Developments in Cork

@who_me wrote:

Ok, I’ll ask the obvious question. Why is the estate being bought now, off a third party, rather than buy at the time Brideview bought the site?

😉 Some might suggest this may be a bail out for developers who thought the sun would never cease to shine as in the case of the CCC buying 90 apartments in the former Our Lady’s hospital 2 months ago for “older people”,a development with pityful sales for many years.

The ABP public hearing regarding City Manager, Joe Gavin’s wish to CPO the showgrounds site may now be irrelevant as the manager has been asked to confirm to Council (next Monday) that negotiations with the Munster Agricultural Society have concluded and that CCC have acquired the property.

Last year CCC invited proposals from interested parties for the provision of a new Central Library. Documentation was prepared which set out specification of requirements with an indication that the new library should be located in the Grand Parade or its vicinity. They offered the existing library site as part of the package.

Five proposals were received following the public call. A selection process was implemented resulting in a recommendation that the proposal of Frinailla Developments be accepted

Frinailla Development’s proposal involves the building of the new library on part of the current library site extending into adjoining property. The new library proposed will comprise in excess of 50,000 sq.ft. which is twice the size of the existing library. The cost of designing and building the new library will be met by Frinailla Developments. The building will be handed over to the City Council in exchange for that part of the current library site which will not form part of the new library.

Under the arrangement, the City Council will secure a Central Library on Grand Parade without any financial outlay. Frinailla Developments will also provide temporary accommodation for the current library, while the new one is under construction, free of charge.
A planning application for the library and for the development of the adjoining run-down buildings will be made within two months.
.

@kite wrote:

Irish Nationwides appeal to extend banking hall for a change of use from retail to commercial, internal alterations and site works 33 and 34 St Patrick’s Street, Cork have also been greenlit by ABP despite their Inspectors recommendation of refusal.

There are errors of fact and spurious insinuations in kike’s posting.

This was not a first party appeal by Irish Nationwide against a City Council refusal. It was a third party appeal by a serial appellant against a permission.

In deciding to grant permission the Board had regard to
•the provisions of the Cork City Development Plan 2004
•the limited floor area of the proposed extension of the existing banking hall and
•the fact that the proposed design would result in a significant improvement in the appearance of this important corner building on Patrick Street.

In deciding not to accept the Inspector’s recommendation, the Board had regard to
•the established use of part of this building as a banking hall and
•the planning gain associated with the amalgamation in visual terms of No’s 34 & 35 Patrick Street as a single unit at this prime corner site.

Anyone genuinely interested in architecture and urban design would surely applaud such a decision.

Why should the Board always accept the Inspector’s recommendation? Would you argue that a judge should always accept police evidence? What is the point in having a Board if they can be bullied by tabloid reporting into accepting the Inspector’s view?

@kite wrote:

Why have inspectors visit a site, see firsthand the pros and cons of granting or refusing permission only to have the decision made by “the flip of a coin” in Dublin by people who may not be able to pick Cork out on a map?
A judge has all the facts before him or her and has to be fully trained in law.
Not so with ABP whose members may be nothing more than the greyhound trainer of some Government Minister.

You are more than a little out of date.

Whatever might have happened in the dark reign of Jimmy Tully, the Board members are now nominated by professional bodies such as RIAI, IPI, RTPI IEI etc. Several of the Board are former senior inspectors.. one a Chief Tehnical Officer.

On the other hand, some Inspectors are fee per case English planners who fly in from Stansted on the day of the inspection. When they arrive at the site in their Hertz car, it may be the first time they have been in that county. No earthly reason why you should rely on them to always get it right. Reading some of their reports they seem to believe that they are in Roscommonshire.

Woud you expect a judge in a criminal case to rely on the forensic evidence because he/she has not visited the scene of the crime?

@Dieter wrote:

You are more than a little out of date.

Whatever might have happened in the dark reign of Jimmy Tully, the Board members are now nominated by professional bodies such as RIAI, IPI, RTPI IEI etc. Several of the Board are former senior inspectors.. one a Chief Tehnical Officer.

On the other hand, some Inspectors are fee per case English planners who fly in from Stansted on the day of the inspection. When they arrive at the site in their Hertz car, it may be the first time they have been in that county. No earthly reason why you should rely on them to always get it right. Reading some of their reports they seem to believe that they are in Roscommonshire.

