote:

@CasaNova wrote:

Ah the “River” that ignored stretch or waterways that defines Cork city ignored by planners and developers alike.
See Merchants Quay and North Main St Shopping centres,Port of Cork Buildings behind the custom house falling down as their yards are used as a car park.No pavements,Seating,Trees at Georges Quay and Batchelors Quay amongst others,Cars parked right up to the Quay at the School of Commerce,dilapadated lighting at Patricks bridge,rotten balustrading and handrails,
The potential for Cork is the south facing stretch in front of the Clarion Hotel etc. compared to the mess in front of the Lapps Quay development.

Should we send the councillors on a few junkets to Bruge,Amsterdam or Hamburg to show them how a river(s) through a city centre works ?

I fear that would not be economic expenditure. Some are beyond instruction of even the most basic kind!

Northgate Vehicle Hire (UK) were granted cinditional permission by CCC for
a) demolition of existing structure and
b) a 3 yr temporary planning permission for construction of storage building and renovation of existing offices at the former Maxol storage facility, Centre Park Road, Cork City, with change of use from storage to van hire depot.

Anyone any thoughts as to why this would be granted? I’m not against it, just curious as to why a temporary planning permission would be given for the construction of a building.

And also why it would be granted if the CCC want to get started on the redevelopment of the area with landmark buildings etc. Maybe the building is only small, I dont know.

@Pug wrote:

Northgate Vehicle Hire (UK) were granted cinditional permission by CCC for
a) demolition of existing structure and
b) a 3 yr temporary planning permission for construction of storage building and renovation of existing offices at the former Maxol storage facility, Centre Park Road, Cork City, with change of use from storage to van hire depot.

Anyone any thoughts as to why this would be granted? I’m not against it, just curious as to why a temporary planning permission would be given for the construction of a building.

And also why it would be granted if the CCC want to get started on the redevelopment of the area with landmark buildings etc. Maybe the building is only small, I dont know.

I am as confused by this permission as you seem to be Pug.
Joe Gavin made sure that “low value” businesses such as windscreen shops, car alarm installers etc moved from Albert Quay to encourage redevelopment of the area.
Seems strange that he would expect submissions for blue chip development from stakeholders in the vicinity of what in effect is a service yard.
More dockland delays perhaps?

Address by Joe Gavin, Cork City Manager at Cork Chamber of Commerce breakfast briefing, 26th April, 2007

The Docklands
The Docklands comprises 400 acres of land with four kilometres of waterfront all within a 20 minute walk from City Hall. The overall vision for the regenerated Docklands was set out in the Docklands Strategy Study commissioned by the Council. It proposed a vibrant mixed use quarter developed to the highest standards and to be in effect an easterly extension of the city centre. There is potential for seven million sq.ft. of non residential development and for 10,000 units of residential development. This would provide for a resident population of 20,000 and provide for 25,000 jobs.
Since the strategic vision was launched in 2002, significant interest has been generated in the Docklands area.
This interest has seen property values in the Docklands rocket in the past five years. Development sites have been assembled by the private sector and property owners are actively looking at ways of developing their lands.
I set up a team which is headed up by Pat Ledwidge, Director of Services, to specifically facilitate and support the redevelopment of the Docklands. Pat and his team have been working in close consultation with all stakeholders in preparing a masterplan and in identifying measures which need to be taken. A committee of City Council has been established to help with policy development.
Achievements to date include:
• Local Area Plans
The North Docks Local Area Plan was completed in late 2005.
• Cork Docklands Economic Study
The Cork Docklands Economic Study was completed in December 2006. It provides an overview of the economic potential of the Cork Docklands and indicates how this project will assist in the achievement of local, regional and national objectives. This study also identifies targets for Foreign Direct Investment and other opportunities in the residential, commercial and tourism/leisure areas.
• Showgrounds C.P.O.
The C.P.O. on the Cork Showgrounds and adjacent lands was confirmed by An Bord Pleanála on February 10th, 2007. The City Council will commence detailed planning of Marina Park shortly and plan to take possession of these lands in late 2007.
• Contaminated Lands Study
The study has now been completed. The contamination levels are such that they can be dealt with in a reasonable manner.
• Business and Implementation Plan
One of the Economic Study recommendations was the preparation of a Business and Implementation Plan for Docklands. Work on this plan has commenced and Deloitte has been appointed to assist in its preparation.
• Stakeholders
A number of Stakeholder groups have been established over the past year. These consist of:
• Major Landowners/Developers
• General Stakeholders
• Publicly funded Service Providers
• Arts and Culture Interest
In addition contact is maintained with Government Departments and Public Agencies.
• Cork Docklands National Forum
An Taoiseach recently announced the establishment of the Cork Docklands National Forum. This body will co-ordinate responses at Government Department level to issues arising from the development of the Cork Docklands and support Cork City Council in the implementation of its plans.
This approach was recommended in the Cork Docklands Economic Study.
• Funding
The process of identifying key projects that will benefit from funding by the National Development Plan 2006-2013 has commenced. Funding needs will be clarified when the South Dock Local Area Plan is published.
The priority projects to be funded by the Gateway Fund will be set out once the relevant procedures are issued by the Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government.
• Designation
In October 2006 the European Union allowed the application of State Aid to companies setting up in Cork Docklands following a submission by the Irish Government which was based on a proposal prepared by Cork City Council.
This may apply to all companies up to the end of 2008 and to small and medium size enterprises (less than 250 employees) to the end of 2013.
• Tidal Flooding Study – Lee Catchment Flood Risk and Management Study (Lee CFRAM)
This study is progressing and the consultants have been focusing on the issues for Docklands.
• Water Street Bridge
A feasibility study has been prepared for Water Street Bridge.
The Local Area Plan for the South Docklands will be ready for publication next month. This will set out clear guidelines for the nature of development to be permitted and will identify public infrastructure requirements including social infrastructure such as schools. This plan will indicate the need for two new bridges – one at Water Street and the second at the Skew Bridge connecting the Docklands to Lower Glanmire Road. We have taken a policy decision that both bridges will be opening bridges to ensure that the maritime access to the heart of the city continues. Future maritime traffic, as the main port activities relocate, may be leisure related but it is considered important that the harbour which adds so much to the heritage and character of Cork is maintained intact.
New development in the Docklands area to date include the Clarion Hotel and office development at Lapp’s Quay, the Webworks at Albert Quay and office development on Monahan Road which houses CITCO. While there is need to provide significant infrastructure to service the regeneration of the Docklands there are large areas available for immediate development fully serviced with infrastructure. These lands include the former timber yard at Water Street which has planning permission for 212 apartments.
They include Horgan’s Quay and Kent Station where there is potential for significant residential and mixed development. At Albert Quay there are significant sites which can be immediately developed.
As we move into the heart of the Docklands there are again large tracts which can be developed and need not wait for the provision of further infrastructure.
At the eastern end of the Docklands in the vicinity of Páirc Uí Chaoimh there are 30 acres of land. Two ownerships are involved. They have come together in a joint venture and have a target of lodging a planning application for development by July. Their development proposals include for office, residential and retail development and a 200 bedroom hotel.
The development planned extends to 2.3 million sq.ft. and will represent the single largest development in the city. They plan to commence construction work once planning permission is secured. This joint venture project involving Howard Holdings and Tedcastles is about showing initiative, vision, creativity, risk-taking and making things happen. The City Council has plans to develop the adjacent Showgrounds comprising 22 acres into Marina Park which will be a major recreation resource for the entire city.
A number of particular activities in the Docklands will require to be relocated in the future if the full potential of the Docklands is to be realised. These include 3 SEVESO sites. It is the intention of the City Council to seek the application of a special tax incentive package to encourage and facilitate the re-location of these activities.
Attracting third-level educational establishments to the Docklands is regarded as important and again the City Council will seek support from Government either by way of direct funding or tax incentive to encourage such development.
In addition to the development of the Showgrounds we see the provision of a new bridge as being an important catalyst for Docklands regeneration. We would like to see major private sector involvement and funding on the bridge project to which we will give high priority.
The vast bulk of land in the Docklands is owned by the private sector and as such private sector investment is central to the development of the Docklands.
These lands are held by a small number of owners and it is important that there should be co-operation between them to ensure co-ordinated development. I am very pleased with the level of involvement and co-operation which has been shown by all of the land owners so far.
The City Council for its part has set out a clear planning framework, it has commissioned various studies which will be available to developers, it will secure the provision of necessary public infrastructure and it will champion and support the Docklands regeneration. As a planning authority, a housing authority, a roads authority and a sanitary authority the City Council is in a position to contribute in a major way to the successful redevelopment of Cork’s Docklands.
The involvement of the I.D.A. and Enterprise Ireland will be critical in assisting with the attraction of employment opportunities to the Docklands to meet the target of 25,000 jobs.
Over the past five years we have seen the centre of our city transformed. Over the next five years the regeneration of our Docklands will take centre stage. This most exciting project will take ten to fifteen years to complete and will require the full support of the City Council, the Private Sector, the Government and relevant State Departments and Agencies.
We can look forward with confidence to a new era of development in the life of the city as we roll out the regeneration of our Docklands.

11 May 2007

Origin Enterprises set to submit docklands redevelopment plan

By Niamh Hennessy
A MULTI-million euro plan for a major retail and residential development in a key location on Cork city’s docklands will soon be submitted to Cork City Council.

Origin Enterprises, a subsidiary of convenience food group IAWS, owns a 30-acre site worth an estimated €180 million on the south-side of the docklands. The area in question is about twice the size of the Dundrum shopping centre in Dublin.

By August the company will have submitted plans for the development of a key location — the frontage of its animal feed company R&H Hall — on Albert Road Origin chief executive Tom O’Mahony confirmed last night. He said the plans are for a mixture of residential and retail development.

“We are working very closely with Cork City Council who have been wonderful in helping to push the docklands development forward.

“To drive the development on we are waiting for the publication of the Local Area Plan, which will determine everything we need to know.”

Last year Origin submitted a master plan to Cork City Council, outlining the company’s vision for the docklands. They are also working closely on developments with architects and other landowners.

Once they have seen the South Docs Local Area Plan (LAP), Origin will make a decision about the relocation of their business, which they say is key to driving the project on.

“We would certainly have a target of relocating our activities over a three to five year period,” said Mr O’Mahony.

The delayed South Docks LAP was expected to come before Cork City Council on Monday but officials have decided to wait until after the General Election for its publication.

The South Docks LAP is a crucial part of the overall docklands redevelopment and will include residential, commercial and educational aspects.

It includes the stretch of docklands from the Atlantic Pond to Albert Street.

Last week IAWS listed its Origin subsidiary on the IEX market in Dublin and the AIM in London.

[ATTACH]4818[/ATTACH]

Proposed water street bridge.I Like it alot.Think its a unique looking design should get the go ahead.

I presume thats a raising bridge or the boat is trapped 😀

TBH Im not keen on it. Looks like a giant seagull.

@THE_Chris wrote:

I presume thats a raising bridge or the boat is trapped 😀

TBH Im not keen on it. Looks like a giant seagull.

It looks like its a rotating both sides on those black shaped supports on either side above the waterline.
Its poor enough IMO.

It looks like something from the Early Learning Centre 😮

Jesus, it is just desperate.

Looks like it has collapsed

Surely its just a design study/provocative image just to attract attention, and they’d have to get an architect to design the actual bridge?

@PVC King wrote:

It looks like something from the Early Learning Centre 😮

:rolleyes: Just Joe Gavin going off on a solo run AGAIN, Councillors have told him that we do not want access to the city restricted. Will he listen?

@kite wrote:

:rolleyes: Just Joe Gavin going off on a solo run AGAIN, Councillors have told him that we do not want access to the city restricted. Will he listen?

to be fair i dont think he wants it restricted, isnt the plan that the bridge be moveable / raisable to allow access to the harbour

You gotta have a new bridge there somewhere…… but it has to be risable or rotating etc. Not a huge number of ships come up there anyway, but they have to keep the waterway open in this way.

@THE_Chris wrote:

You gotta have a new bridge there somewhere…… but it has to be risable or rotating etc. Not a huge number of ships come up there anyway, but they have to keep the waterway open in this way.

Once Port of Cork, move essentially all commercial traffic will move to Ringaskiddy, vessels loading/discharging will not need to go upriver so far.

However one still may get smaller Cruise vessels, courtesy visits by Naval vessels, training ships etc. so
would think that there will always be some need to gain access to these section of quay where one has
deep/usuable berths.

Take the Toll Bridge in Dublin, the bulk of traffic is down river on Alexandra Road etc. but you still do see a small amount of traffic going upriver, be they masted pleasure craft or anything with the airdraught that neccessiates a bridge lift.

In longterm for the city, albeit for more Tourism related traffic it would be unwise to have the Cork upriver quays un-navigable.

@samuel j wrote:

Once Port of Cork, move essentially all commercial traffic will move to Ringaskiddy, vessels loading/discharging will not need to go upriver so far.

However one still may get smaller Cruise vessels, courtesy visits by Naval vessels, training ships etc. so
would think that there will always be some need to gain access to these section of quay where one has
deep/usuable berths.

Take the Toll Bridge in Dublin, the bulk of traffic is down river on Alexandra Road etc. but you still do see a small amount of traffic going upriver, be they masted pleasure craft or anything with the airdraught that neccessiates a bridge lift.

In longterm for the city, albeit for more Tourism related traffic it would be unwise to have the Cork upriver quays un-navigable.

Well the can only go as far as the Custom House anyway.

Any plans to replace the Bruian Boru & Clontarf WW2 temporary bridges with their rotting superstructure.

They are looking really bad these days.

Yeah I hate those, need to be fixed.

Were they only temporary? Whats the story behind them?

@Spinal Tap wrote:

Well the can only go as far as the Custom House anyway.

True, you probably notice (not many mind) occasional courtesy visits by foreign navies, odd small cruise liner and Tall Ships of various nationalities, be they training ships or partial cruises, usually berth on Custom house quays or as close to the city as possible. Many of these types of craft are open to the public for visits/tours so it is really a decision as to whether Cork in general wants to keep this facilty or whether the limited amout of tourism related tonnage if I can call it that, warrants the expense and maintenance of a swing or lift bridge arrangement.

What you won’t see is the Rig supply vessel or bulk cargo vessels are we do now and the associated trucks loading/discharging once all moves to Ringsakiddy.

Many ports around the world have kept the option though of being able to bring lets say scenic vessels
close to town but as I say its at a cost and ongoing maintenance.

The state of the Bridges you mention would give one concern as to how we might see any new swing/lift bridge in 50 years…..

I think they should keep the touristy boat visits. Is cool to visit a ship there occasionally, and is nice to see various navy ships right next to the road.

Yeah, I remember when a dutch submarine pulled up there about 18 months ago. I asked if I could board and have a look around, but to no avail.

Does that bridge look like a Shinto gate after collapsing to anyone?

@PTB wrote:

Yeah, I remember when a dutch submarine pulled up there about 18 months ago. I asked if I could board and have a look around, but to no avail.

Does that bridge look like a Shinto gate after collapsing to anyone?

It does……:D

Sub – probably above top secret…….:D 😀 or so they want to believe… nah maybe just their tea time…:p

As per the Examiner, more movement on the Docklands, Port of Cork expect to lodge an application to redevelop Ringaskiddy very soon and move their entire Tivoli operation down there. I imagine local residents will observe closely. This will free up 35 acres at Tivoli.

This is to add to the plans by IAWS to lodge an application for the riverfront at the R&H Hall site in/around August and Howard Holdings expect to lodge an application for a site adjacent to Pairc Ui Chaoimh over the summer as well.

The burst of applications would lead one to believe that these developers/parties have seen the final South docks Masterplan. This was due to be shown to councillors for approval but it was delayed until the election was over and probably will be further delayed until the new councillors to replace the TD’s are appointed – (go on democracy, looking forward to see which councillors are appointed that we didnt get a chance to vote for) so it shouldnt take that long. I might be cynical but I expect when its published, the general public will be the final group of people to lay eyes on it.

Now if the country was well planned, the council would buy up freed land at Tivoli and stick a P&R in there.

Maybe a multi-storey next to the rail line, but even that far out, ground-level parking would be a scandalous use of the site.

Now remind me, do we need a site for a conference centre that is located close to the rail line, has easy access to the city’s ring road network and is within walking distance (just about:rolleyes: ) of the city centre…

@jungle wrote:

Maybe a multi-storey next to the rail line, but even that far out, ground-level parking would be a scandalous use of the site.

Now remind me, do we need a site for a conference centre that is located close to the rail line, has easy access to the city’s ring road network and is within walking distance (just about:rolleyes: ) of the city centre…

ah! indeed, well spotted. Would be good then to put a pedestrian bridge from there over to the other side of the river leading to the large 5 star hotel adjacent to the brand new 35,000 seater multi sports discipline / concert venue formerly known as Pairc Ui Chaoimh (now known as Roy Keane Stadium).

@Pug wrote:

ah! indeed, well spotted. Would be good then to put a pedestrian bridge from there over to the other side of the river leading to the large 5 star hotel adjacent to the brand new 35,000 seater multi sports discipline / concert venue formerly known as Pairc Ui Chaoimh (now known as Roy Keane Stadium).

Are you organising the hit on Frank Murphy or am I! (only joking, sort of)

@Pug wrote:

go on democracy, looking forward to see which councillors are appointed that we didnt get a chance to vote for .

Digressing from property slightly to prove my point

PJ Sheehans son wants to be appointed as a councillor
Michael McGraths brother Seamus apparently wants to be one and
one of Christy O Sullivans relatives is tipped

never heard of any of them, i think its an appaling rule that they can just get parachuted in

@Pug wrote:

Digressing from property slightly to prove my point

PJ Sheehans son wants to be appointed as a councillor
Michael McGraths brother Seamus apparently wants to be one and
one of Christy O Sullivans relatives is tipped

never heard of any of them, i think its an appaling rule that they can just get parachuted in

I can understand the reason for it. The response to a bye-election for a local authority seat is likely to be a very low turnout.

However, I think the system should be like the European elections in that your replacement should be nominated at the time you run. At least that way they have some kind of mandate.

@jungle wrote:

I can understand the reason for it. The response to a bye-election for a local authority seat is likely to be a very low turnout.

However, I think the system should be like the European elections in that your replacement should be nominated at the time you run. At least that way they have some kind of mandate.

😮 Councillors “hand picked” so they would not be a threat to mammy or daddy’s seat in the Dail. Any wonder the Cork Docklands etc is going nowhere fast with that caliber of local representation?

I know I’m a broken record on this but this HAS to become a municipal stadium. I’m not saying the GAA should part with it cheaply – they should be properly compensated – but it should then be a municipal stadium which all the various sporting bodies / clubs should lease. And don’t give me the economic arguments against it until we’ve at least done a proper analysis. Suffice it to say I think it could be run at a profit once concerts, hotels etc are thrown into the sporting mix (70% of Croke Park’s revenue is non match day related).

There is an article in today’s Examiner where Sean Kelly (now of the Irish Sports Council) talks of Ireland hosting sporting events like the Rugby WC or the European Championships in Football in the next 10 yrs. He lists as venues Croke Park, Landsdowne, Maze site in Belfast, Abbotstown (eh?) and Thomand Pk. The fact that Cork, Ireland’s most sporting county (both in terms of interest and success – about 50% of the country’s greatest sports people are/were rebels inc 4 of the first 5 in an RTE poll at the millenium) doesn’t get a mention (for obvious reasons) is a disgrace. I see the City Council gave Frank Murphy an award last month – any chance they could now call in a favour from the Great One?

Ciaran Lynch of Labour proposed a Motion last January calling for a study into the feasability of a municipal stadium. I know Ciaran has moved onto bigger and better things but this Motion needs to be followed up. Anyone any idea where it is at? I’ve e-mailed Ciaran Lynch already asking him to see that his co-opted successor doesn’t lose sight of this issue.

Finally that Examiner article for those interested is as follows:

“Kelly: bring on the big games

IRELAND could host, or co-host, events such as the Rugby World Cup or a European Soccer Championships within the next decade, according to executive chairman of the Irish Institute of Sports, Sean Kelly.

The former GAA president believes that developing sports infrastructure north and south, a mild climate and an improving transport system makes Ireland the ideal location for such showpiece events.

He explained: “We are getting the infrastructures in place. Stadium-wise, we will have the new Lansdowne Road, a stadium at Abbotstown and a possible new development in the Maze in Belfast.

“We also will have a revamped Thomond Park, and the possibility of using Croke Park for other sports, depending on the GAA’s attitude post 2009.

“These are all modern state-of-the-art projects capable of hosting top international events. The key is to have two grounds to take the major games while the other grounds can take lesser matches.

“Given the number of airlines and airports now in existence, the issue of co hosting an event could also be explored.”

Mr Kelly doesn’t see any issues with venues like Thomond Park hosting a soccer game should the need arise.

“Rugby never had a problem with soccer. After all, Lansdowne Road is a rugby stadium first and foremost and then it opened to soccer.

“There were plenty of rugby grounds around the country who opened their doors to GAA clubs when they were in trouble.”

Despite the costs of hosting such events, Mr Kelly is convinced that such tournaments offer a win-win situation for Irish sports and the economy.

“There is massive publicity to be gained from a tourism perspective — just think back to the Ryder Cup.

“Then you have all the hotels, shops and businesses that would benefit. And don’t forget the exposure that the sports themselves would get.”

Mr Kelly continued: “We should be targeting something like this as a long-term strategy. The Department of Sports has a committee set up to look at the knock-on benefits of the Olympics Games in London in 2012 and how we can cash in on it.

“They are planning to get teams to come here on training camps and then try to extend their stays. We as a country are starting to look outwards.

“That committee is a first step in that direction. There are other possibilities like sending some out to France to the Rugby World Cup to make contacts and gain more information about what is required to host a major sporting event.” “

It would be a bit of a disgrace if the second city of Ireland was left out of such a competition.

I remember back to the time when ireland bid with Scotland for the Euro 2008. It was a bit silly considering that the only stadiums offered by Ireland were in Dublin. Also none of the Irish stadia were actually confirmed at the time. Croke Park was not open for soccer at the time. The new Landsdowne was only at the very start of an uncertain building process. Abbotstown was a grandiose pipe dream.

Twould be great to see intermnational matches being played in Cork. And the concerts we could have! U2, Killers, Chris De Burgh, Big Tom – all selling out. Please God I’ll live to see the day.

@browser wrote:

Ciaran Lynch of Labour proposed a Motion last January calling for a study into the feasability of a municipal stadium. I know Ciaran has moved onto bigger and better things but this Motion needs to be followed up. Anyone any idea where it is at? I’ve e-mailed Ciaran Lynch already asking him to see that his co-opted successor doesn’t lose sight of this issue.

“

Ciaran’s Motion 13.19; “That Council will undertake a study to explore the feasibility of building a Municipal Stadium in Cork City which would accommodate various sporting bodies & organisations” (07/032) has gone to the Recreation Amenity and Culture Committee.

Report in today’s Examiner regarding the Docklands. It might be a good idea if the journalist actually went to Manhattan to check out their skyline before making the somewhat pretentious claim that Cork is about to replicate it. Really, where do they get these notions :rolleyes:

Cork’s docklands eyes a Manhattan skyline

By Eoin English, 08 June 2007
AN iconic tower up to 22 storeys high is one of four soaring landmark buildings proposed in a blueprint that will transform Cork’s south docks into one of Europe’s top waterfront urban quarters.

If built tomorrow, the structure, which has been given the name Iconis Tower as a working title, would be the tallest building in Ireland. A site at the Marina has been identified for it. The other towers have been earmarked for sites on:

Centre Park Road.
Kennedy Road.
The South Docks Quayside.

Together, they would attract international attention to the rejuvenated docks, which will have a Manhattan skyline-style design.

The tower plans are among dozens of exciting recommendations in the long-awaited draft south docks local area plan (LAP) , compiled by consultants Brady Shipman Martin. It will be presented to city councillors on Monday.

It provides the framework for the multi-billion-euro regeneration of the south docks into a high-density urban quarter over the next two decades.

With a LAP already in place for the north docks area, this is the final piece in the jigsaw to guide the redevelopment of the entire docklands region.

The south docks LAP sets a target population of 20,000 and a working population of 25,000 in the area by 2027.

Up to 10,000 homes will be built, which is two-and-a-half times the size of the city’s island area. Most will be built with their main aspects facing south to capitalise on solar energy.

The LAP sets out detailed guidelines for the style and type of apartments. “Confetti-type” residential design, which expresses building uses, will be encouraged. City planners want 30% of the apartments set aside as family units, with a minimum floor area of 90 square metres, 15% set aside for one bedroom units, and 20% of zoned land set aside for part five social and affordable housing.

Between 10% and 14% of space will be set aside for public open space, parks and a boardwalk.

Tens of thousands of square feet of office space, a third-level campus, one secondary and two primary schools, medical facilities, and childcare facilities are also proposed.

The plan calls for preservation plans for the Ford’s complex and the Customs House Quay area.

The Bonded Warehouse building could be converted for interactive uses like galleries, shops and cafes.

And the Odlum’s Building on the south docks should be developed as a flagship cultural project.

At least two bridges should be built — one near the Skew Bridge and one at Water Street — to link the study area to the north docks. A third bridge at Mill Road is under consideration.

Flood protection measures, including raising ground levels, and an early warning system, will be needed to protect the flood-prone area.

However, three Seveso sites (where hazardous material is stored) could affect redevelopment in certain areas, the plan warns.

Topaz Energy, the National Oil Reserves Agency, and Gouldings Fertilizers — all of which have exclusion zones — will prevent the development of high-density housing.

“Their relocation is to be encouraged,” the plan says.

The Port of Cork’s activities will also have to be moved downstream.

Cllr Damian Wallace (FF), chairman of the council’s Docklands Policy Committee, welcomed the LAP.

“Our next task is to prepare a business implementation plan to ensure it can be delivered,” he said.

“Almost €406 million will be needed to deliver key infrastructure. The council is hopeful that a lot of this will be recouped from development charges.”

Cllr Dara Murphy (FG) also welcomed changes suggested to make the bridges open span to ensure boat access up to the city centre.

“This development will change the focus of our city. Now it’s over to the private sector to play their part and come forward with proposals,” he said.

Well, to be honest, it would take a very, very brave developer now to take on a big docklands project in the current property market; with no residential facilities in the docklands, and with the Eglington St. project about to dump dozens of apartments onto the market in a year’s time in a much more favourable location.

Has anyone actually seen this plan? Does it offer anything new at all other than hackneyed phrases and suggestions?

well the Examiner has obviously seen it, if I were a local councillor I wouldnt be thrilled with that in the first place

Much seems to be stating the already stated, Seveso sites need to be moved, possibilituy of landmark towers, what worries me is Damien Wallace coming out with how they now need to have a business implementation plan. How long will that take? why hasnt it been done all the way along? The CCC must have a fair idea of what they want to build there, the only variable is what developers want to build there.

Hopefully the plan states how they actually plan to move the Seveso sites, what resources it will take, how long, what cost and then they go and do it.

I’m not sure about keeping Fords, maybe something about industrial heritage but a waterfront site with the possibility of putting a cafe/restaurant/amenity development there? would be a waste leaving those warehouses there in my opinion. Custom house quays and bonded warehouses certainly should be kept.

South Docks Local Area Plan (Draft, June 2007)

5.3 With regard to ground contamination, landowners are responsible for remediation of their own sites. The above study was only an overview of the situation, to present a scale of the problem and potential solutions. It does not exonerate developers from detailed ground contamination of each site. It will be necessary for each landowner to undertake further detailed studies of their sites, assisted by the findings of the Ground Contamination Report. Remediation will likely take place on a site-by-site basis and collaboration between developers would provide benefits of scale, but will be for each developer to decide.
The detailed study of each site, setting out solutions to ground contamination, will need to be submitted with planning submissions and approval received from Cork City Council.
A potential solution identified in many cases is for filling the site, which also facilitates flood protection and surface water drainage through the raising of ground levels, as identified in Section 4 of this Strategy. Given the potential volumes of fill combined with the possible remediation process which may require licensing by the EPA, it is the view of the EPA that filling and / or excavation and disposal, or on site treatment be controlled and licensed by Cork City Council.

The estimated overall cost of remediation of contaminated ground in the South Docks area is €50 million.

The full report on ground contamination is fairly long, I can post it, or any other section if anybody is interested?

@kite wrote:

South Docks Local Area Plan (Draft, June 2007)

5.3 With regard to ground contamination, landowners are responsible for remediation of their own sites. ?

ok – so CCC could surely hint strongly that no planning to be granted to the landowners on any other sites they own in the docklands until they lodge a satisfactory application to start moving the sites? I mean, the CCC arent going to grant planning for anything other than clean up to those sites anyway so why should they affect the landowners around them?

@Pug wrote:

ok – so CCC could surely hint strongly that no planning to be granted to the landowners on any other sites they own in the docklands until they lodge a satisfactory application to start moving the sites? I mean, the CCC arent going to grant planning for anything other than clean up to those sites anyway so why should they affect the landowners around them?

A clay layer forms the upper natural layer in the South Docks. The area has been raised since the 19th century, first with sludge/dredging material from the River Lee and also with waste and rubble after industrialization in the beginning of the 19th century.

In general the strata in the South Docks are as follows:
• Pavement 0.2 m;
• Fill, a mixture of rubble and clay, 0.5 up to 4 m;
• Clay until 3-5 mbgl, in the Showgrounds until 6.5 mbgl;
• Gravel aquifer, with a depth of more than 25 m in the central part of the South Docks.

Tidal fluctuations in the aquifer result in a 1.5 m difference in groundwater level between high and low tide. Average groundwater flow is perpendicular on the River Lee, dropping around 0.5 m from the southern border down to the River. A hydrogeological model has been prepared which may serve as a basis or tool for several activities including remedial action design, urban water management plans and abstraction calculations for construction works.

The fill layer throughout the South Docks was found to contain contaminants in varying concentrations, often above DIV This is partly due to the use of contaminated materials for level raising and the industrial history of the area (car and tyre manufacturing, electricity production, fuel storage and transshipment). Contaminants that have been detected above DIV include lead, copper, zinc, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, polcyclic aromatics (PAH), and mineral oil. Lead and high PAH concentrations may involve health risks where humans have direct contact with the fill (e.g. gardens).

The most cost-effective method to treat this contamination is to cover the soil with 1 m clean soil, as full cleaning of the fill will be expensive due to its mixed structure. Removal of the fill down to 1m and its replacement with clean material is also acceptable.

Seven zones (in total 8 hectares) in the South Docks are considerably contaminated with oil, mainly in the fill layer. The total polluted volume is estimated to be 105,000m3. The contamination in these zones is generally related to (bulk) fuel storage and transshipment activities. Although oil polluted groundwater was found locally, the aquifer is not significantly affected, as it is isolated from the pollution by a (generally) thick clay layer.

Where this clay layer is thin or absent, adequate measures should be taken. Excavation of the entire fill layer in this instance and its replacement by clean clay of at least 1m is recommended. The clay layer must be repaired where it has been perforated.

Four spots with elevated concentrations (>Dutch Intervention Value DIV) of dichloroethene and/or vinyl chloride have been identified: in the Marina, at the border of Shell/Free Foam, at NORA and at the Ford Vehicle Distribution Centre (Ford VDC). Generally concentrations of these substances above DIV involve health risks in buildings with ground floors, unless ground membranes are introduced in the floor slabs. Likely significant contaminant sources are present in the soil (fill and clay).

Biodegradation assessment and groundwater modeling indicate that where no action is taken, vinyl chloride concentrations in the aquifer would drop below DIV within 21 years. In the clay layer vinal chloride would still exceed DIV after 30 years. Excavation of the pollution source would accelerate sufficient breakdown in the aquifer to 8 years (combined with biological stimulation, breakdown may be reduced to 1 year). A cost efficient method to reduce breakdown time is to ‘pump and treat (in combination with excavation of the source), which would lead to a drop below DIV within 2 years.

VCH contamination is identified as the most hazardous element, demanding further investigation. Attention should be paid to possible VCH contamination below existing buildings and below vulnerable parts in the sewerage system. It may not be necessary or cost effective to remediate all contamination. The preparation of a land management plan is recommended to ensure optimum remediation solutions are identified and implemented.

Here is my prediction for what its worth.
If FF and the Greens go into Government together then it will be RIP to the Cork Docklands redevelopment.
The FF attitude of “the developer knows best” will not wash with the Greens. They will not / cannot allow any form of development (especially residential) on contaminated grounds by hiding the heavy metals etc. under a 1 metre layer of moss peat.

Remember Southpark in Galway?
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0605/primetime_av.html?2255962,null,230

Cork docks could be a hundred times worse.

The docklands can be cleaned up though and it’s better to deal with it now than have the problem come back and bite us later.

In theory, a high density brownfield site should be exactly the type of development the Greens like, although I can’t help but notice that most greens I know live in rural areas and drive gas-guzzlers.

Regardless, it looks like they won’t be in government anyway.

I wonder if we have the same problem out at the pitches on the Carrigrohane Straight?

@jungle wrote:

The docklands can be cleaned up though and it’s better to deal with it now than have the problem come back and bite us later.

In theory, a high density brownfield site should be exactly the type of development the Greens like, although I can’t help but notice that most greens I know live in rural areas and drive gas-guzzlers.

Regardless, it looks like they won’t be in government anyway.

I wonder if we have the same problem out at the pitches on the Carrigrohane Straight?

That is the problem jungle, the draft report hints at hiding the contamination instead of dealing with the issue, a shortsighted answer that will as you mention, “come back to bite us”
The same problem albeit on a much smaller scale exists on the site of the former landfill site on the Carrigrohane Road. However if litigation were to raise its ugly head there it would not be much of a problem to move a few pitches and our traveler cousins to a safer site.
No easy solution if we turn a blind eye to the dangers in the Billion Euro Docklands redevelopment.

Anyway I think it may be a little academic to speak of Docklands redevelopment at this point as after 7 years of junkets, millions spent on report after report, Port of Cork holding the city to ransom, the latest Brady Shipman Martin draft / report states that;

“Some existing land-uses, e.g. the oil storage facilities and the electricity generating station, may be expected to remain in the area for a considerable time to come and this may place a constraint on the scale, form, location and type of future development”

This statement along with the fact that designation as a Seveso site, means that some restrictions apply to proposed land uses in the surrounding area, as identified by the HSA. While each site will incur differing restrictions, generally, the closer a proposed development is located to a Seveso site, the more land use occupation and density restrictions will apply. New developments will be referred to the HSA within the following distances from a Seveso site:
• Topaz Energy Ltd Site 400m referral boundary
• NORA Slte:300m referral boundary
• Gouldings Fertiliser Site:700m referral boundary and HSA land use zones
High-density residential development is normally not permitted in areas immediately adjoining Seveso sites.

As these sites themselves are considerable in size, particularly the Gouldings and ESB sites any development is likely to be piecemeal.
The only way around this problem again entails a long drawn out process of dealing with redevelopment on a “mini site” by “mini site” basis, where very limited amounts of contaminated soil can be removed from site without licence

I think Cork’s docklands are more likely to be contiminated in a similiar way to other docklands e.g Dublin etc. There was never any major use of heavy metals down there.
I’d suspect there could be big issues with hydrocarbons though on the former dunlop site and some of the fuel storage areas and the power station.

It was also never (as far as I know) used to dump material.

The major risk area for heavy metal contamination in Cork is the former Irish Steel / Irish Ispat site and possibly the Ship yard at Rushbrook too.

various people seem to have access to extracts of the new South Docklands Area Plan, would anyone have a link to it yet? I assume its not yet on general release.

@Pug wrote:

various people seem to have access to extracts of the new South Docklands Area Plan, would anyone have a link to it yet? I assume its not yet on general release.

The draft is quite large Pug, four sections;
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Infrastructure Stategy
Public Realm Strategy
Local Area Plan

If you need a part of a section posted, let me know.

Report in today’s Examiner re the Docklands.

Officials reveal plans for multi-billion regeneration of Cork’s south docks
By Eoin English
THOUSANDS of spacious luxury apartments aimed at families will be built in Cork’s multi-billion south docks regeneration project, city officials have revealed.

So-called ‘shoe-box’ apartments have been banned and city planners have set generous apartment floor-space guidelines for developers in a bid to attract families back to live in the city centre.

The guidelines are contained in the city’s ambitious draft south docks Local Area Plan (LAP) — a detailed development blueprint for the area which was agreed by city council on Monday.

It aims to transform the south docks into one of the most attractive urban waterfront quarters in Europe with thousands of residential apartments ranging in height from five to seven storeys, and including four soaring landmark towers — one of which will be 22 storeys high at the Marina.

The LAP wants to see the construction of 10,000 homes and apartments, has set a target population of 20,000 and a working population of 25,000 in the region by 2027.

To help achieve this, planners have set down guidelines for apartment sizes that are substantially bigger than the Government’s minimum requirements.

The apartments will range from one bedroom dwellings for two people, to four bedroom dwellings for seven people, with a range of options in between.

Pat Ledwidge, the director of the city council’s Docklands Directorate, said this move was designed to make the apartments more attractive for families.

“We felt that if we wanted to encourage families to live in the docklands, we needed to have adequate living quarters,” he said.

“The apartments will also have generous storage space which has often been a problem area for apartments in the past,” he said.

And two massive planning applications for sites in the docks are to be lodged within weeks.

Property developers Howard Holdings and landowners the Tedcastle Group are expected to seek planning permission in August for a joint project to transform 30 acres of land near Páirc Uí Chaoimh.

Their project for a site three times the size of Croke Park, includes offices, residential and retail developments and a 200-bedroom hotel.

its a great idea in fairness to put in the family size units – all they need to do now is move the seveso sites so the children wont be merrily playing with the local chemicals

http://www.corkcity.ie/docklands/planning/southdocks.shtml

link to the south docks plan, submissions to be made by 24 aug 2007, prob the one and only chance to have your say to the local council so get cracking! I’ll be mooting things like, start and finish the movement of kent station, integrate the intercity buses into that station, have integrated ticketing for all transport, have ferries collecting and dropping off up and down harbour pulling into monkstown, cobh, crosshaven,have half decent looking waterfront apartments etc etc

I know nothing of the costs of these things, but a budget of 130m for 3 new bridges over the Lee (especially if they’re designed to allow boating access to the dockland area) seems incredibly low to me.

Irish Examiner report re the Port of Cork’s container facilities moving from Tivoli. Anyone know if the vacated land will be designated industrial or residential?

Final plans for €160m port facility on display
By Eoin English

THE Port of Cork will unveil the final plans today for its massive €160 million container facility planned for Ringaskiddy. Port officials said last night that they have addressed several concerns about traffic, noise and visual impact which were raised by the public during the first round of public consultations last December.

They and representatives from their consultants, RPS Consulting Engineers, will outline later today several mitigation measures they intend to take to deal with those issues.

A draft Environmental Impact Statement on the massive project at Oyster Bank — which includes the reclamation of almost 18 hectares of land — will also be on display.

The massive project is being dealt with by the State’s Strategic Infrastructure Bill designed to fast-track major infrastructural projects.

Port officials are due to meet with that body within the coming weeks to finalise their planning application, which could be lodged within two months.

A final decision could be made by the middle of next year, depending on the outcome of public hearings.

The proposed new facility will replace the port’s city-based Tivoli Docks container facility.

With a capacity for 180,000 units, it handled 155,000 container units and port traffic is still growing.

The new container terminal, together with a multi-purpose roll on-roll off (Ro-Ro) berth, will be able to handle twice the volume of Tivoli.

Work is expected to be carried out in two phases — phase one will cater for 300,000 container units. Phase two will complete the facility allowing it to cater for 600,000 units.

The port also has plans to build a new €70m bulks facility at the nearby ADM jetty.

The plans for the port’s move downstream were first proposed in 2002, as part of the Port of Cork’s Strategic Development Plan.

Today’s public consultation sessions will take place at the Ringaskiddy Ferry Terminal between 11am and 2pm and again between 5pm and 8pm.

The E.S.B.Power Station is due be be shut down by 2010 and that site should also be up for re-development.

And if Tivoli is residential, will it be a designated ‘high rise’ area?

@who_me wrote:

And if Tivoli is residential, will it be a designated ‘high rise’ area?

Yes in Cork thats a maximum Height of 3-Stories !

quote from rte: The power generating stations at Great Island in Wexford, Poolbeg in Dublin and Tarbert in Kerry are to close. The steam turbine at Marina in Cork is also to close but the larger gas turbine there will remain open.

looks like that site is staying industrial for the forseeable future…

@d_d_dallas wrote:

quote from rte: The power generating stations at Great Island in Wexford, Poolbeg in Dublin and Tarbert in Kerry are to close. The steam turbine at Marina in Cork is also to close but the larger gas turbine there will remain open.

looks like that site is staying industrial for the forseeable future…

ESB to seek board approval for three plant closures

21/06/2007 – 8:02:04 AM

ESB management is to ask for approval from its board to close three power stations by the year 2010.

Among the stations earmarked for possible closure are Tarbert, Poolbeg, North Wall, Marina in Cork and Great Island in Wexford.

The move is part of deal with the Energy Regulator to bring fresh competition into the Irish energy market.

The agreement will also allow the ESB to build a new power station at Aghada in Cork.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

Yes in Cork thats a maximum Height of 3-Stories !

That’s cool. We have very tall stories in Cork.. 😉

I was looking at purchasing an apartment in the block on the hill behind Tivoli (they all feature great balconies overlooking what’s now the docks & river), but wondered how attractive they’d be if the container area was built up and blocked the view of the river. Little did I think it might happen so soon.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

Among the stations earmarked for possible closure are Tarbert, Poolbeg, North Wall, Marina in Cork and Great Island in Wexford.
.

as per the South Docks masterplan, the ESB wont be moving out of the MArina for the forseeable future

Navigation House up for sale through DTZ, 1 acre site, expected to get 15-20 million, OCP own the site next door

If they tore down the Aghada power plant instead of one of the others – its a magnificent site for a hotel.

@THE_Chris wrote:

If they tore down the Aghada power plant instead of one of the others – its a magnificent site for a hotel.

The Aghada plant has some nice buildings – I was down there for the first time recently.

The former IFI site would also make a great hotel & marina site.

The docklands is a massive opportunity for Cork as I have been down there a lot recently for some of the Marquee concerts.

A few ideas for the docklands:

http://ireland.archiseek.com/news/2007/000190.html

http://www.newislington.co.uk/tuttifrutti/

Has anyone heard about some plan to close the Mercy Hospital and South Infirmary and to house them in a new hospital to be built in the south docklands?

@jungle wrote:

Has anyone heard about some plan to close the Mercy Hospital and South Infirmary and to house them in a new hospital to be built in the south docklands?

There was something in the Irish Examiner a few weeks ago about same.

mazing seeing as how much money the HSE have spent/spending on the Mercy etc.

It would make sense as I am sure that UCC would love to expand into those buildings / sites etc.

24 July 2007

Howard Holdings wins city approval for event centre

By Eoin English
CORK CITY COUNCIL voted after an hour of secret talks last night to plough over €8 million of public money into Howard Holdings’ plans to build a €33 million conference centre in the docklands.
Councillors were asked to back a report from city manager Joe Gavin which recommended they support the company’s proposal, selected by a special city committee, to build the multi-purpose venue. However, they were unhappy with the amount of information they were given beforehand and they cleared City Hall’s public gallery. The media was also asked to leave.
They then quizzed Mr Gavin for an hour-and-a-half on the process which led to the selection of the Howard Holdings proposal, and on the details of the project, before resuming the public meeting just before 7.30pm.
Then, without discussion, councillors voted 19 to seven to accept the report.
It clears the way for Howard Holdings to submit a detailed planning application for the site it owns and which hosted the Live at the Marquee series over the last two years. It is understood the application could be with planners within weeks.
Subject to planning, the company hopes to have the venue open in September 2009. The three-storey glass-fronted building has been designed to cater for:
6,000-plus performances, including 1,150 seated;
seated concerts of up to 4,200;
conferences of up to 2,000;
gala balls of up to 800 diners.
However, the venue could also be configured into smaller modules to host smaller events ranging from 400 to 1,500 capacity. It will be linked directly to a 200-bedroom hotel with a 1,000-seat banqueting hall, and a 1,000-space car park.
Last night’s vote followed a public invitation from Mr Gavin last April for submissions from the private sector to provide a suitable site, design, build, fund and manage an event centre.
Four submissions were received — the Howard Holdings proposal; one from Medaza, who wanted to build the venue at the Showgrounds; Ascon, who wanted to build on a site at Black Ash; and the Hyde Partnership who wanted to build on the Atkins site at the Carrigrohane Road.
An assessment board of senior city officials examined the proposals and recommended the Howard Holdings project.
Fianna Fáil councillor Tom O’Driscoll welcomed the outcome of the vote.
“This has been long awaited. It will do a lot for Cork, making it a year-round destination.”
Fine Gael’s Joe O’Callaghan said the city has been crying out for such a venue for decades.
Socialist Mick Barry said he voted against the “hand-out to a big business concern” to highlight the fact the private sector has until now refused to provide the city with such a venue.

Sinn Féin’s Jonathon O’Brien criticised the lack of public debate on the proposal.

Looks like it just might happen for Cork in 2009.

No wonder the Socialists & Sinn Fein get rattled at the General Elections……

Not quite as wonderful as all that, I believe. I was connected to one of the other submissions and we raised BIG concerns about the manner in which the process was managed – e.g.: sent initial letter to City Management (CM) on 1st June looking for clarification on criteria under which submissions should be lodged. Many follow-up phonecalls and THREE weeks later we received a reply. This reply came on a Thursday and the submission had to be in for the following Monday (4 days, including a weekend). A request for an extension was denied. We submitted, expected to be called in for further discussion (‘fleshing out’) but nothing more until the media leak last week! There were only four submissions – it wouldn’t have taken a lot to bring each in for a few hours to discuss each submission thoroughly.

Hand on heart I believe that the HH proposal is too small – 4,000 seats. Our own proposal was for up to 8,000 seats PLUS a second 2,000+ seated ‘green-glens’ type arena PLUS a massive indoor waterpark. Anyway you makes yer choices…..!

Think of it this way – major show hits Ireland a few years from now. They play 10,000 seats in Belfast, then 10,000 seats in the redeveloped Point – does it make sense for them to then move everything to Cork for 4,000 seats, or would it be better to play an additional night in Belfast/Dublin before heading across to Manchester MEN Arena for the start of the next leg?

Agreed Pug – if we’d been part of what we felt was an open and transparent procedure we wouldn’t have any problem with the result.

WRT Pairc Ui Chaoimh we mentioned in our submission that, at the very least, a discussion should be undretaken in relation to some mechanic bringing it inside an organisation overseeing ‘activity’ at that end of the docklands. We would have liked to engage the GAA in discussions about us designing/funding/building a 40,000+ all-seater as part of our overall development. Now however it looks like the city is going to give the GAA some of the showgrounds site (= public money since City is going to have to pay a LOT of money to Munster Agricultural Society as a result of the CPO) for nothing! If it’s municipal money then there’s an argument for a municipal stadium (ie – ALL sporting codes). Mind you this is still Cork, so I shouldn’t be too surprised. 😉

on a separate note, Manor Park and CIe had appealed to ABP the outright refusal of their plans for Horgans Quay by CCC at end Feb 2007 – i thought it was due for ABP decision 5 months later, i.e. around now but looks as if a decision now wont happen until start October 07 – and the midleton railway now wont be done until 2009 – what a joke

@theblimp wrote:

Not quite as wonderful as all that, I believe. I was connected to one of the other submissions and we raised BIG concerns about the manner in which the process was managed – e.g.: sent initial letter to City Management (CM) on 1st June looking for clarification on criteria under which submissions should be lodged. Many follow-up phonecalls and THREE weeks later we received a reply. This reply came on a Thursday and the submission had to be in for the following Monday (4 days, including a weekend). A request for an extension was denied. We submitted, expected to be called in for further discussion (‘fleshing out’) but nothing more until the media leak last week! There were only four submissions – it wouldn’t have taken a lot to bring each in for a few hours to discuss each submission thoroughly.

Hand on heart I believe that the HH proposal is too small – 4,000 seats. Our own proposal was for up to 8,000 seats PLUS a second 2,000+ seated ‘green-glens’ type arena PLUS a massive indoor waterpark. Anyway you makes yer choices…..!

Think of it this way – major show hits Ireland a few years from now. They play 10,000 seats in Belfast, then 10,000 seats in the redeveloped Point – does it make sense for them to then move everything to Cork for 4,000 seats, or would it be better to play an additional night in Belfast/Dublin before heading across to Manchester MEN Arena for the start of the next leg?

How many big shows even in London sell 10,000+ seats ?

Killarney has 4,250 seats with hotel facilities etc and manages to attract plenty of world class acts and plenty of punters from Cork and all over Munster.

6,000+ for a “Marquee” type event is plenty for a City the size of Cork.

The HH proposal is actually very realistic and feasable.

Personally Cork needs this badly as I along with others are fed-up with heading to Killarney 7 Dublin for good acts etc.

I’m actually quite happy with the HH proposal – but what on Earth is going on with the application & voting process?

Assuming everything was above board, why would the gallery need to be cleared & the media ejected?

How are we to trust (local or national) Government if they pull stunts like this?

@who_me wrote:

I’m actually quite happy with the HH proposal – but what on Earth is going on with the application & voting process?

Assuming everything was above board, why would the gallery need to be cleared & the media ejected?

How are we to trust (local or national) Government if they pull stunts like this?

Anywhere else in the World this development would be seen as essential to the future and well being of a City.

This country has way too many layers of red tape and quango’s.

In the U.S. we would build these things and if its a good design and in demand by the community they were the people who determined its ultimate success.

Cork needs dynamism and developments like this must be welcome.

See any of the previous proposals for the Clarion Lapps Quay Site an dyou will be glad that Howards got involved.

They may not be perfect but they get things done.

“How many big shows even in London sell 10,000+ seats ?”

mmm …. pretty much all of them! (02 Arena / Wembley Arena / etc.). Likewise with Birmingham, Manchester and a whole lot more.

In any case that’s not the point I was making – Belfast has, and Dublin will soon have, 10,000+ seating capacity venues. Here in Cork we have a similar catchment (draw an arc 1.5-2hrs from Cork), although 10,000 may be a little too large so 8,000 would (in my opinion) be an ideal max (although it needs to scaleback without looking like a half-empty barn)

Jaysus, don’t misunderstand me … I’m not against one being built…that’s why we submitted a proposal for a suitably sized one. My concern is over the entire process that selected HH as the ‘preferred’ choice. This concern was then compounded by the manner in which last night’s proceedings were conducted.

You can agree with me, or disagree with me … that’s fine, but I can assure you that there’s a lot more to come into the mix over the coming weeks and months which will shine some clearer light on how these things have been skewed.

“In the U.S. we would build these things and if its a good design and in demand by the community they were the people who determined its ultimate success.”
True, but only in so far as they would probably be built to suit an actual requirement. WHO has determined that the 4,000 seats is the right amount for Cork – similarly who knows if our belief that 8,000 seats is correct? The ‘proper’ way would have been to bring in experienced professionals to create a full and detailed brief (i.e.- you need 7,000 seats, mixed capacity of 10,000, supporting 350-bed hotel, etc. etc.) and then use this as the basis for all submissions. This wasn’t done. The councillors, to be fair to them, don’t know how these facilities work so had little choice than to accept the recommendations of a committee who had little knowledge/experience of what the city actually needs. ‘We need an events centre. We’ve got an events centre. Now, on to the next problem’ ….. and we end up with a facility that nobody knows is suitable or not. I believe it isn’t… but only time will tell.

[quote=”theblimp

You can agree with me, or disagree with me … that’s fine, but I can assure you that there’s a lot more to come into the mix over the coming weeks and months which will shine some clearer light on how these things have been skewed.[/QUOTE”]

Sounds like a whole load of sour grapes to me ?

Sorry Spinal Tap, if it came across as bitter in any way then it read different to what was meant.

Hand on heart, if the deal was that we could build it but I could never make a cent out of it, I wouldn’t be bothered. Over five years of thorough research has given me an insight into this sector and I genuinely believe that mistakes were made in this process. Ones that will, very sadly, mean that we have all missed an opportunity.

I’m neither bitter, nor angry …. just sad and frustrated.

i’m with theblimp on this one, i dont think its sour grapes on blimps behalf, i too am more than delighted that there will be an events centre, there should have been a concert venue years ago since the time someone had the guts to bring in michael jackson and the likes of oasis/prodigy at their height.

I would question the process of its choosing also and remain sceptical that 8 million of the public purse is spent by councillors, most of whom have no experience in these matters and therefore as was pointed out feel obliged to take the recommendations of a committee that may also not have any experience in these matters . An event centre should have been proposed and a public ocnsultation (e.g. hand out survey at the Marquee gigs) should have been conducted.

You wouldnt have had to use all of pairc ui chaoimh for a concert, surely an area could have been cordoned off or one end been designed to hold 6-10,000 person venue.

Doesnt matter now anyway!

@Spinal Tap wrote:

In the U.S. we would build these things and if its a good design and in demand by the community they were the people who determined its ultimate success.

Cork needs dynamism and developments like this must be welcome.

See any of the previous proposals for the Clarion Lapps Quay Site an dyou will be glad that Howards got involved.

They may not be perfect but they get things done.

In the US, they’d relish the idea of competition, and would thoroughly look at all proposals.

In the US, they’d be far, far more wary of investing public money in a private project.

In the US, there would be blue murder if the media were ejected from the discussion of public funding.

I honestly think it’s the best site for the centre, and the size, while not the largest, isn’t too small. But why oh why do we have to have this idiotic veil of secrecy. These public-private ventures sound risky enough as is, but without any openness and transparency how on Earth are we to trust those holding the public purse strings?

@theblimp wrote:

Sorry Spinal Tap, if it came across as bitter in any way then it read different to what was meant.

Hand on heart, if the deal was that we could build it but I could never make a cent out of it, I wouldn’t be bothered. Over five years of thorough research has given me an insight into this sector and I genuinely believe that mistakes were made in this process. Ones that will, very sadly, mean that we have all missed an opportunity.

I’m neither bitter, nor angry …. just sad and frustrated.

Agreed.

As a Dub native living in Cork I continuously find it sad and frustrating the ammount of times locals have to head to Killarney or Dublin for decent events on a large scale not catered for by The Everyman,Opera House,Triskel etc ( Cork has probably the best Arts infrastructure outside Dublin B.T.W.)
The Marquee is probably a good barometer of the potential capacity for touring acts with most gigs being sold out and the 3,500 people at some of the more obcure acts still comfortable.

Cork City is a far more attractive place to live and work and an environment that only tthose trapped in traffic in Dublin or London can only dream about.

It is the beauty,potential and independance of the place that makes it a great place to live but (theres always a but) Cork need to think big, ambition seems to be stamped on by quango’s elected and unelected always providing reasons NOT to proceed due to some parcohial fears.
The neglect of the river is being addressed apart from the old stone warhouses behind the custom house and Horgans Quay.An architectural competion for a maritime museum and aquarium,art galleries etc is required as tourists have very little to do in this great city apart from the usual English Market/Shandon/St.Finbarrs etc.
6,000+ people coming to visit for gigs conferences etc will help.

I would personally much rather a 8,000 – 10,000 venue for Cork but Cork has lacked this venue for so long we just have to get behind this proposal as this small City loses so much business to Dublin & Killarney.

The way the City is growing an Odyssey type Arena may be feasable in 10+ years.

@who_me wrote:

In the US, they’d relish the idea of competition, and would thoroughly look at all proposals.

In the US, they’d be far, far more wary of investing public money in a private project.

In the US, there would be blue murder if the media were ejected from the discussion of public funding.

I honestly think it’s the best site for the centre, and the size, while not the largest, isn’t too small. But why oh why do we have to have this idiotic veil of secrecy. These public-private ventures sound risky enough as is, but without any openness and transparency how on Earth are we to trust those holding the public purse strings?

And like in the U.S. if the other consortia think that their proposals are all that sustainable they would go and build it on their own.You have massive arenas – stadia sitting all over cities there competing for events – does the public care – No – they benifit from having a choice yes a choice of events centres.

Some colleges there have better facilities than entire cities here.

Screw the media – Do they really care ? Any thing proposed for planning in Cork City 0ve 2/3 stories appears in the Echo “MANHATTAN FOR BLACKPOOL” etc.

It will all come out in the wash anyway – Cork needs this facility 10 years ago and anything that the City Council can do to make it happen must be welcomed.

The public money will be paid back tenfold in rates,taxes,contributions.

Does anybody on earth trust those who hold the public purse strings ?

@Spinal Tap wrote:

And like in the U.S. if the other consortia think that their proposals are all that sustainable they would go and build it on their own.You have massive arenas – stadia sitting all over cities there competing for events – does the public care – No – they benifit from having a choice yes a choice of events centres.

Some colleges there have better facilities than entire cities here.

Screw the media – Do they really care ? Any thing proposed for planning in Cork City 0ve 2/3 stories appears in the Echo “MANHATTAN FOR BLACKPOOL” etc.

It will all come out in the wash anyway – Cork needs this facility 10 years ago and anything that the City Council can do to make it happen must be welcomed.

The public money will be paid back tenfold in rates,taxes,contributions.

Does anybody on earth trust those who hold the public purse strings ?

Yes, but in the US the other consortia don’t have to compete with private ventures with significant public funding. The US tends to have better facilities because they have an open and level playing field. It’s easier to raise the venture capital because it’s simply easier to build a venue and profit from it. I think it’s safe to say you won’t see another venue open in Cork now, now that this one has such a leg-up.

I don’t care about the media per se, but they are the only way the majority of the public would ever hear about these developments prior to building; and that’s crucial.

This wasn’t the only choice before the council, not does it seem to have been the cheapest (from the public’s point of view) – so why was it chosen? I think that’s a simple question to which we’re entitled an answer – given we’re all contributing to it without any say in the matter.

very pertinent questions which you are entitled to send to your local councillors to ask them? why not email or write or phone them? they serve us the public after all.I will also be asking why the gallery was reputedly cleared.

@who_me wrote:

Yes, but in the US the other consortia don’t have to compete with private ventures with significant public funding. The US tends to have better facilities because they have an open and level playing field. It’s easier to raise the venture capital because it’s simply easier to build a venue and profit from it. I think it’s safe to say you won’t see another venue open in Cork now, now that this one has such a leg-up.

Still nothing stopping a private developer submitting an alternatve application next week is they think that their plans are sustainable

1 decent sustainable venue /conference centre will suit a city the size of Cork for the foreseeable future

I don’t care about the media per se, but they are the only way the majority of the public would ever hear about these developments prior to building]A clear and open planning process is a matter of public record where any nember of the public can make an observation[/B]

This wasn’t the only choice before the council, not does it seem to have been the cheapest (from the public’s point of view) – so why was it chosen? I think that’s a simple question to which we’re entitled an answer – given we’re all contributing to it without any say in the matter.

Its 8 million to whoever builds it

It will be part of the massive docklands project,new modern public transport and architecture rather than putting it out the Black Ash wasteland car and public transport dependant.
You could walk there in 15 – 20 minutes and even srroll down there 10 minutes from Blackrock etc.
It has only cleared the first hurdle and this location is very convenient to the city centre without disrupting existing established communities or the Mary Leland landed gentry “it was once all sheep grazing around here and a clear uninterrupted view of St.Finbarrs”

Well, which is it? It’s great to have a choice of venues, or one is all Cork needs?;)

Honestly, I think one may be enough for the forseeable future, but I’d rather leave it open and let the market decide what Cork can sustain. It will now be more difficult for a second consortium to come forward with a second proposal, as they’d be competing for events against a (effectively) subsidised competitor; regardless of the merits of their design or location.

The point remains – why was the HH selected, and why the secrecy over the selection process? Those questions are anything but indicative of a clear and open process.

I’m very happy with the choice of location; but I’m concerned about the 8m invested; and angry about the secrecy over the selection.

@Pug wrote:

very pertinent questions which you are entitled to send to your local councillors to ask them? why not email or write or phone them? they serve us the public after all.I will also be asking why the gallery was reputedly cleared.

Cheers Pug, I’ll do that.

@theblimp wrote:

Not quite as wonderful as all that, I believe. I was connected to one of the other submissions and we raised BIG concerns about the manner in which the process was managed – e.g.: sent initial letter to City Management (CM) on 1st June looking for clarification on criteria under which submissions should be lodged. Many follow-up phonecalls and THREE weeks later we received a reply. This reply came on a Thursday and the submission had to be in for the following Monday (4 days, including a weekend). A request for an extension was denied.

You seem to be suggesting to us that between the date you submitted a letter to city management and the date they replied, you did no work on your submission, because you didn’t know what ‘criteria’ you should lodge it under!!
Its this sort of lazy attitude which has meant the showground site has remained next to useless for decades. Maybe if the Munster Agricultural Society had got off their backsides and proposed something like this for their site BEFORE they were scared into it by CCC, then it wouldn’t have been neccessary to compulsarily purchase the site to open it up to public access.
It takes a private backer to do this, because clearly voluntatary bodies couldn’t muster up the cop on to do so. Even the GAA, who are to be commended on their work with Croke Park have been slow to redevelop Pairc Ui Chaoimh. But then, I seem to recall the Munster Ag Society having something to do with that delay too!!!

radioactiveman – I hope I didn’t give the impression that I was connected in any way to the Munster Agricutural Society, because neither I nor our submitting group are. Therefore I can’t really comment on the prior actions, or inactions, of same. We identified the Showgrounds site as the optimum one for our proposal and suggested (in our submission) that instead of seeking the monetary investment from City Hall, we investigate some mechanism whereby we gained a lease to the land once the CPO was completed. It was, and remains, our position that the City would be far better served with our plans for that site, than the stated plans for a public park.

Yes, we did wait the three weeks for one very real reason – we expected that there would be a substantial brief forthcoming and we would have to tailor any submission accordingly. We already had our design and our research done, but the submission itself would have to suit the brief criteria. To be honest the actual criteria were amazingly vague (this being part of the reason why I’m now concerned about the entire process). I don’t really think that was laziness on our part, more ‘prudence’ I would have thought

Just one final quick matter, and it’s by way of illustrating the consequences of not having ‘experience’ dictate the brief and manage the submissions (and not a dig at the HH proposal)

Those that have today’s (Wed.) Examiner – have a look at the site plan for the HH proposal. Many concerts and shows can have in excess of 12 artic trucks requiring back-stage parking. Where do they go on this sitemap? Furthermore imagine a large exhibition being held there tomorrow. You could have in excess of 100 stands at this show and each one has a crew in at least one van looking to park alongside the centre so that they can ‘load-in’ and ‘build’ their stands. How easy would it be in that site? (again, I’m just asking the questions so don’t flame me for it 😮 )

On a very final, related, matter – the chosen operator for the HH centre is ‘Live Nation’ (formerly Clear Channel). I personally have a few problems with this – namely:
1. Live Nation are primarily a concert promoter/concert venue company – they don’t have strengths in Conference and Exhibition activity. While the concerts grab the headlines, it’s the conferences and exhibitions that make the ‘bread and butter’ which keeps such a centre viable
2. Live Nation tend to prefer to move concert activity outdoors during the Summer to maximise returns – this could leave Cork with a pretty poor range of activity from May to Sept each year
3. Live Nation are heavily involved with the redevelopment of the Point in Dublin. Some could argue that by holding the only other major venue in the country they’ve created something of a monopoly, or a ‘blocking’ move.

Again, just my thoughts. To any one who still thinks it’s envy, sour grapes or anything similar can I offer that if I really felt this way I’d be running to the papers, not archiseek. I’m putting the points here because I feel I’m talking to people who have a genuine interest in development matters in Cork. I’m not going to change anything about the result, but I might be able to provide some others with a better insight into things.

Blimp, can we see some details and images of the proposal you were involved in? So we can compare and judge for ourselves.

I still think the three week gap you left in your preperations was pretty shoddy, but I don’t have experience in submitting such proposals. I wouldn’t do it in my own line of work though!

Radioactiveman – There should be 3 brief attachments. Hope they explain things a little better

Looks good. The Waterpark will be a winner too.

Wasn’t that the same plan that was mentioned during the recent An Bord Pleanala hearings regarding the compulsary purchase order of the Showgrounds? As far as I was aware, it was put forward as a reason not to allow the CPO to go through. Although i cant remember a waterpark in that plan.

**Edit**

From ‘Developments in Cork’ Thread (16th March 2007):

And a reply from theblimp, when asked who was behind the venture (16th March 2007):
“No, not HH – it was a new grouping that were going to do it by way of some kind of arrangement with MAS – hence the inclusion of a MAS structure on site. Perhaps the fact that it wasn’t one of the ‘established few’ worked against them? I do know, however, that a LOT of work had been done on it. Architects were london-based and there were/are proprietary rights over the roof design which gave it significant advantages over traditional methods”

So, while not having any direct relationship with MAS, it would have clearly been to this groups advantage had Showgrounds stayed in MAS control rather than reverting back to CCC. With MAS’ track record, can you blame CCC for being weary of thiese plans at the ABP hearings?
And then to see a warmed up version, without the MAS arena, but including a waterpark being proposed, must have raised a few eyebrows. How much research had been done on the need/demand for a waterpark in the City?

looks good but seriously the GAA, Frank Murphy and municipal stadium do not go together!!:eek:

I am afraid to say we would be waiting a long long time for any plan with the municipal stadium to go through

@Leesider wrote:

I am afraid to say we would be waiting a long long time for any plan with the municipal stadium to go through

Which is a crying shame, since it’s the one key ambition that most of us have for the docklands. A modern, municipal stadium which could be used by Cork GAA, Cork City and Munster (for big ties which won’t fit even in the new Thomond) could use.

I find it a tad ironic that the council object to the showgrounds being so under-used and underdeveloped; while Pairc Ui Chaoimh is an sadly under-used eyesore yet they’re going to great lengths to accommodate them. But, if the stadium remains GAA only, it will continue to be under-used surely?

Radioactiveman – probably very similar, we’ve been working on this for quite a while now. We kept our heads down during the CPO as we didn’t wish to be involved in the process, but it is possible that an early version of our plans for the site were utilised by the Munster Agricultural Society to show that there was in fact some movement on the site.

Agree with both points about the Cork County Board – yes it would be great / yes, it’s highly unlikely. What we had hoped for was the opening of a discussion on same. Pairc Ui Chaoimh has a long history of major assistance from the city and the Munster Ag. – we feel that it’s only fair for a discussion on municipal useage to entered into in advance of more assistance from public funds.

@theblimp wrote:

Radioactiveman – probably very similar, we’ve been working on this for quite a while now. We kept our heads down during the CPO as we didn’t wish to be involved in the process, but it is possible that an early version of our plans for the site were utilised by the Munster Agricultural Society to show that there was in fact some movement on the site.

Thanks for the images and clarification blimp.

In the same vein, at the time of the ABP hearings,
(a) had any formal agreement (or indeed negotiations) been entered into between MAS and this new grouping?
(b) had the grouping given permission for MAS to use this plan during the hearings?

radioactiveman – matters between Munster Ag. and CCC are still ongoing with the ‘compensation’ element to be addressed in a few weeks time. As such I think it’s only right that I not comment publicly on the questions you raised – at least not until such time as the above matter is completed.

Just to add my tuppence worth. theBlimp’s plan looks great but given they don’t own the land and given Frank Murphy’s continued presence on this earth you can’t blame the Council for having doubts about short term deliverability. I think the Howard plan is good enough and hopefully the other components of the theBlimp’s plan will follow in time.

I couldn’t agree more with the posts about Pairc Ui Caoimh. It is every bit as underused (and every bit as much an eyesore) as the Showgrounds. Council should buy it off the GAA and make it a municipal venue. Alternatively facilitate the GAA expansion if they propose a proper upgrade / rebuild but STRICTLY on the basis that they open it up a la Croke Park (ie. for good rent). Me doubts any of this will happen in Franky Baby’s time but then again if Ian Paisley and Martin McGuiness………….

Finally, whatever about the merits of the Howard plan, Monday night was a PR disaster. As a lawyer it offends my sense of due process. I must admit though that every now and again someone taking the bull by the horns to deliver something quickly is needed. Jury is out on Joe Gavin but at least he is not doing a Jack Higgins on it and talking as he did on his retirement about how someone should do something to revive the docklands…er…em.. that would have been your job Jack, wouldn’t it? In fairness to Joe, after the Dublin job passed him by he has really knuckled down instead of mopping into his beer. Pity he does all of this from his home in Galway mind!

Does anyone here have a scan of the HH plans from Wednesday’s Examiner. I forgot to buy a copy.. I’m very interested to see the layout, especially given how the site spans Centre Park Rd.

I notice in theblimps earlier post that their concert hall had sloping seats from the stage upwards. What exactly are we standing on? Some kind of terraced thing? Surely thats dangerous at a rock concert. What the Howard Holdings proposal has is a layout very like the Marquee, with seating only at the further reaches and a large floor for standing on.

@PTB wrote:

I notice in theblimps earlier post that their concert hall had sloping seats from the stage upwards. What exactly are we standing on? Some kind of terraced thing? Surely thats dangerous at a rock concert. What the Howard Holdings proposal has is a layout very like the Marquee, with seating only at the further reaches and a large floor for standing on.

If you noticed even further, you would see that the seats marked 2, are temporary and could thus be removed. Presumably the structure underneath could be removed also, to leave a standing only section.

Does anyone know how much longer Emperor Gavin will remain as City Manager ? I understand that it is usually 7 years plus a possible 3 years extension, but I can’t remember when he started.

Actually I found it !

“Mr. Gavin is Cork City Manager at a time when a number of major infrastructure, transport, environmental and cultural developments are underway as Cork prepares to become the European City of Culture in 2005. He was previously Galway City Manager (1994-2000) and has held a variety of posts with local authorities in Sligo, Mayo, Kildare, Galway and Cork.”

So unless he applies for the 3 year extension, his time may be nigh ! 🙂

@Citybythelee wrote:

So unless he applies for the 3 year extension, his time may be nigh ! 🙂

Yeah, him coming in here, doing his job properly; overseeing one of the most exciting decades in the city’s development. Getting developers who’d stalled for years to start doing something with huge tracts of land, and all this against vested local interests who’ll knock anything because city management doesn’t trust them to do now what they haven’t done for decades! Yeah, I hate the guy, boooh, hissss. 🙂

I reckon he’s to blame for all this rain we’ve been having lately too. It never rained before he got here!!
Coming in here….taking our womenfolk! tsk tsk :p

On a more serious point though, of course nothings happened in the docklands. Because its all privately owned! Getting developers to develop stuff in a coordinated, timely fashion is like herding cats! I wouldn’t do his job for next Saturday’s Lotto numbers.
At least he’s managed to reclaim the showgrounds site against much opposition and now it can be opened up for REAL public access. He’s also overseen the the rejuvenation of St. patrick Street and Grand Parade’s (soon to be finished) public concourse, despite the moaning and cribbing of shopowners worried about loosing some busineess for a few months while the place is done. The work on St. Patrick street paved the way for the two huge developments which are now ongoing there. The Grand Parade work should give those who have been occupying adjacent sites on the west of of the street a kick up the backside they need.
He’s also secured a deal to build the City a brand new central library at no cost. Expect the Howard Holdings docklands plan and the IAWS/Origin plan to go to planning shortly.

@Citybythelee wrote:

If you noticed even further, you would see that the seats marked 2, are temporary and could thus be removed. Presumably the structure underneath could be removed also, to leave a standing only section.

Yes I saw that. Thats why I said ‘what are we standing on?’, which you would have noticed if if you had noticed further.

Certainly the city manager has managed to get movement in Cork alright but its not all down to him – there is an element to the property boom/developers having the cash to buy massive sites and do them up – I dont think there was anything special in getting a library built in to the plans on grand parade, the developer already owned the site and are more than happy i would think to put it in which makes them look very good for any future applications

certainly the docklands has been sitting idle for years – i dont agree its because its privately owned, eg when you see the council must have known about the Seveso sites for how long? Nothing much can happen until they are moved as per the Health & Safety Authorities constant objections in the area –

its the private developers who have the money to develop it so i wouldnt be giving too much credit to the city – as shown by a closed doors decision to give 8.25 million of our taxes and permission for an event centre to a major developer whereas another developer offers to build a multi discipline stadium and gets no look in – thats pretty poor

the docklands master plan was done in conjunction with the developers so at least the city&developers are moving on it now – from the quick look i had at the docklands plans it looks really good to be fair – the shining jewel should have been a multi dicsipline sprts stadium&concert venue

meanwhile we have to wait on idiotic CIE/Manor Park to go through the appeals process on their grossly out of place plans for Horgans Quay – which is another long wait for a half decent railway station thats holding up the north docklands

was there any more updates on what ACTUALLY happened in the cpuncil chambers when they decided on granting the event centre? Maybe a Freedom of Information act query might help if the council minutes dont when they are published

@Pug wrote:

was there any more updates on what ACTUALLY happened in the cpuncil chambers when they decided on granting the event centre? Maybe a Freedom of Information act query might help if the council minutes dont when they are published

Apparently the freedom of information act is a load of bullshit. You have to pay to submit an application, and then your case is reviewed. They have the right to turn down your application. It’s like the Henry Ford quotation- ‘Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black’

Likewise:
‘ Any citizen can have all the information they want, so long as we decide that it’s OK for you to get it’

From RTÉ:

Consultation on Port of Cork proposals
Monday, 13 August 2007 18:56

Cork City Council has started a public consultation on draft development plans for 400 acres of dockland close to the city centre.

The draft proposals for the South Docklands include landmark buildings up to 22 storeys high, a light rail system, and the potential to bring 20,000 new residents to the area.

In reaction to the draft plans, the Port of Cork Company says that, while it supports the development, it will need a funding package to provide alternative port facilities elsewhere in Cork’s lower harbour.

Meanwhile, the Port of Cork Company today released its annual report for last year, in which it outlined a 10.6% increase in container traffic in 2006, and profits 6.3% higher at €5.4 million.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2007/0813/cork.html?rss

Looks like port of cork are after €65 million to move to Ringaskiddy and out of the docks.

@Radioactiveman wrote:

Looks like port of cork are after €65 million to move to Ringaskiddy and out of the docks.

See posting on https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?p=66694#post66694
😡 The Port of Cork begging bowl is well and truly out.
I wonder will Minister Martin instruct his political cronies opps, i mean appointies on the board of the POC to rattle the bowl, or to look after the interests of Cork and stop holding up the redevelopment of the Docklands before its too late?

Surely PoC are entitled to compensation for any move. If you asked any private company to move to a new location, you would have to either buy their property (presumably at a market rate) or set them up with an attractive alternative that makes it worth their while. But to expect PoC to up sticks for nothing and build out the required infrastructure for nothing is, frankly, nuts and it ain’t going to happen!

I understand your view BUT Port of Cork is as much a “private company” as the ESB, VHI, or An Bord Pleanala, all are loaded with political appointments.
It was many years ago that POC began visiting the City Council looking for compo to move, every time there was some hope that Cork’s Docklands development may at last take off, the POC’s price to open the “front door” (Custom House Quay + the quayside) rose considerably.
Maybe I was half asleep 18 months ago when I thought the POC put such a high price on their quayside property that the city fathers and investors ran for cover to allow their heart rate return to normal.
POC are the landlords of a listed heritage building on Custom House Quay, a building that is described as “unquestionably the most important surviving port-related structure in the upper harbour area” in the South Docks Local Area plan.
This unique building is in danger of collapse due to years of neglect.
POC cannot be allowed to hold the Docklands redevelopment to ransom, we are 8 years in a talking shop regarding the docklands, if things don’t start to happen in a meaningful way VERY soon we may as well forget the whole project and hand Cork back to the handful of merchant princes that held Cork in a stranglehold for generations.

My understanding of it is that PoC’s compensation claim relates to not just the Custom House and the associated listed warehouses, but the quay that fronts all the docklands (still in use) and the Tivoli container depot and its associated landbank. All are supposed to be relocated to an expanded facility at Ringaskiddy. I may be wrong of course, so I stand to be corrected. Either way, I would obviously love to see movement made on the docklands.

🙂 Prof. Gerry Wrixon, past president of UCC has been chosen by the Government to lead the Cork Docklands steering committee.
At last we may see some movement on this vital site for Cork after years of junkets, consultants reports, and foot dragging by inept councilors.

There’s a man with drive, focus and busines acumen. also knows how to do a deal or two!

Good luck to him. He stepped on many toes in UCC, but maybe thats what this position needs. And he has an eye for good architecture…the Glucksman was his baby.

Dr. Wrixon is quoted in the Examiner today as saying he had no idea that he was about to be appointed and that it was “news to him”!!
I hope this whole Docklands process is going to be as superbly handled as this appointment!! :rolleyes:

@Radioactiveman wrote:

Good luck to him. He stepped on many toes in UCC, but maybe thats what this position needs. And he has an eye for good architecture…the Glucksman was his baby.

He stepped on the toes of those that needed to be woken from their slumber.

@mickeydocs wrote:

He stepped on the toes of those that needed to be woken from their slumber.

His legacy at UCC was mixed.

He expanded the university, oversaw a lot of new building and increased industry links to the extent that UCC’s industry funded research is almost as much as UCD and TCD combined. However, he left it with a massive pile of debt. Although he liked to portray his opponents as old-fashioned academics, the major concern was over whether UCC could service the debt.

@jungle wrote:

His legacy at UCC was mixed.

He expanded the university, oversaw a lot of new building and increased industry links to the extent that UCC’s industry funded research is almost as much as UCD and TCD combined. However, he left it with a massive pile of debt. Although he liked to portray his opponents as old-fashioned academics, the major concern was over whether UCC could service the debt.

Alot of that debt had to do with Govermental commitments being reneged upon.

This is a goog news, bad news article.

http://www.examiner.ie/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=business-qqqm=business-qqqa=business-qqqid=43211-qqqx=1.asp

The good news is that someone is actually making plans; the bad news is the time frame.

City Manager, Joe Gavin’s letter to City Councillors (Docklands)…

CORK CITY COUNCIL

Re: Designation of Cork’s Docklands for Targeted Development Incentive

The City Council has made a submission to Government seeking the designation of Cork’s Docklands for Targeted Development Incentives. The submission was developed on foot of recommendations in the Cork Docklands Economic Study and the inclusion of the Docklands in the E.U. Regional Aid Map. There was wide consultation with relevant stakeholders during the preparation of the submission.

The incentives sought relate to:
1. Overcoming Barriers to Development
(a) Relocation of SEVESO Activities
(b) Remediation of Contaminated Land.

2. Relocation of Non-Conforming Users.

3. Residential Owner-Occupiers

4.Provision of certain Public Infrastructure by the Private Sector.

5.Provision of Premises for Targeted Sectors

(a) Bio Pharma/Pharmaceuticals, Medical Devices and Life Sciences Activities – Headquarters/Regional Headquarters, Back Office, R&D, Advanced Manufacturing.

(b) Information Communications Technology. Activities – Headquarters/Regional Headquarters, Back Office, R&D, Advanced Manufacturing.

(c) Financial Services and Internationally Traded / Mobile Services. Activities – Headquarters/Regional Headquarters, Back Office.

(d) Third and Fourth Level Education associated R&D and Ancillary Facilities.

The time is now right to seek these targeted supports. The City Council has prepared Local Area Plans, a Docklands Development Strategy and a Docklands Economic Study. Private landowners and developers are actively preparing development proposals. They have assembled sites and prepared framework plans.
Two of the major landowners intend to lodge planning applications for large scale developments comprising some 150,000 sq. metres of development before the end of the year.

It is important that provision is made in the forthcoming Budget and Finance Act for whatever supports the Government decide to provide as uncertainty could cause some developments to be delayed.
The City Council will also focus strongly on the Docklands in preparing the bid under the Gateway Fund.

It is understood that the Docklands National Steering Forum announced by the Taoiseach earlier this year will be established shortly. Input and support will be required from many state departments and agencies in the regeneration of the Docklands – Investment will be required, for example, from the Department of Education & Science, Transport, Marine, Arts Sport & Tourism, Enterprise Trade and Employment and Environment Heritage & Local Government in dealing with the provision of schools, public transport, art and tourism infrastructure, job creation, housing, sanitary services and community facilities. The national co-ordination which will be provided by the Docklands National Forum is of fundamental importance.

J. GAVIN,
CITY MANAGER.
20th September, 2007.

I believe Greg Coughlan of Howard Holdings made a very impressive presentation about the Docklands in Cork this morning. It seems they will lodge for planning in November for a €2bn scheme which will include the new event centre. he called for a joint approach between all aprties to deal with the port and serveso issues but suggested that the opportunity for Cork docklands will pass if there isnt progress soon

it wasnt a €2bn scheme, it was a €1bn scheme and I’d say that was more what it would be valued at the end of completion – he was quite strong in his points that Cork needs to move on the Docklands immediately and that the first bridge needs to be built straightaway and nothing will happen until the port of cork move and the seveso sites are sorted. He warned of the danger of Cork delaying on this, which would result in a few years in Cork having to compete directly with a rejuvenated Dublin with its relocated port activities (in the pipeline) and far better transport network

28 September 2007

€2bn Cork docklands plan lodged within weeks

By Niamh Hennessy and Eoin English
PLANS for the €2 billion development of Cork’s docklands are to be lodged within weeks, in one of the largest single applications in the history of the State.

The development will include two hotels, 600,000 square feet of office space and a 30-storey residential tower.

It will also include an “iconic building” likely to house a restaurant run by a world-renowned chef such as Richard Corrigan or Gordon Ramsay. Provisions have also been made for a metro system.

Howard Holdings chief executive Greg Coughlan said his firm has engaged London-based architecture firm Foster and Partners — which is involved in the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site in New York — to work on the project. Work is to begin at the end of next year.

“What a coup for us to get them in the first place and what a great fillip for the project to attract such a company,” he told a Cork Chamber business breakfast yesterday.

He said the biggest objection to the development of the docklands was the relocation of the Port of Cork and the vacation of the two Seveso sites — the Topaz and Gouldings’ sites in Centre Park Road.

The Port of Cork is demanding a €60 million to €65m relocation package to leave the city centre quays but Mr Coughlan said it needed to vacate quickly for the docklands project to move forward.

He said all parties involved need to sit down together and work out a solution. He did not rule out Howard Holdings contributing to the relocation costs for the port.

“The Port of Cork must move down-river. Each of us: developers, government, the local authority and the Port of Cork itself must work together to facilitate this critical step and an immediate dialogue needs to commence to achieve it.”

Mr Coughlan said nothing of scale would happen in the docklands until the two Seveso sites were vacated.

Meanwhile, the council has made a submission to government seeking the designation of the docklands for targeted tax incentives in the December budget.

The incentives sought include tax breaks for relocating the Seveso sites, incentives for dealing with contaminated land, incentives for attracting foreign investment, the provision of public infrastructure by the private sector, grant aid for owner occupiers, and tax breaks to provide premises for biopharma, IT, financial services and third and fourth level R&D interests.

“It is important that provision is made in the forthcoming budget and finance act for whatever supports the Government decides to provide, as uncertainty could cause some developments to be delayed,” said city manager Joe Gavin.

@Spinal Tap wrote:

Provisions have also been made for a metro system.

Meanwhile, the council has made a submission to government seeking the designation of the docklands for targeted tax incentives in the December budget.

I will believe the whole metro thing when i am standing in it, travelling. The city cant get the rst of the transport sorted let alone a metro (or tram/bus type thing that we saw them announce few months ago – anyone heard another peep about that?)

Couldnt the council have made a submission re tax incentives ages ago? how many TD’s do we have for Cork? what are they doing? Michael MArtin is claiming all headlines on it as Minister for Enterprise

@Pug wrote:

Couldnt the council have made a submission re tax incentives ages ago? how many TD’s do we have for Cork? what are they doing? Michael MArtin is claiming all headlines on it as Minister for Enterprise

A few years ago I wrote an email to all of our elected TDs saying that they should get together as a united force if they ever wanted Cork to develop to its full potential, examples at the time were the new terminal at the airport, the kinsale flyover and the pathetic budget for city of culture 2005! Every single one of them replied except one Mr. Michael Martin……..suppose he was a bit too busy to reply to trivial matters

@Leesider wrote:

Every single one of them replied except one Mr. Michael Martin……..suppose he was a bit too busy to reply to trivial matters

I’m not defending M Martin in the slightest but every TD writing back to you is great but what action did they actually take? Writing letters is easy, local councillors minutes seem to consist of how they “write to the minister to express their outrage” at something. Nothing actually seems to happen though. I will happily write letters to people for the money and expenses that councillors get.

@Pug wrote:

I’m not defending M Martin in the slightest but every TD writing back to you is great but what action did they actually take? Writing letters is easy, local councillors minutes seem to consist of how they “write to the minister to express their outrage” at something. Nothing actually seems to happen though. I will happily write letters to people for the money and expenses that councillors get.

Of course nothing was done! 😮 😉

Following the first meeting of the Docklands Forum, Cllr. Dara Murphy (FG) threw his toys out of his playpen and demanded that 3 Councillors be appointed to the new forum panel.
Hopefully this demand will not find faviour with the city manager or the Chairman, Prof. Wrixon.
These “junket junkies” have had their chance and blew it over the past 8 years. It is now time to leave it to the professionals before the will to develop, or the cash runs out.

@kite wrote:

Following the first meeting of the Docklands Forum, Cllr. Dara Murphy (FG) threw his toys out of his playpen and demanded that 3 Councillors be appointed to the new forum panel.
Hopefully this demand will not find faviour with the city manager or the Chairman, Prof. Wrixon.
These “junket junkies” have had their chance and blew it over the past 8 years. It is now time to leave it to the professionals before the will to develop, or the cash runs out.

hear hear. Why this forum, if its so important, wasnt established 5 years ago is amazing. Its a talking shop politically designed to make it look as if something is happening. The councillors knew it was happening, the TD’s knew it so there should be no more councillors appointed. THey already have a motion anyway to form a group within their own city council to liaise with the councillor on the forum

If the governement were so concerned with it, where is the announcement on tax incentives?.

Drive on private enterprise, only way to get something done

is the re-developement of the docks actually going to take place or will it be the never ending story like the U2 tower in dub? there’s a proposal for a lage stadium complex and a light rail connection to the city centre. So my guess is no. I severely doubt that the City council has the means or the will to carry out such a mamoth task. Mayb they’ll release a watered down version in a few years and call it an origional masterplan for the city.

the only people that will drive on the docklands are the developers – i’m all for the city keeping an eye on them and thats what the public planning applications are for, so people can respond, but if we were waiting on the council and politicians, we’ll be waiting a long time

Updated images of proposed Howard Holdings Docklands Development, planning due to be lodged early in the new year…

Not bad…

Happy Christmas everyone!

Am I getting muddled about the location of the first pic or is there no way that ship can get out?

@THE_Chris wrote:

Am I getting muddled about the location of the first pic or is there no way that ship can get out?

The bridge opens (sideways, not up and down) to allow traffic up and down the river.

Aha 😀

Part of me was hoping for the greatest ‘oops’ in the history of Cork 😀

I like it! Especially the new bridge, which creates a whole new thoroughfare through the city.

Is that a concert hall/convention hall at the far north of the site?

@CC105 wrote:

@phatman wrote:

Updated images of proposed Howard Holdings Docklands Development, planning due to be lodged early in the new year…

agree does not look too bad, how high are the tall buildings at the far end?, pitty they are all located at one end of the development.

Reckon the main tower is around the 100m mark,reminds me a bit of Heuston gate in Dublin

Dublin’s Docklands Authority are defending a decision to hold their annual conference in Kerry.
I wonder where the Cork Docklands Forum will hold their next meeting now that those councilors that did sweet f*** a** over the past 8 years are throwing their toys out of the playpen and bitching that they have been excluded from the decision making Docklands Forum.
:mad:Thanks to the likes of our elected local Muppets, and the lack of taxpayers money picking up the tap for Corks docklands development I think we can now safely say
“Cork Docklands…RIP” 😮

Trying every media source available to no avail, somebody please tell me if the Government approved tax breaks for the docklands in today’s finance act?

http://www.finegael.ie/News/index.cfm/type/details/pkey/653/nkey/33339

Of course they didn’t do anything!!! If you want to contact our esteemed Enterprise minister to vent your frustration try michealmartintd@eircom.net probably never looks at it!!

:(Brian Cowen was on the 96fm 7am news stating that “we are only at the start with regard to Corks Docklands” he is now going to discuss the tax break issue at European level.
I am not Government bashing here, they are after killing what hope was left for the docklands but it was our elected local junket junkies that did nothing over the past eight years despite being constantly prodded by City Manager, Joe Gavin to get off their fat backsides and start earning their wages that have us at this funeral wake.

Perhaps the webmaster would let this thread run for another week or so to allow us vent our disappointment and anger, then he can switch off the life support.
FF, FG, Lab, Green, SF, SP etc, a curse on all their houses for failing us. Cork Docklands RIP.

Keep you powder dry,be patient !

01 February 2008

Cowen: Docklands tax incentives must not breach rules

By Stephen Rogers, Rose Martin and Ian Guider
THE Government last night said it would not be rushed into securing tax incentives for Cork’s Docklands project without first ensuring those incentives would not breach EU state aid regulations (Minister for Finance, Brian Cowen is pictured).

While announcing the Finance Bill yesterday, Minister Brian Cowen said the Government was looking at how it could get round the EU legislation to put the incentives in place for developers to take on the e2 billion Docklands project.

However, he said it would take time and consultation.

Fine Gael questioned the Government’s commitment to Cork saying it had promised to address the incentives in yesterday’s bill.

“Last December I challenged Enterprise Minister Micheál Martin about the lack of tax incentives for the Docklands in the budget,” said FG TD Deirdre Clune.

“Minister Martin claimed at the time that the Finance Bill would address this issue. Clearly Brian Cowen was not listening and the commitment of Martin… must be questioned.”

However, Mr Martin hit back saying the comments of Fine Gael were “over the top and premature”.

“Before we move at all we need to establish the types of supports we can give. I have met with the finance minister on this over the last few weeks and I accept his position. Tax relief or grants have to be within a state aid framework.”

Mr Martin said there was plenty of time as the Docklands project was a 10-year commitment and there was only one significant project on the cards in the next 12 months.

That project is a e1bn, 30-acre development close to Pairc Uí Chaoimh.

Jason Clerken, of Howard Holdings, the developer behind it, said the tax break package was not at the forefront of developers’ minds.

“It’s probably not going to happen in this round, but then it’s all a bit previous because the Local Area Plan has yet to be announced and the Docklands Forum is just starting up,” he said. “The renewal and regeneration of the Docklands will not rest on tax breaks.”

Cork city manager Joe Gavin said the council will continue to press for supports and to work with the relevant officials. “I take satisfaction from the fact those officials we have been working with have indicated a positive disposition so I would be hopeful we will be successful,” he said.

thats very very poor from the government – they have known about the Docklands for I dont know how long, its ridiculous to say they are going to start talks now and that just because its a big project means the govt have time to sort it out. If they had started the talks years ago then the project would be underway, absolutely disgraceful from Dublin as usual

Ties in completely with lack of funding coming from NRA for cork. Again.

@Pug wrote:

thats very very poor from the government – they have known about the Docklands for I dont know how long, its ridiculous to say they are going to start talks now and that just because its a big project means the govt have time to sort it out. If they had started the talks years ago then the project would be underway, absolutely disgraceful from Dublin as usual

Ties in completely with lack of funding coming from NRA for cork. Again.

I wouldn’t disagree with what you say but this is not all the fault of Government.
Eight years ago saw the start of the docklands adventure. Cork City Councillors jealously guarded their junket cow and told Dublin to keep their noses out of Corks business on many occasions.
Cork City Council turned a blind eye to the Listed Heritage building on Custom House Quay, an area that needed to be transformed to provide a gateway to the docklands; instead people visiting the area are met with the near derelict sight of the Bonded Warehouses falling into the Lee (what a selling point for investors and stakeholders?).
For ex Cllr’s. Burke and Clune to be crying crocodile tears now is a joke as is Cllr. Dara Murphys demand for Councillors to be added to the Docklands Forum so that everything in their fantasy world can be “happy happy” again.
Fair dues to the stakeholders, they took a chance, they put their money on the table, unfortunately they backed a lame duck City Council instead of a race horse!

The EU gave approval for tax breaks in 2006. To say they have to get EU approval is a bare-faced lie, not an indication of laziness because it wasn’t done earlier. In the meantime, it put me in mind of this Examiner article from three weeks ago

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2008/01/12/story52382.asp

Nobody should despair though, tax breaks will be approved shortly before the next election when they’ll still have six months to run :rolleyes:

@jungle wrote:

The EU gave approval for tax breaks in 2006. To say they have to get EU approval is a bare-faced lie, not an indication of laziness because it wasn’t done earlier. In the meantime, it put me in mind of this Examiner article from three weeks ago

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2008/01/12/story52382.asp

Nobody should despair though, tax breaks will be approved shortly before the next election when they’ll still have six months to run :rolleyes:

Plenty of excuses not to do things and with the construction industry in decline,revenue from building to the exchequer in freefall here is anopportunity to stimulate the sector in Cork over the next 15 years.
As the Government has made such a protracted mess of Cork Airport,Cork School of Music,Kent Station,Re-opening railway lines and teh National Development Plan,decentralisation etc Why is anyone surprised ?

Perhaps its better that private developers go ahead without any Govt.input ?

From today’s Irish Examiner:

Docklands project faces 12-month wait for tax incentives

By Paul O’Brien, Political Correspondent
THE Government has admitted it will be at least a year before any tax incentives are announced for the Cork Docklands project.

In what is understood were non-scripted remarks, Junior Minister Noel Ahern told the Dáil last week “many things need to be done locally first, the proposal can be improved and it may be considered next year”.

Fine Gael described his remarks as a “kick in the teeth” for the Cork region.

“Claims by the minister that the Cork Docklands needs to be ‘improved’ and is not ready for launch are an insult to everyone who has worked tirelessly on the project,” said FG Cork South-Central TD Deirdre Clune.

“Extensive proposals have been drawn up for the project, which is included in the National Spatial Strategy and the National Development Plan. The least we could expect is some support from the Government,” she added.

Under the e2 billion regeneration plan, homes, offices and leisure space will be built on the 166-hectare docklands site.

Prior to Christmas, the Government signalled that tax incentives to encourage development in the docklands would be announced in the Finance Bill 2008.

But when that bill was published recently, it overlooked the Cork project, with Finance Minister Brian Cowen saying more time was needed to determine what incentives could be provided under EU state-aid rules.

The remarks of Mr Ahern, who is junior minister at the Department of Finance, indicate the Cork region will have to wait until next year’s Finance Bill for any incentives to be announced.

Speaking at a Fianna Fáil function in Cork over the weekend, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern insisted his party would “continue to lead the development of Cork Docklands”, and dismissed opposition efforts “to score cheap political points”.

However, he failed to provide any timeline for the tax incentives, merely saying: “We will provide the support and incentives that the development of the docklands needs — when they are needed.”

@kite wrote:

Speaking at a Fianna Fáil function in Cork over the weekend, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern insisted his party would “continue to lead the development of Cork Docklands”, and dismissed opposition efforts “to score cheap political points”.

However, he failed to provide any timeline for the tax incentives, merely saying: “We will provide the support and incentives that the development of the docklands needs — when they are needed.”

yes Bertie, they were needed about 5 years ago

it may be considered next year

I think we all know what that means.

I can’t for the life of me work out what they’re waiting for. Maybe the bribes haven’t been paid yet.

@jungle wrote:

I think we all know what that means.

I can’t for the life of me work out what they’re waiting for. Maybe the bribes haven’t been paid yet.

You know whislt all this drags out into the next decade more than likely Cork City Council and The Port of Cork watch the fantastic Bonded Warehouses behind The Custom House crumble and decay.

Absolute disgrace.

08 March 2008

€1bn ‘new Cork’ takes shape

By Tommy Barker, Property Editor
A €1 BILLION property investment unveiled last night for Cork city’s docklands will facilitate 4,800 jobs and create a community of 1,600 residents.

Developers Howard Holdings set out a stall to lead the southern city’s 21st century transformation and renewal. It promises a world-class docklands renewal project, and said it could be ready to start building by the end of this year.

Key elements of the developers’ plan include a 51-metre span opening bridge to create access to the overall 400-acre docklands campus, a ‘family’ of three tower apartment cylinders of 30, 20 and 10 storeys, four huge office buildings with over half a million square feet of space, a 200-bed hotel, and a 5,500-person events centre called the Arena.

It also includes a strongly ‘green’ building agenda (including a publicly-accessible roof garden and trees 96 metres up in the sky on the 30-story tower), public open spaces, and more than 2,200 underground car spaces serving the mix of shops, residents, and entertainment venues.

On its ‘Passport to the Future’ launch in front of 400 guests last night, the Atlantic Quarter project was described as “the single largest development project ever undertaken in Cork, and a catalyst for other docklands schemes to follow”.

The overall docks area in Cork runs to more than 420 acres, with about a dozen landowners, and could house 10,000 persons and provide thousands of jobs.

Developer Greg Coughlan, CEO of Howard Holdings, said the company was committed to design excellence and setting a new environmentally sustainable standard for Cork, Dublin, and Europe, where they also have projects in Britain, Italy, Poland and Portugal.

Atlantic Quarter in Cork could be largely delivered within a five- year timeframe, and depends primarily on securing planning permission, and also necessary is approval for vital infrastructure such as the iconic €80 million swing bridge, to be the largest in Europe.

Despite the scale of the company’s plans for Cork at a time of relative property market stagnation on both commercial and residential fronts, Mr Coughlan said: “We are currently building 3,500 apartments across Europe, doing 500 in Cork isn’t going to faze us.” Howards has just sold 320 units in a development of 400 in south London, he added.

“Sometimes I think the only people who aren’t getting the story of Cork Docklands are Cork people. We often seem to me to be so busy looking around us for someone to blame that we forget to look forward,” he said.

Interestingly, the planning application in d’Examiner yesterday says a max of 24 stories, yet Tommy Barker above says 30 stories? Which is it…and will it be better looking than the mismash of materials that is the Elysian?

I must say, the cylindrical towers don’t really do it for me. But thats just a personal issue.
Well done to Howards for having the balls to do it.

I thought the planning app was for 27 stories, will we forgive Tommy 3 stories!!! 🙂

Did anyone notice what looks like a redeveloped parc ui coimh in the promotional video for this project. I wonder if such a redevelopment is likely as part of the overall regeneration of the docklands?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0306/cork_av.html

Must say it looks pretty impressive on the website

http://www.atlanticquarter.ie/

Thanks for the link murfee, looks very impressive there!! The swing bridge looks bigger than I expected.

@Leesider wrote:

I thought the planning app was for 27 stories, will we forgive Tommy 3 stories!!! 🙂

The website says 28, but that probably excludes the tall roof garden/gallery which would “kinda” take it up to 30 stories.

@who_me wrote:

The website says 28, but that probably excludes the tall roof garden/gallery which would “kinda” take it up to 30 stories.

And of course the tree house they are putting in as well……that will bring it up to 31 floors!!:D

Nobody has really said whether they like the scheme or not, what do you all think?

@Super Q wrote:

Nobody has really said whether they like the scheme or not, what do you all think?

looks pretty good, thought more could be made of the event centre and its hard to get a sense of what colours etc it will look like on the outside but it beats a yard to store cars any day

In the examiner today that Origin (who are IAWS) will sumbit an application for a development on one part of their site ( i think they own 32 acres in total) before July 31

…and the application mentioned is for a 2 acre site they hold at the Victoria rd end of the Docklands…

I’m impressed by the new plans. When can we expect a decision from the local planing authority? Do these plans still include a light rail proposal?

For those of you interested in what might happen to Pairc Ui Chaoimh in the future, city councillors recently held a vote on the motion

‘That Cork City Council as part of any arrangement they may enter into with the
Cork County Board in relation to the development of Pairc Uí Chaoimh by way of
transfer of land that Cork City Council would insist / express its desire to see Pairc Uí
Chaoimh be made available to other sporting codes.’

the motion was, amazingly, defeated
Am I completely wrong in this but are these councillors in tune with what the people actually want? Whats the point in having a white elephant 60,000 seat stadium going empty for most of the year and taxpayers funds being used if the Cork County Board are given some public owned land to make the stadium bigger?

FOR: Comhairleoirí M. Quill, M. Barry, C. Clancy, J. O’Brien, D. McCarthy, M. O’
Connell, L. Kingston. (7)

AGAINST: Comhairleoirí T. Brosnan, D. Wallace, T. Fitzgerald, D. Counihan, C.
O’ Leary, D. O’ Flynn, T. Shannon, J. Corr, S. Martin, T. O’ Driscoll, F. Dennehy, M.
Shields, M. Ahern, J. Buttimer. (14)

That’s just brilliant. In my ward, five voted against and one didn’t bother to vote. That makes it easy for me to decide who to vote for next time out :rolleyes:

Actually, looking at that list, we have

For: Labour(x3), Sinn Fein, PD, Ind , Soc
Against: FF (x9), Green, Labour(x2), FG (x2)

So a few questions

Was there a party decision to vote against by Fianna Fail councillors?
Why did so few Sinn Fein (1/3) and Fine Gael (2/8) councillors vote at all? [FF managed 9/10 and Labour 5/6]

http://www.atlanticquarter.ie/

Nice website……..looks interesting.
Towers are designed by Foster + Partners – the same guys behind U2 tower.

@jungle wrote:

For: Labour(x3), Sinn Fein, PD, Ind , Soc
Against: FF (x9), Green, Labour(x2), FG (x2)

So a few questions

interesting analysis jungle, fair play, Fianna Fail have major questions to answer along with ineffectual opposition

Another image I hadn’t seen before, of the top of the towers. The design seems a bit more interesting than just tall cylinders. In fact, from that shot it looks like two waterfalls streaming from the top of them!

at the launch it looks like those waterfall things will have tree/shrub things going from the bottom to the gardens in the top of the towers – the designers were looking at blarney castle being surrounded by and becoming part of the green landscape apparently – just like the cladding on the elysian

The towers are not cyclinders, more like three petals on plan, achieving duel aspect to almost all units. Not sure about the waterfalls though!

According to todays Examiner, there has only been one objection to Howard Holdings Atlantic Quarter plan – from some residents in Montenotte – Surprise Surprise. I think its great news and shows how much we all want to actually see this plan happen

That’s ridiculous…am I correct in saying you’re not entitled to a view? So what are they complaining about in Montenotte?

@Angry Rebel wrote:

That’s ridiculous…am I correct in saying you’re not entitled to a view? So what are they complaining about in Montenotte?

Cant see the planners taking any notice of this – wouldnt it be refreshing for permission to be granted without any unnecessary delays

absolutely, fingers crossed for that development, prob have to clear Bord Pleanala at some stage but definitely a smashing looking development

Much lobbying for taxbreaks here which they say are critical to the scheme going ahead.

Can’t see why our tax money should be given to these guys. If the project cannot make it in the market on its merits why should we be giving HH/Alleyquay handouts?

agreed I mean people who buy these places have to pay body corporate fees for the rest of there lives….

@nimbus 2008 wrote:

Much lobbying for taxbreaks here which they say are critical to the scheme going ahead.

Can’t see why our tax money should be given to these guys. If the project cannot make it in the market on its merits why should we be giving HH/Alleyquay handouts?

Sure why wouldn’t the taxpayer throw HH a few million towards their docklands development, after all the City Manager proposed to sell historic Albert Quay House (next door to City Hall) to HH for the price of a modest 1 bed apartment i.e. 250,000 euro.
Thankfully Councillors Tim Brosnan, Chris O’Leary, David McCarthy and Jonathan O’Brien were wide awake and put a stop to what would have been yet another fiscal disaster for Cork. HH had to be satisfied with “buying” the site to the rear of said house for a bargain basement price.

A little further up the quays and the gateway to the Docklands, we sold Navigation House to OCP at a 4,000,000 discount so that our city officials would have the benefit of car parking. (I bet the car parking element of this deal will materialize, unlike the convention centre in Mahon the city residents were promised when we sold that landbank at a discount in 1998)

Again with Joe Gavin, it is a case of “do as I say, not as I do”

:rolleyes:Anyway, I am delighted we can help the major developers of the city; those helicopters don’t run on fresh air you know!!

Dave McCarthy wide awake – now that’s hilarious

@murfee wrote:

Dave McCarthy wide awake – now that’s hilarious

He saw it coming and was one of a handfull of Councillors to stop a potential disaster for the city. Fair dues to them.

Incidentally, if you check out the application here, you can see mock-ups of the development from almost every angle imaginable. The towers will make some impression on the city skyline!

Does the HSA submission on the HH application mean it will not be possible for the planners to grant permission?

@Steady wrote:

Does the HSA submission on the HH application mean it will not be possible for the planners to grant permission?

Not at all, EU directives and the Planning and Development Act mean absolutely nothing when it comes to planning in Cork.
Just think of all the lovely development levies the city will receive from such applications?
Why spoil the party on safety matters?

@Steady wrote:

Does the HSA submission on the HH application mean it will not be possible for the planners to grant permission?

What did they say?

its usually just an observation to note that its a Seveso site or in the vicinity of one – shouldnt stop it once arrangments are made eventually to sort out those sites – which will need to be done at some stage by City Council

@nimbus 2008 wrote:

What did they say?

The Health and Safety Authority submission states:

“On the basis of the information the Cork City council has supplied to the HSA, and the information obtained from Alleyquay Investments Ltd. the HSA ADVISES AGAINST the grant of planning in the context of major accident hazard”

(capital letters as above used in HSA submission)

so they’ll probably stick in a condition then

I think it very unfortunate for Cork City Council that all these Seveso sites appeared in the docklands overnight.
If our city officials and Councillors had advance notice that somebody was going to flytip these Major Hazard sites in the middle of the jewel of Cork’s crown maybe Joe Gavin could have instructed a litter warden to be on the lookout and fine them 125 euro. That would go a long way to pay for the clean up!!
If the contaminated sites were in place for say 30-40 years then our ultra efficient officials and Councillors would of course have begun the decommissioning process 8 years ago when the Cork Docklands project was launched.

;)Or maybe it’s the case of nobody foresaw John Gormley as Minister for the Environment!!

@kite wrote:

The Health and Safety Authority submission states:

“On the basis of the information the Cork City council has supplied to the HSA, and the information obtained from Alleyquay Investments Ltd. the HSA ADVISES AGAINST the grant of planning in the context of major accident hazard”

(capital letters as above used in HSA submission)

As I understand it this Seveso situation will only really be sorted out once the City (or County?) Council nominates some poor god forsaken place as the future location for Seveso developments. Is this right?

@browser wrote:

As I understand it this Seveso situation will only really be sorted out once the City (or County?) Council nominates some poor god forsaken place as the future location for Seveso developments. Is this right?

Whatever site is going to be declared a Seveso in the future does not remove the very serious headache we now have to sort out.
If our officials and Councillors were to be held personably liable for future loss for granting planning against EU safety directives then this mess would have been sorted out years ago, BUT as always, if the worst happens and there is a liability issue it will be taxpayers money that will be spent / wasted while the decision makers will be spending their salaries / pensions / pay related bonuses on a golf course somewhere (hopefully well away from contaminated lands)

@kite wrote:

The Health and Safety Authority submission states:

“On the basis of the information the Cork City council has supplied to the HSA, and the information obtained from Alleyquay Investments Ltd. the HSA ADVISES AGAINST the grant of planning in the context of major accident hazard”

(capital letters as above used in HSA submission)

Thanks.

Do we know which of Cork’s Seveso operations would lead the HSA to give that advice for this location?

I assume it is the Gouldings site and the Irish Shell site that the HSA are concerned about

@lawyer wrote:

I assume it is the Gouldings site and the Irish Shell site that the HSA are concerned about

Thanks lawyer.

Whats the latest update on the Oral Hearings for the Oysterbank development? I have not heard much in over a week. Apart from Capt mc Carthys rebuttal of Tom McSweeneys article in the Echo

doesnt seem to be any really, the Examiner got bored and stopped reporting last week, I thought the cross examining would be worth reporting on but obviously not

Hearing finished now – Port of Cork had some info on their website but obviously its not the most objective view….

if anyone finds any more info, lash it up

@lawyer wrote:

I assume it is the Gouldings site and the Irish Shell site that the HSA are concerned about

Have any of the local papers picked this up? It looks potentially terminal.

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.

Isn’t the Atlantic Quarter planning decision due from Cork City Council today ?

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

@murfee wrote:

Isn’t the Atlantic Quarter planning decision due from Cork City Council today ?

Anyone any news on this?

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

I think it was very very unfair of Howard Holdings to submit a surprise planning application with Cork City Council for the Docklands.
If our city officials had any prior notice that somebody was to try and redevelop this derelict part of the city they would of course have been prepared for same.

Have we really got officials with such intelligence that they get dizzy when placed in a round room and asked to piss in a corner?
Did the Health and Safety Authority submission point to a contaminated land time bomb that CCC forgot about?
Didn’t anyone foresee a Green Minister for the Environment?

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

@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

Whats the story with this bridge? I thought we were going to hear word on funding a few weeks ago.

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.

@Pug wrote:

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

No wonder this thread has gone to the dogs,

CJH was a pillar of society,
The Emperor has new clothes,
The Cork Docklands will be up and running soon.

PIGS WILL FLY…

@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

@jdivision wrote:

May I ask why

I feel he is 100% right, i was being factitious on all the points mentioned.

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.

OK this will sound very childish but I have to say it.
I couldn’t give a flying **** about any of this political bullshit. I just want to see a whole load of cranes in the docklands and this HH project built asap with as little meddling as possible. Why the hell are they lobbing 2 storeys off anyway? As if that’s going to make a difference when the tallest has 28 floors or something.

@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.

@malec wrote:

OK this will sound very childish but I have to say it.
I couldn’t give a flying **** about any of this political bullshit. I just want to see a whole load of cranes in the docklands and this HH project built asap with as little meddling as possible. Why the hell are they lobbing 2 storeys off anyway? As if that’s going to make a difference when the tallest has 28 floors or something.

Exactly ! Build it and best of luck to Howard Holdings for having the balls to go for it.
Hopwards are ahead of the possie on this one and can see the potential of the Docklands whilst City Hall will still be only talking about it in 10 years time.

Cork needs to wake up if it wants to compete with Dublin – Belfast corridor.
About time that Cork decided to actually go fot it as you can always find negative begrudgers around every corner.

Is Kite the bitterest poster on here ?

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.

Ok lads, lets everyone just calm down for a minute 🙂
Thats better.

Now, everyone invloved in this docklands huhhah is telling us that the sevesco sites need to be ‘sorted out’.
How will this happen? What is involved? Is it just movement of the facilities there or is there a further clean up needed? I don’t think its every been fully explained to me.

@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.

Guys: this whole thread is a lot of babble without any illustrations of what you’re all rabitting on about. Few of us have the pleasure of living in the People’s Republic of Cork, but if you could all stop the mutual bloodletting and explain a bit more, it would help!

My understanding of the contaminated land issue as it relates to the Cork Docklands is as follows;
Best practice in this case would require a 3meter skim to be removed and exported for de-contamination. This of course would be very expensive and could make many parts of the Docklands site uneconomic.
CCC are suggesting that a one meter skim be removed and “disposed” of, and backfilled with fresh soil but no one is quite sure what impact (if any) this would have environmentally, or in raising funds from financial intuitions to purchase units that would be built on land that may be classed as dangerous.

I would like to post photos of the Cork Docklands johnglas but I am unsure how to do so.

@bosco wrote:

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.

I think this is a bit wide of the mark.

A lot of people work & study in the city centre (a LOT), and if the docklands ever take off even more so; meaning there needs to be a lot of people living within walking distance of the city centre or people will be commuting in from Douglas/Rochestown/Passage/Glanmire into the city centre & docklands and adding greatly to the congestion. There desperately needs to be a significant (but balanced) residential element to the docklands.

@kite wrote:

My understanding of the contaminated land issue as it relates to the Cork Docklands is as follows;
Best practice in this case would require a 3meter skim to be removed and exported for de-contamination. This of course would be very expensive and could make many parts of the Docklands site uneconomic.
CCC are suggesting that a one meter skim be removed and “disposed” of, and backfilled with fresh soil but no one is quite sure what impact (if any) this would have environmentally, or in raising funds from financial intuitions to purchase units that would be built on land that may be classed as dangerous.

I would like to post photos of the Cork Docklands johnglas but I am unsure how to do so.

Doesn’t the a lot of the docklands have to be raised anyway due to the effects of future tidal flooding?? Maybe this 1m skimming would work if it doesn’t have bad effects on the environment.

@Leesider wrote:

Doesn’t the a lot of the docklands have to be raised anyway due to the effects of future tidal flooding?? Maybe this 1m skimming would work if it doesn’t have bad effects on the environment.

The Docklands Local Area Plan states:

Chapter 7: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGMENT
MATERIAL AMENDMENT MA17: FLOOD RISK
Amend the section of the plan relating to flood risk (7.26-7.28 /
ENV9) to take account of revised food policy for South Docks area:
Flood Risk
7.26 Flooding results from a combination of human activity and natural physical
conditions. There is mounting evidence that the global climate is changing as a result
of human activity, which will lead to an annual increase in sea level of between 4 –
6mm. Flood risk will therefore need to be considered at all stages of the land use
planning process and managed in an environmentally sensitive way.
7.27 A flexible approach is needed to take account of flood risk to ensure that
appropriate measures are taken wherever the need arises. When considering
development in flood risk areas regard should be had to both the “Precautionary
Principle” and “Sequential testing”. Those proposing developments in areas where
there is a flood risk should:
7.28 Provide an assessment of whether the proposed development is likely to be
affected by flooding and whether it will increase flood risk elsewhere and of the
measures proposed to deal with these effects and risks. Satisfy the planning authority
that any flood risk rising from the proposal will be successfully managed with the
minimum environmental effect, to ensure that the site can be developed and occupied
safely.
7.28A Guidance in relation to the flood risk management and protection measures
for the South Docks is outlined in the South Docks L.A.P. and Infrastructure Strategy.
A detailed study of flood risk in the Lee Catchment is also being undertaken by
consultants for the O.P.W., in conjunction with Cork City and Cork County Councils
(Lee Catchment Flood Risk Assesment and Management Study). This Study will give
the definitive guidance on best practice for the assessment and management of flood
risk in the Lee Catchment, including Docklands. The guidance contained in the SDLAP
shall be reviewed in the context of the final Lee CFRAM Study.
Amend Policy ENV 9 be addition of following sentence:
Policy ENV 9 Flood Risk
Development will not normally be permitted unless appropriate flood protection and
mitigation measures can be put in place to ensure that the site can be safely
developed and occupied and flood risk as a result of the development is not increased
elsewhere. The City Council will require that key flood protection infrastructure be
developed on a phased basis within the South Docks. Flood protection measures as
outlined in the Infrastructure Strategy for South Docks include the raising of ground
levels with perimeter protection of the site.

Speaking of “contaminated land”….;)

Did anyone else hear that there was a panic earlier when developers at the Elysian received a quantity of topsoil bought from one of the army barracks (don’t know which one), complete with an unexploded shell!

Was someone yanking my leg?

Nope, that actually happened:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0519/cork.html?rss

wasn’t a decision on gateway funding due today ?

From today’s examiner – it appears a PR firm is being hired to publicise the Docklands generation. Given the size of the development, I wouldn’t have thought “tens of thousands of euros” would exactly entice any big-name marketing firms!

03 July 2008

PR contract for docklands: Firm ‘chosen’

By Eoin English
CORK CITY COUNCIL is poised to award a lucrative contract to a PR firm to brand and market its multi-billion docklands regeneration project.

The council remained tightlipped last night on who has landed the contract or on how much it is worth.

The initial phase could be worth tens of thousands of euro to the successful public relations firm.

But the company could be working on the project, which will involve branding, marketing and advertising, for at least a decade as the council oversees the estimated €10 billion regeneration of the extensive docklands region as a new waterfront quarter.

The news emerged yesterday as the largest landowner of docklands real estate put the first phase of its ambitious €2bn development on public display in City Hall.

Origin Enterprises, a subsidiary of the IAWS milling group, owns 32 acres of docklands.

It is seeking planning permission initially for a two acre waterfront site on Kennedy Quay and Victoria Road.

The first phase of its Port Quarter project is valued at about €200 million.

It will have 165 large apartments, and 24,600sq m of offices, in buildings ranging from eight to 11 storeys tall, with basement parking, shops and a creche.

No building will be taller than IAWS’s existing grain silos — for example at the R&H Hall site — all of which are set for demolition.

The only building to be retained is the red-brick Odlums building, dating back to the 1890s, which will most likely be used for cultural purposes.

Origin describes Port Quarter as an 18 to 20-year plan and believes the first phase could be delivered in late 2010.

This planning application follows the lodging of plans by Howard Holdings in March for its €1bn Atlantic Quarter project further downstream in the docklands, near Páirc Uí Chaoimh.

Now that redevelopment plans are rolling in, City Hall wants to hire public relations experts to advise how it should brand and market its vision for docklands.

Up to 50 firms pitched for the contract and they were shortlisted down to five.

Representatives of each of the shortlisters made presentations to a panel last Friday and it is understood that a firm has been chosen.

But city manager Joe Gavin has to sign off on the contract first — a process that is expected to take several weeks.

Will the acid spill in the Docklands area today, and the evacuation of large sections of the area, the closure of Centre Park Road, Manahan’s Road and the Marina, complicate matters in relation to recent planning applications in the Docklands, especially since the HSA have already advised against granting planning in one case due to presence of Seveso sites? If the entire road network in and out of the area can be closed by such an incident, and large-scale evacuations can arise, will this affect the planners’ thoughts?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0703/breaking43.htm

theres still no lead from the city council on what they propose to do about the Seveso sites – they’ll have to grab the issue by the horns sooner or later – probably later, when the PR firm is hired!

dont know how true it is but someone at work tells me the govt have announced that there wont be funding for the docklands bridge until at least 2010 – joke – not really a surprise though given the lack of fund for infrastructure from Dublin for cork in general – last bus at 11.30 is such a joke

if that is true Cork politicans should hang their heads in shame!!! No point in blaming Dublin it is our politicans that are useless!!!!

No doubt they will just stay quiet like they did over the aiport! Martin won’t be heard from for a while.

From what I saw on the paper, Ascon are looking for a licence to dredge 9000 tonnes of spoil from the river bed at the location of the proposed bridge..
Work is planned between mid August and mid September.

@Pug wrote:

dont know how true it is but someone at work tells me the govt have announced that there wont be funding for the docklands bridge until at least 2010 – joke – not really a surprise though given the lack of fund for infrastructure from Dublin for cork in general – last bus at 11.30 is such a joke

The last bus in Dublin is also at 11:30, what’s wrong with that? In fact some Dublin Bus routes have their last
service at 11! Cork is not hard done by in that department

last bus at 11.30 is such a joke

apologies, i should have clarified, my point was meant to refer to no nightlinks in existence and poor public transport

agreed, Cork does need a night link. However it is important to note that the night link in Dublin is a skeleton service and the buses are only outbound and some routes only have two services per night

well it was confirmed that there is no funding for the bridge until at least 2010. Now the only thing we can hope for is that they name the projects now that will get funding then so that the docklands is not left in limbo.

Still think the government should be looking at the bigger picture and see the substantial economic benefits this would bring.

Read an article in the examiner recently where the guy was very worried about how the government is run by teachers and solicitors…….while not suggesting there is anything wrong with these professions we need more business people to be involved to get a good over all picture. Michael O’Leary was suggested as one guy that should be enlisted by the government to give his point of view. Makes sense but can’t see it happening!

@cgcsb wrote:

agreed, Cork does need a night link. However it is important to note that the night link in Dublin is a skeleton service and the buses are only outbound and some routes only have two services per night

its much more than a skeleton service to be honest, i lived up there and depended on it completely to get to Lucan after a night out – i’d be more than happy to start with 2 buses in cork say at 1am and 2am to all the major suburbs like douglas/carrigaline, wilton/bishopstown/ballincollig, glanmire and mayfield – you’d need more then for the bigger routes –

“Bump” 🙂

I thought id awaken this thread…

So what’s all this business of Port Of Cork objecting to the Port Quarter (R&H Hall) development? They said something like developing the docklands would compromise there activity’s in the port. Are they just bitter about not getting the planning for Ringaskiddy?

Also I saw on the Howard Holdings website that they plan to develop those sorry looking warehouses on Albert quay turning them into 11,150 sq.m of high spec office / retail accommodation.
Anybody have any more information on this scheme? Will they bulldoze the lot or are they planning to use some of the stone work?

http://www.howardholdingsplc.com/index.php/development/project/albert-quay-cork/

@Leesider wrote:

…

Read an article in the examiner recently where the guy was very worried about how the government is run by teachers and solicitors…….while not suggesting there is anything wrong with these professions we need more business people to be involved to get a good over all picture. Michael O’Leary was suggested as one guy that should be enlisted by the government to give his point of view. Makes sense but can’t see it happening!

The problem is that people with big business backgrounds, as well as planning and architectural backgrounds are simply not entering Irish politics. Teachers enter quite simply because they have such short hours and long holidays that they can easily become councillors and then make a jump to being a TD. Schools even hold their jobs open for them while they’re a sitting TD! Traditionally, (although this is rapidly decreasing) Farmers were also massively over-represented in Leinster House. Solicitors and barristers also have relatively large amounts of freedom to partake in political life compared to other professions as they’re usually self-employed, or working in small partnerships. They also tend to have a better understanding of the political system than most as they are engaged in law.

Business people need to put their money where their mouth is and stand!! If Michael O’Leary wants to be involved in government he should stand for election. There’s no point in standing on the sidelines and moaning. There’s no reason why he, or anyone else should or could be appointed to Government without winning an election. It would be just a ‘tad’ undemocratic.

I also reckon that more architects and planners need to consider standing for council, for the senate or for the dail. There may be people on these boards who ought to be considering standing in the local elections next time around!!

Perhaps one way forward would be to make some kind of legal provision where by employers were obliged to allow someone to work part-time or job share if they were entering political life. It’s very difficult to break into politics without a lot of free time on your hands. Although that is unlikely to ever happen as it would weaken the position of existing politicians…

We have quite an open and easily accessible political system, it’s about time that people other than teachers, solicitors, farmers and the odd accountant used it!

TDs now make over €100k p.a., excluding expenses etc. Why in the hell would we make extra provision for them such as holding their jobs etc? Granted a Dail career can be short, if a TD cocks up, but so can a career in medicine if you cock that up. Every job has consequences, the whole point of political representation is that there are consequences to your actions to meet or fail your constituency expectations. The Irish system even goes so far as to make lump sum payments to TDs if they fail to be reelected! That’s before we get started on the pension….

Granted, the situation is different for coucillors, but this topic started about those in government.

I know several TDs and I can assure you it’s not a cake walk of a job. Yes, the money isn’t bad but you are literally on the phone pretty much every waking hour answering constituency queries and have to be nice to every single caller, regardless of how big/small or sensible their query actually is. The work load is mind-blowing. And, before you say that a lot of it is just paying lip service to callers, the reality of our democratic system is that you’re up against up to 4 other sitting TDs on a day-in, day-out basis. So, if you don’t answer the phone, one of your counterparts will.

Your career could be high flying and go on for decades, or it could be a short lived stint on the back benches, particularly if you’re in opposition.

You can cock up as a doctor, an architect, a sales person in Tesco and get fired but as an elected representative you do not have any tenure. You face the electorate every 5 years and there are absolutely no guarantees of keeping your seat. Your career could be over just like that and it’s happened to plenty of good TDs too! It doesn’t even take a cock-up, the electorate can be quite fickle.

The vast majority of TDs get into politics for all the right reasons, i.e. that they’ve a desire to actually do something for their communities. There are a few rotten apples, but the same could be said for any area of life. Unfortunately, they do tend to tarnish the whole world of politics.

The fact that someone has to risk their career / pause it to run a campaign which may or may not be successful and then their career could only last 5 years does mean that they are taking a huge risk. If you’ve a mortgage and kids, it’s often an unacceptably high risk.

I just think that something could be done to make some kind of provision for people to participate in public life. E.g. an ability to take time off / take a career break, even an unpaid one. It would actually be highly beneficial for companies and sectors to get some of ‘their people’ into the political sphere too as it means that their views are represented. So, you’re not talking about something that doesn’t have rewards for companies willing to allow staff members time off to do something like that.

Even if a company could say, ok take 6 months of unpaid leave to run your campaign. If you don’t make it, you can take up your job again. Not many employers would go that far. So, it rules out the possibility of ever running for the vast majority of us and biases the entire system in favour of those with time on their hands i.e. mostly teachers!

Breaking into politics usually means slogging it out as a councillor too, which to be fair, isn’t exactly a very well paid job and often requires almost as much work as a TD puts in (certainly a back bencher).

I really do think that we need to be incentivising the RIGHT people to become more politically involved. As it stands you’re getting teachers, academics, lawyers and people who’ve got politics in the family i.e. they already have the infrastructure behind them and know what is involved.

Incentivising people to get involved could include outreach and education programmes to show people how to go about becoming an elected representative. Encouraging people to actively participate in political life etc.

I don’t think it’s that unreasonable that a company or employer as part of their social responsibility should facilitate someone when they’re basically going out there to serve their community and their country.

It’s the kind of cynical attitude that seems to exist in Ireland (and elsewhere) when it comes to politics that leads to a situation where the entire system is full of people who know how to work the system, rather than those who are the best at the job.

If it were such an attractive career there’d be a lot more people putting themselves forward for election.

It would be more attractive of course if politicians and councillors in this country were not as corrupt as they are.

I take your point about some short term career break or something but if you are a minister / TD for years and your teaching job is still kept open, i think thats a bit much, but then where do you draw the line?

@MrX wrote:

The fact that someone has to risk their career / pause it to run a campaign which may or may not be successful and then their career could only last 5 years does mean that they are taking a huge risk. If you’ve a mortgage and kids, it’s often an unacceptably high risk.

They choose to make the attempt though

@MrX wrote:

If it were such an attractive career there’d be a lot more people putting themselves forward for election. Breaking into politics usually means slogging it out as a councillor too, which to be fair, isn’t exactly a very well paid job and often requires almost as much work as a TD puts in (certainly a back bencher).

Local council rules allow co opting as far as I know, i.e. if someone gets elected as TD or resigns, someone in the council can pick their brother or friend to be a councillor, thats hardly democratic and councillors have little or no power, it seems to me all they do is write strong letters to government departments and if you have a problem, they refer to you a department, theres no accountability at all

Look at the Lord Mayors salary of 100k or more, that the parties all have made a pact to swop the position between them so someone will get the dosh, thats hardly democracy and i do appreciate that councillors and TD’s have to listen to all and sundry giving out to them but when councillors have take home pay of something like €86k (I think thats the usual annual figure from PJ Sheehan) then theres a reason why people are queueing up to get in

Councillors have very little power, but one of the ones they have, rezoning, is terrifying. Look at the new town proposed and voted for by councillors down by Innishannon against all the advice of the planners and county managers etc

I think bureacracy has an awful lot to answer for in this country

@green_jesus wrote:

Also I saw on the Howard Holdings website that they plan to develop those sorry looking warehouses on Albert quay turning them into 11,150 sq.m of high spec office / retail accommodation.
Anybody have any more information on this scheme? Will they bulldoze the lot or are they planning to use some of the stone work?

http://www.howardholdingsplc.com/index.php/development/project/albert-quay-cork/

Hopefully they’ll retain the stone work, it’ll add some ‘texture’ to otherwise bland glass ‘n’ cladding buildings. It will be interesting to see what goes up there, knowing how lovey-dovey Howard Holdings and OCP are, it’ll be a 15 story monolith, just to block all views from the Elysian! 🙂

At the moment, those buildings are being used to house huge pumps, presumably for water extraction from the OCP site?

@MrX wrote:

I know several TDs and I can assure you it’s not a cake walk of a job. Yes, the money isn’t bad but you are literally on the phone pretty much every waking hour answering constituency queries and have to be nice to every single caller, regardless of how big/small or sensible their query actually is. The work load is mind-blowing.

I’m in the same position in my job, so are many people in sales and other such service industries.

You can cock up as a doctor, an architect, a sales person in Tesco and get fired but as an elected representative you do not have any tenure. You face the electorate every 5 years and there are absolutely no guarantees of keeping your seat.

I recognise the fickle nature of politics, but wouldn’t it be great to only worry about getting the sack 1 day out of 1825!?! In every other job you can get the chop on any given day!

It would actually be highly beneficial for companies and sectors to get some of ‘their people’ into the political sphere too as it means that their views are represented.

So, we move to a Yank like system where there are more vested interests than voices of the people!? Right. :rolleyes:

Listen, I agree with your basic point that more talented people, or to avoid offending serving politicians, people with different skills/talents, should be encouraged into the political sphere. I just don’t think some sort of guarantee which ends up costing business is the answer.

@Angry Rebel wrote:

So, we move to a Yank like system where there are more vested interests than voices of the people!? Right. :rolleyes:
er.

I’m not suggesting that they be company sponsored, I’m just suggesting that certain sectors are vastly over-represented in the make up of the Dail and others are grossly under-represented simply because some people have more control over their hours and have more time on their hands than others.

I mean how many engineers, architects, planners, scientists, IT people, nurses, gardai, hospital doctors etc ever make into Leinster House?

From what I can see it’s teachers, who tend to be well-meaning, good at talking rather a lot and not doing all that much. Accountants and legal professionals who tend to be good at tying themselves into knots of red tape and a good smattering of self-employed business types who often seem to follow some very narrow agendas…

What’s the latest on the Howard Holdings application for the Arena etc? Surely a decision is due soon?

@MrX wrote:

I’m not suggesting that they be company sponsored, I’m just suggesting that certain sectors are vastly over-represented in the make up of the Dail and others are grossly under-represented simply because some people have more control over their hours and have more time on their hands than others.

I mean how many engineers, architects, planners, scientists, IT people, nurses, gardai, hospital doctors etc ever make into Leinster House?

From what I can see it’s teachers, who tend to be well-meaning, good at talking rather a lot and not doing all that much. Accountants and legal professionals who tend to be good at tying themselves into knots of red tape and a good smattering of self-employed business types who often seem to follow some very narrow agendas…

Ruari Quinn’s an architect.

Made a good finance minister.

I see something is being done on Seveso sites in the Finance Bill (see below). While I’m no fan of this Government, and whilst you would like to see action on tax incentives and infrastructure, is the Seveso issue the most pressing and is this measure enough to keep (get?) things moving in the docklands? Would be interested in hearing views.

Tax incentive a step to kick-starting docklands

By Eoin English
A TAX incentive scheme announced in the budget has been described as a small step towards kick-starting the multi-billion regeneration of Cork’s docklands.

But opposition parties and business leaders demanded further action and commitments from the Government to get the ambitious project, which has the potential to create thousands of construction jobs, off the ground.

Cork Chamber also criticised the fact that State supports for a crucial piece of infrastructure — the Eastern Gateway Bridge designed to open up the south docks — were not included in the budget.

Cork City Council has drafted ambitious plans for the transformation of the 400-acre docklands region site into a waterfront urban quarter with thousands of apartments, offices, hotels and an events centre.

The Cork Docklands Forum, set up by the Government last year and chaired by former UCC president Professor Gerry Wrixon, has said the Exchequer should fund hundreds of millions of euro worth of infrastructure, including bridges and roads, to kickstart the development.

Its report said the potential of the project — the biggest proposal since the International Financial Services Centre in Dublin 20 years ago — is huge.

However, developers have baulked at paying the cost of basic infrastructure to the area. And much of the docklands is unusable because it has been occupied for decades by oil tanks and other high-risk operations — so-called Seveso sites.

Finance Minister Brian Lenihan announced plans yesterday to introduce a new tax incentive scheme to facilitate the relocation of Seveso sites.

There are three such sites in Cork’s Docklands owned by Topaz Energy, the National Oil Reserve Agency and Gouldings Fertilisers.

“This scheme will be subject to clearance by the European Commission from a state aid’s perspective,” said Mr Lenihan.

The Docklands Forum said offering grants to these companies to move operations would not breach EU state aid rules.

Cork Chamber chief executive Conor Healy welcomed the Seveso move but said a whole range of further measures are needed.

“We would hope to see additional support in the Finance Bill,” he said.

Fine Gael’s innovation spokesperson Deirdre Clune described Mr Lenihan’s announcement “as the one bright spot in an otherwise bleak and bad budget for everyone in the country”.

“One obstacle holding up the docklands project has been removed and that is good news,” she said.

Fine Gael senator Jerry Buttimer said he is disappointed that there was no clear commitment to funding the overall docklands project.

“This was promised before previous budgets and has not been delivered,” he said.

“The Seveso tax incentive is a small step and is subject to approval from Brussels.”

remains to be seen whats in the Finance Bill i suppose but the Seveso should have been done ages ago (Health & safety will be delighted, they wont have to keep sending pointless letters every time there is an application within a seveso zone) and if there is nothing for the rest of the docklands in the bill, well, thats just an out and out disgrace. Its bad enough we got landed with the airport debt and they still havent appointed a chairman to the airport authority. Remember, local elections next year. Dont hide from the councillor at the door, ask him what are they doing about the docklands. (Answer: Nothing, as they have no power).

Cork City Council last night voted in favour of rezoning a sports ground at Farranlea Rd in Wilton for a 100 bed facility for the HSE. Councillor Dave McCarthy questioned the move when he said Our Ladys Hospital is lying idle. Councillors have said its not setting a precedent though. (Presume they are hinting at O’ Callaghans plans to get Cork Con rezoned).

@Pug wrote:

remains to be seen whats in the Finance Bill i suppose but the Seveso should have been done ages ago (Health & safety will be delighted, they wont have to keep sending pointless letters every time there is an application within a seveso zone) and if there is nothing for the rest of the docklands in the bill, well, thats just an out and out disgrace. Its bad enough we got landed with the airport debt and they still havent appointed a chairman to the airport authority. Remember, local elections next year. Dont hide from the councillor at the door, ask him what are they doing about the docklands. (Answer: Nothing, as they have no power).

Cork City Council last night voted in favour of rezoning a sports ground at Farranlea Rd in Wilton for a 100 bed facility for the HSE. Councillor Dave McCarthy questioned the move when he said Our Ladys Hospital is lying idle. Councillors have said its not setting a precedent though. (Presume they are hinting at O’ Callaghans plans to get Cork Con rezoned).

McGonigle, Shannon, Shields, Corr et al will do as they are TOLD at the end of the day.
And from today’s Cork Independent.

KEEPING MUM
What a coy city councillor is Fine Gael’s Laura McGonigle!
Take a dekko at her website to see why. She tells us the Corpo lads and lassies met reps from Owen O’Callaghan Properties to discuss his plans for the Temple Hill Cork Con site, The 93 houses, the 354 apartments, the offices, the shops. Etc, etc.
What’s more, the co-opted councilor would “be most interested to hear your views on the O’Callaghan proposal”. More to the point, we’d be most interested to hear her views particularly in light of the fact that the Council and City Manager have already said no more rezoning of green acres. Not even over their dead bodies. Is she for that, or not?
Has she got a solid opinion on the thorny subject or has O’Callaghan already got carte blanche for his very controversial project?
Or is she merely trying to gild the Lilly? She claims to represent punters in the Ballinlough/Silverdale area who are already up in arms at the traffic chaos in a section of the city that can no longer cope with poor planning,
They certainly would like to know where she really stands on O’Callaghan’s plan.
She says we can be assured she’ll be voting against the development in its current form. But what does she mean by “in its current form”?
Oh, and she’d also welcome your views on the Osprey Properties plan to construct 128 houses and 127 apartments at ChurchLane just down the road,
No doubt also in its “current form”.

the residents out by the silver key, who objected to the Eircom site being developed, made a good point in that a decision can wait until plans are revealed for O’ Callaghan Properties development on the Cork Con grounds. Seems logical to me. One of the objectors mentioned that O’ Callaghans already had a plan prepared for the Cork Con site which again makes sense but the question remains will the city authorities row back on their plans to rezone a sportsground for residential. Who knows until the plan is seen. Dont expect Fianna Fail to object though.

remains to be seen whats in the Finance Bill i suppose but the Seveso should have been done ages ago (Health & safety will be delighted, they wont have to keep sending pointless letters every time there is an application within a seveso zone) and if there is nothing for the rest of the docklands in the bill, well, thats just an out and out disgrace. Its bad enough we got landed with the airport debt and they still havent appointed a chairman to the airport authority. Remember, local elections next year. Dont hide from the councillor at the door, ask him what are they doing about the docklands. (Answer: Nothing, as they have no power).

I am in favour of well-planned development of the Docklands. With suitable infrastructure etc etc. It could be a nice place to live.

But how much money should the taxpayers of Ireland (or Germany) have to chip in to make it “viable”? After all (and I don’t have a problem with this), developers want to develop down there to make a profit.

Not to “improve the city”.
Or to “enhance the public realm”
Or to “create a new gateway to the city”.

It is for money the developers do their thing, and fair play to them. But why should the taxpayers of Europe pay for the removal of the Seveso sites so that the developers can do their thing? Maybe it’s all academic now anyway, with the credit crunch.

The airport is a bit different, becasue it is a strategic piece of economic infrastructure which all of the citizens of Munster (or farther afield) can use, and may need.

But the Docklands is all about the money to be made by Developers, and more power to their elbows if they can squeeze a few hundred million out of “Europe”. Obviously if the Docklands goes ahead, it will benefit many of us who work in the industry, which is what we want too, financially.

well we need developers to actually build the things because as you can see, if we waited on the government, it would never get built. They are taking the risk so are entitled to profits. The most frustrating part is that If govt had managed the airport project properly, they would have had the money for the bridge which would kickstart the whole docklands. I do some project management work and if I thought there was like minded people out there, I would work some hours for free to get Docklands going as its so slow in moving.

I agree with you to the extent that we have to balance what the taxpayers contribute to what they will get back but I think most people would agree a new bridge would hugely improve the infrastructure of cork and keep traffic moving, given that the rest of the transport in cork is rubbish

It’s a tough balance Pug, it sounds too much to me like the current US environment: capitalising profit & socialising loss.

but if the planning process was in any way proper, theres no reason why developers cant be made to build the District Centres and Neighbourhood centres and infrastructure before or at the same time as they do their residential, office development etc. The planning process though doesnt appear to be used in such a manner.

The alternative though is to rely on the system and local/central government to do it which means it will never happen. Look at CIE putting 2 different planning applications through for Horgans Quay despite being told from the outset that they would need a Masterplan for Kent station. They still persisted, got refused, appealed to Bord Pleanala and got refused, all the time knowing they were wasting time and unknown amounts of tax payers money, whereeas if they had done the plan, they could have been kicking off the docklands as we speak.

I live in carrigaline and a transport study for the town was completed recently. Between that and the traffic studies completed by Port of Cork, they acknowledged the traffic and transport network for Carrigaline was poor and over capacity. At the same time councillors have apparently voted to rezone more land for houses! when i challenged them on it, they said they were afraid the developer would not build the recreation / amenitys he promised. Talk about the tail wagging the dog. Had it not ocurred to them to form a contract so the builder has to develop the recreation / amenity first and then be allowed build his houses? All this of course while the councillors then acknowledged there was no money to implement the transport study. Unbelieveable!

Its a case of the lesser of 2 evils, have nothing built by the local bureaucracy or try and put some semblance of control on whats built by developers. Current system fits between the 2 i think.

Got this notice via eTenders on Friday, (Re: Pre-Qual for Public Realm Design):

“Cork Docklands is a propopsed high density mixed use urban regeneration project consisting of approximately 162 Ha and will ultimately provide for a population of 22,000 and 27,000 jobs which will be the key development project for the future of Cork City and its environs which has a current population of approx. 250,000. The project is for an international quality design of a masterplan and detailed design of 2.5 km of quayside amenity, streetcapes, multiple pocket parks and plazas, and which will meet with the objectives of the approved Local Area Plans and Public Realm Strategies.”

“NOTE: To register your interest in this notice and obtain any additional information please visit the eTenders Web Site at http://www.etenders.gov.ie/Search/Search_Switch.aspx?ID=72902.”

Nothing in 2009 budget – but at least they’re thinking bout it!!

true, possibly they could have got this going some time ago but hey, they’re doing something.vaguely.kind of.

De paper made mention of forthcoming works being undertaken by the council to upgrade a stretch of the Marina. Narrowing the carriageway and adding parking spaces, raising the level of the road surface by 1 meter to facilitate future developments in the docklands. It’s small, but it’s a step in the right direction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7753171.stm

Belfast takes another step towards becoming Ireland’s second city.

Any updates on Atlantic quarter?

no, i was looking at the planning on city council website recently and they were due to send in Further Info but havent. The lack of govt commitment on the docklands bridge is very poor. Also makes you wonder, with CIE in trouble, what will they do with the years- late-in-being-developed Horgans Quay? might be a positive in that CIE have to sell off the site and as per usual, private sector can do it properly.

@mickeydocs wrote:

Any updates on Atlantic quarter?

My understanding is they have until the end of Jan to put in the FI

I came across this link…

http://www.haconnect.ie/portfolio/category/digital-marketing/

Will the Atlantic Quarter ever get built? :confused:

And is there any news on the R&H hall development?

still waiting on the further info re atlantic quarter, they have as the previous poster said, 2 weeks to submit the further info

R&H Hall were asked for a lot of Further info and changes for their plans so i think they have until the end of Feb to submit that but they could always I assume re submit a plan after that date anyway

While waiting on the governments dithering about the money for infrastructure, Cork City Council to their credit have ploughed ahead with the Oral hearing as to the future road structure in the docklands so that report should be out in mid feb

Thank for the update. So it’s after February before we know if any more progress has been made.

Not a very realiable source but there was a mention on the echo about HH site and how they intented to proceed with hotel and Arch (conference centre) this probably makes sense in current climate. I’m sure a concert venue would be vibable and a hotel to could feed off that.

Any word on the GAA investing in their Grounds Pairc ui chaoimh or are they to busy in-fighting?:confused:

How long more before MAS move out of the showgrounds. I thought city successfully CPO’d the showgrounds.

Irrespective of the docklands going ahead the showgrounds could be cleaned up…:mad:

Notice of CPO for Showgrounds on the Irish Examiner today,

What kind of notice as I thought the CPO had been passed.
Has MAS even begun looking for another site? I’m sure Howard Holding would gladly part with old Cork City grounds in Bishopstown.

‘SHOWGROUNDS/MONAGHAN’S ROAD ACCQUISITION ORDER NO. 1 OF 2006’
Form of notice of entry for compulsory puirchase order under section 76 of and the third schedule of the housing act 1966.

I hope this means more to you than it does to me.
Page 36 of yesterdays Irish ‘Examiner’

@SoundsDreamy wrote:

What kind of notice as I thought the CPO had been passed.
Has MAS even begun looking for another site? I’m sure Howard Holding would gladly part with old Cork City grounds in Bishopstown.

Piece in the echo during the week mentioned plans to develop this site (old FAI pitch) with student apartments, some commercial (bank, shop) and business (‘science & technology’). Up to 4 stories. CSD spokesman said they’ll fight it of course.

It’s McCarthy Developments that own the old Cork City ground. They recently applied for PP for a mixed use scheme.

Origin have applied to demolish and clear the materials from 2 sites, the Buhler Grain silo and the Simon & Mouchel grain silos at sites bordered by Kennedy Quay, Marina Walk and Mill Lane – not sure which silos they are but presume they are the silos other than the R&H Hall one, for which Origin were requested for Further Information re their application for that site last year.

North Docklands

I was wondering does anyone have any info on CIE and their continued inexplicable delay in sorting out Kent station? This was due to be turned round to face the quays and redeveloped years ago. They were to do a deal with Manor Park Homes for that site, Manor Park Homes subsequently was sold off and CIE were to create a Masterplan for the site (having applied for the site twice and been refused twice, having been asked to prepare? yes, you’ve guessed it, a Masterplan).

Anyone heard any more about it?

Not gonna happen any time soon I’m afraid the money ain’t there. The only plan on the cards at the moment for Kent station is simply to extend platform 4 down further so after the curve the trains will stop on a straight. As for turning the station around, well another life time perhaps but for the inside information I have those plans are seriously on the long finger.

absolute complete and utter joke. Remember, 21m was earmarked for that and Martin Cullen reduced it to 4m for the lick of paint and minor refurb. Joke.

all the limited money they had was put towards the kildare route project which now is only extending out 10miles from heuston to hazelhatch. Remember CIE are just another one of the Governments whipping boys. On another note anybody heard anything regarding the Hoard Holdings development by the showgrounds. Think I read in the paper the other day the City Councel were supposed to make a final decision on it today but haven’t heard anything.

they got the nod for it, very few objectors as well so is good news, the only people that might bring it to Bord pleanala is themselves, given city councils recent history of asking for huge development contributions.

Like waiting on CIE to sort themselves out and rebuild the train station, we now wait on the government to sort the funding for the required new bridge. To be fair, behind the scenes, city council seem to be doing what they can, they got the application for the bridge going, it has to trawl its way through government departments and into Brussels at some stage, city council also drove ahead with the oral hearings and application to CPO the roads in the Docklands and got landowners organised as to what needs to be done for that.

I wonder what bearing, if any, last night’s Evening Echo story about a marquee-type ‘venue’ at the Landfill site will have on HH’s plans for the Docklands. I understand planning there is either through or imminent. Can’t see the CCC supporting 2 similar-size structures, but what do I know!!

Really great news regarding the atlantic quarter next question tho is will it actually get built in this economic climate. And in fairness credit where its due to the city council, they actually seem to be doing something to get the whole docklands going.

Story is in the Irish Times today, hopefully it will go ahead. Bit of a problem with their domain at the moment though –

This account has been suspended.
Either the domain has been overused, or the reseller ran out of resources.

@sovereign12 wrote:

Really great news regarding the atlantic quarter next question tho is will it actually get built in this economic climate. And in fairness credit where its due to the city council, they actually seem to be doing something to get the whole docklands going.

From what I have heard the events centre and the hotel would go ahead straight away if the bridge was put in place with a number of large office plate buildings (not all of course)…….makes sense in the economic climate we are in, start with the stuff that has a good chance of working.

Having passed the Elysian on countless occasions and having viewed it from a variety of different perspectives it has just dawned on me that I dont notice it anymore. If there were another ten stories on top I really dont think that it would make any difference. This Irish paranoia with heigth is completely ridiculous. A properly designed and positioned tall building need not impose. Lash em up I say.

It looks awful as you approach it coming down Albert Rd.

But then, that’s the low-rise part you see there.

You’re right that the tower element has almost no negative effect on any city perspective.

saw a brief report in the evening echo last week, that brian cowen was in Cork and said the Gateway Innovation Fund was “suspended”. Did I read that right? But that would mean the funding for the bridge is gone up in smoke so for the moment wouldnt it? Arent these the sort of projects that should be funded now given that they would supply jobs etc? If that doesnt happen it will be hard to open up the docklands for the next few years

I fear that the redevelopement of the docks incl. the bridge and light rail is a dead duck for another few years

@Pug wrote:

saw a brief report in the evening echo last week, that brian cowen was in Cork and said the Gateway Innovation Fund was “suspended”. Did I read that right? But that would mean the funding for the bridge is gone up in smoke so for the moment wouldnt it? Arent these the sort of projects that should be funded now given that they would supply jobs etc? If that doesnt happen it will be hard to open up the docklands for the next few years

I don’t think this government has any initiative at all. Nevermind the jobs created in the construction phase which would be very welcome but the jobs and boost to the economy of a permanent venue for concerts, exhibitions etc would mean they would have their money (our money I should say) back in years!

@Leesider wrote:

I don’t think this government has any initiative at all. Nevermind the jobs created in the construction phase which would be very welcome but the jobs and boost to the economy of a permanent venue for concerts, exhibitions etc would mean they would have their money (our money I should say) back in years!

I can understand the need for developing public venues etc, but I don’t think the office and apartment space proposed has any market for the foreseeable future.

It would be fantastic if we could still go ahead with some of the public spaces, and let the apartments and offices happen as needed.

@MrX wrote:

I can understand the need for developing public venues etc, but I don’t think the office and apartment space proposed has any market for the foreseeable future.

It would be fantastic if we could still go ahead with some of the public spaces, and let the apartments and offices happen as needed.

I realise the office space and apartments are a non runner at the moment but the events centre and a hotel would not be and provide a welcome boost to the economy, green and public spaces on top of this and it could be a nice area……..of course the long overdue development of the pairc would be a welcome boost as well

Actually, office space could still be a goer.

Although Cork has a glut of commercial space, there’s a serious lack of good quality modern office space near the city centre (Believe me, we’re in the process of looking!). Plenty out in Mahon, Little Island or up at the airport, but not in the city centre itself.

@jungle wrote:

Actually, office space could still be a goer.

Although Cork has a glut of commercial space, there’s a serious lack of good quality modern office space near the city centre (Believe me, we’re in the process of looking!). Plenty out in Mahon, Little Island or up at the airport, but not in the city centre itself.

I think his aim first day was to attract large companies such as google to cork, for this the office plate has to be quite big……..fat chance of all this happening when we our local politicans can’t even get us a bridge!

remarkable that the govt have no means apparently of giving us a bridge costing 60m to kickstart the entire docklands but magically a bridge that costs 59m is sitting on a barge just outside Dublin Port having arrived from Rotterdam

Sure the jackeens don’t need it now that the IFSC is gone quiet…

Could we stage a daring raid to steal it? It’s probably too short but sure we could throw a few planks across the gap until we find the extra few bob.

@jungle wrote:

Actually, office space could still be a goer.

Although Cork has a glut of commercial space, there’s a serious lack of good quality modern office space near the city centre (Believe me, we’re in the process of looking!). Plenty out in Mahon, Little Island or up at the airport, but not in the city centre itself.

Can second this – we’re about to move from the city centre for this very reason. D’OH! 🙁

@Pug wrote:

remarkable that the govt have no means apparently of giving us a bridge costing 60m to kickstart the entire docklands but magically a bridge that costs 59m is sitting on a barge just outside Dublin Port having arrived from Rotterdam

not to mention the 5 billion for the metro……I will say it again our politicans are crap!

@Leesider wrote:

not to mention the 5 billion for the metro……I will say it again our politicans are crap!

+ 1

It’s sad to see private business (the sextant, an crubin, el vino, boardwalk etc) close to the elysian being brave enough to give it a go but getting f*** all in return. The Bonded Warehouse is a MUST as cultural/CHQ type building.

@Angry Rebel wrote:

Sure the jackeens don’t need it now that the IFSC is gone quiet…

Could we stage a daring raid to steal it? It’s probably too short but sure we could throw a few planks across the gap until we find the extra few bob.

From Dublin? Surely, A Bridge Too Far? (sorry!)

@who_me wrote:

Can second this – we’re about to move from the city centre for this very reason. D’OH! 🙁

thats mad, i think there was a good few due to come on line but i imagine the developers are holding tough in the downturn, immediate thoughts of ones i thought would be available are Lapps Quay, Clarkes Bridge, The Elysian, Georges quay and in time then the Sullivans Quay might be around and i think whoever it is on grand parade that is developing the site by the library, from what i saw on city planning website yesterday, seemed to have got the nod to change residential to office

you’re right though, the space that comes to mind is all eastgate, city gate, ballincollig etc

All of the office space you quote is small floor plate stuff…no good if you are a google of this world…

But the type of office space that who_me and I can’t find isn’t the sort that Google would need.

In our case, we need about 300 square metres for our current usage, but would be looking for closer to 500 to allow for planned future expansion.

There is an incredible lack of office space of that kind around the city centre considering we’re at the end of a boom where we’re supposed to have built too much property.

I guess the market wasn’t as profitable as housing a few years ago, but it seems to be a lot more robust now. There aren’t many vacant new offices around the city centre.

The Elysian only had three offices built into it. One has already gone to ACC. The others are too small and also command a premium for street frontage that we don’t particularly need.

Where is all this talk of google moving to Cork coming from?
Google currently have quite nice office space in Grand Canal Dock in Dublin. If Howard Holdings or some other Developer were to build large corprate office space in the docklands who is to say that google or any other large company based in Dublin or elsewhere would move their base to Cork?
The only real hope for attracting these types of companies is to attract companies not yet based in Ireland to set up in Cork when they do move here. This isn’t likely to happen for a good few years

yeah, i think the lads are making the point more about floor space sizes rather than Google coming to Cork. Dead right though, there isnt huge floor space for offices really available right in city centre. Mate of mine worked in the Siemens building over by Penrose Quay and thats idle at the moment i think, must be fairly big and very new?

Google is moving it’s offices across the street to the new Montevetro tower in Grand Canal Dock, Dublin. For those who don’t know the developement, it’s literally beside a dart station and I mean the front door is less than 10 metres from the station. Good luck competing with that!

Amazon opened their European hq in Cork.

Yeah, a lot of the businesses in the airport business park really should be in the city / docklands eg. Amazon, Citco, Hibernian, etc. I thought there was some rule that you can only get planning for headquarter operations in the city centre? Wasn’t there a lot of controversy on this issue viz the Rev Comms move to Blackpool?

If you had these sized operations in the city centre it would greatly improve the post work atmosphere on weekday evenings (the city is a ghost town from 6pm to 9pm most nights), would lead to more city living and would in turn better justify Cork’s claim to have light rail etc.

@browser wrote:

Yeah, a lot of the businesses in the airport business park really should be in the city / docklands eg. Amazon, Citco, Hibernian, etc. I thought there was some rule that you can only get planning for headquarter operations in the city centre? Wasn’t there a lot of controversy on this issue viz the Rev Comms move to Blackpool?

If you had these sized operations in the city centre it would greatly improve the post work atmosphere on weekday evenings (the city is a ghost town from 6pm to 9pm most nights), would lead to more city living and would in turn better justify Cork’s claim to have light rail etc.

you mean the Revenue building where they never included proper amount of parking so now loads of people park on the main road causing an obstruction? imagine that, people actually visiting a Revenue office for forms and to sort out taxes. Very unusual.

You’re forgetting that there are the guts of 500 parking spots in that development…oh wait, sorry I forgot that they are for staff and only 10 are for customers. Damn pesky customers.

@jungle wrote:

But the type of office space that who_me and I can’t find isn’t the sort that Google would need.

In our case, we need about 300 square metres for our current usage, but would be looking for closer to 500 to allow for planned future expansion.

In our case, we’re even smaller – about 200m2. We found a handful of suitable options around the city, but all were priced at a premium. Lack of parking didn’t help either (several employees from outside the city, so public transport not an option).

My 5 minute walk to work has turned into a 30 minute commute.. but can’t complain, considering! 😉 The docklands would have been idea – right side of the city and still central, but it’s in limbo.

What up with the Atlantic Quarter its website has been removed?

http://www.atlanticquarter.ie

http://www.atlanticquarter.com

Does Cork City Council run this scheme? if they can’t even keep the website running, how can they possibly organise a new bridge, stadium, light rail line and office/residential/retail area?

I was passing yesterday and noticed a planning permission application had gone on the old Cork Warehouse Company site (the last part of the Elysian block that’s still undeveloped)

So here’s the application from the Corporation Website

The demolition of the building known as the Cork Warehouse Co Ltd at the corner of Albert Street and Albert Quay and the construction of a mixed use office development with ground floor retail area. The proposed development has a height of 7 no storeys with an additional 2 no storey set back fronting the junction of Albert St and Albert Quay. The proposed development includes 2no levels of basement car parking for 87 no vehicles accessed from Albert Street, ESB switch room, plant room, roof top plant area and hard and soft landscaping. The site is bound to the north by Albert Quay, to the south by Port Lane, to the east by Albert Street and adjoins a disused commercial building to the west. The overall development comprises of 13,462.27 sqm GFA of office space and 2no ground floor retails units totalling 846.59 sqm GFA. The proposed development requires a waste licence for the disposal of excavated soil off site.

Odlums are closing their premises on Kennedy Quay.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0702/odlums.html

While, it’s obviously unfortunate for the workers involved, this needs to be a wake up call for the council. This is probably the Docklands building most worth preserving.

The workers must have known this was coming. Had been heavily mentioned for re-development.
Agreed, its a fantastic building with major scope for a civic, cultural use. In fairness, CCC have recognised this too and written it into the local area plan. The developers themselves are also conscious of this.

Nearby, Joe Gavin is due to bring forward a motion to list (i.e. make a protected structured) the remaining Ford production buildings on the quays. Now used for a multitude of retail and manufacturing uses, they have a rich industrial history underneath all the modern rubbish.

@cgcsb wrote:

Does Cork City Council run this scheme? if they can’t even keep the website running, how can they possibly organise a new bridge, stadium, light rail line and office/residential/retail area?

its nothing to do with the city council, its private developers. City council to be fair are tipping away at things like seveso sites, organising the CPO on the road networks, i think the application for the bridge is trawling through government and EU funding applications (but its something the government could have invested in for Cork ages ago but we are shafted as per usual)

@Radioactiveman wrote:

Nearby, Joe Gavin is due to bring forward a motion to list (i.e. make a protected structured) the remaining Ford production buildings on the quays. Now used for a multitude of retail and manufacturing uses, they have a rich industrial history underneath all the modern rubbish.

Which buildings are those, exactly?

Alarm as €2m funds to kick off Docklands plan deferred

By Eoin English and Conor Ryan

Saturday, July 04, 2009

THE Government is under fire for stalling a decision to release just €2.3 million to help kickstart the State’s largest urban regeneration scheme.

Cork’s Lord Mayor Cllr Dara Murphy said the decision to defer vital funding for infrastructure for the city’s ambitious Docklands plan could bring the entire project grinding to a halt.

His warning follows confirmation from Environment Minister John Gormley that funding decisions relating to crucial Docklands infrastructure projects have been deferred “having regard to the prevailing budgetary constraints”.

Mr Gormley revealed the decision in a written reply to a parliamentary question. Mr Murphy said he was alarmed by the move.

“The withdrawal of this funding is extremely shortsighted and shows a bias against the southern capital,” he said.

The city council immediately needs €2.3m to appoint a design team for the proposed Eastern Gateway Bridge, the Lord Mayor insisted.

The €80m swing bridge, which will be the largest of its kind in Europe, is designed to unlock the entire south docks area for redevelopment.

The council applied in 2007 to the Government’s Gateway Innovation Fund for €60m to help build it. It has been waiting for an announcement since.

But Mr Murphy said the decision to defer funding will effectively “handcuff a progressive local authority”.

The council has been working for several years on the project.

Howard Holdings has been granted planning permission for its €2bn Atlantic Quarter project. Several other major docklands projects are in the pipeline.

The council has spent over €5m on preliminary design and planning approval for the bridge. A public hearing into land acquisition has been held and a decision is expected from An Bord Pleanála within weeks.

The council has completed the tender process for a design team and needs just €2.3m to formally appoint the team.

The council hopes the building work will start in April 2011 and that the bridge will open to traffic in the first quarter of 2013.

But Cork Chamber chief executive, Conor Healy said the minister’s announcement is “completely unacceptable and lacks clarity”.

“It is disgraceful that the Government is now going down the line of cutting back on productive capital and infrastructural expenditure, with proven cost benefit analyses, which are vital to the future of Ireland’s economy,” he said.

The Cork Docklands Forum, set up by former taoiseach Bertie Ahern in 2007 and chaired by ex-UCC president Professor Gerry Wrixon, says the potential of the project — the biggest proposal since the International Financial Services Centre in Dublin 20 years ago — is huge.

The forum also recommended that the Exchequer should fund hundreds of millions of euro worth of infrastructure to kickstart the development.

Its report has yet to be published.

This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Saturday, July 04, 2009

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/snojojqley/rss2/#ixzz0KVG43MRG&D

two years after the CPO started, Cork City council are to pay 10 million to the Munster Agricultural society for the showgrounds (who had wanted 40 million apparently).

It might mean at last, the council can get on with figuring out some way of sorting out a redeveloped pairc ui chaoimh. To be fair, it does seem as if city manager Joe Gavin is tipping away in the background with bits and pieces in the docklands.

Pairc ui chaoimh should now be redeveloped into a multi discipline fabulous stadium. Council will also have to be aware of Munsters plans to redevelop Musgrave Pk, I’m sure they wouldnt want cork to miss out and have all munsters games end up in Thomond Park

And slowly the process continues.

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/changes-agreed-to-citys-docklands-strategy-102639.html

I hope to see the docklands redeveloped in my lifetime.

@jungle wrote:

I hope to see the docklands redeveloped in my lifetime.

How old are you?

Today’s echo has the headline ‘Cork Docklands event centre is to go ahead’; attached is a clip of the front page.