Woud you expect a judge in a criminal case to rely on the forensic evidence because he/she has not visited the scene of the crime?

😉 Dieter, i suggest it is you that is a little out of date, the following is directly from the ABP website, two of the four organizations are listed.

“The Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2006 provide for the appointment of nine other members of the Board. Eight of the members are appointed by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government from among persons selected from four groups of organisations prescribed by regulations and representative of :

Organisations representative of local government, farming and trade unions.

Organisations representative of persons concerned with the protection and preservation of the environment and of amenities/voluntary bodies and bodies having charitable objects /rural and local community development, the promotion of the Irish language or the promotion of heritage, the arts and culture/bodies representative of people with disabilities / bodies representive of young people…”

Now I know a man that had relations with a sheep, does he qualify to be appointed to ABP just because the Minister says so?

As usual Archiseek was first with the news of the latest major development application in Cork – the Manor Park Horgan’s Quay application. 276 apartments scrunched into the eastern edge of the site next to Water Street. The mainstream media are still maintaining an unusually coy silence, with the exception being a brief peep from the Echo. The natives are getting a bit restless though and there are no fewer than 30 objections in Navigation House. Lot of those are multi-signature efforts. Owners CIE are keeping the head down.

What have the locals got to complain about? Well only the fact that the application runs a horse and cart through the the North Docks LAP. Oh and that it would raze Benson’s Good Depot, which is humorously designated as a ‘protected structure’. OK there is also the 24/20 floor Fawlty Towers looming over the riverbank. And the permanent enclosure of the land intended for the relief route that was supposed to ease congestion on Lr Glanmire Rd. And one or two other technicalities. Like the bats and the rare plants. And the complete absence of any bit of a sop to the existing community. Like anything green. Or a playground even. OK so they will lose a bit of light. And maybe they will have to walk a bit if they want to see the river again. And the nights will never be quite the same. But apart from that sure its not too bad. Really. 😉

For the record there were three pre-plannings.

Lidl sparks row with councillors over planning

By Eoin English / Irish Examiner
RETAIL giant Lidl sparked a bitter row yesterday by accusing three councillors of interfering in the planning process for political reasons.

In a submission to An Bórd Pleanála, Lidl said it believes that Cork city councillors Jonathan O’Brien (SF), Damien Wallace and Tony Fitzgerald (FF) were “politically motivated” in their objections against a liquor licence for a store it is planing to build on the city’s northside.

The city’s 32 councillors have reacted furiously and are planning to write to Lidl calling on them to substantiate the claims or withdraw the suggestion.

It is the latest twist in Lidl’s two-year campaign to secure a rezoning of industrial land for the store in Churchfield.

The council voted 26 to two in December to rezone the land, clearing the way for the store.

But they attached two conditions as part of the planning — one that prevents the granting of a liquor licence which would allow the sale of wine only, and one directing a change to the location of the entrance road.

Lidl appealed both, along with 16 other conditions imposed by city planners, to An Bórd Pleanála last month.

Details of that appeal lodged on behalf of Lidl by Dublin-based architects Kenny Lane Associates, emerged yesterday.

In it, they single out Cllrs O’Brien, Wallace and Fitzgerald for criticism.

They outlined to the board a previous campaign against a liquor licence sought by a nearby Centra store where residents objected and requested the support of councillors.

The courts refused that licence.

“In order to be consistent, local councillors inserted condition 2a [preventing the liquor licence] as part of our client’s planning permission,” the firm said.

“However, our client feels that the views expressed by local councillors are politically motivated, as they are attempting to be consistent with previous action taken in relation to the Centra Supermarket.

“Our client would further argue that An Bórd Pleanála should not uphold a politically-motivated stance on the liquor licence.”

Mr O’Brien said he was very annoyed with the claim. “This was a decision of the council — not a decision the three of us took on our own,” he said.

“Lidl of course has the right to appeal but they have created an image to the board that this was done by a small number of councillors.”

Mr Fitzgerald said he was elected to represent the views of local people, who want a Lidl store but not one with a liquor licence.

There are more than 20 off-licences in the general Knocknaheeny, Churchfield, Hollyhill and Farranree areas.

There are two secondary schools and three primary schools within walking distance of the proposed store.

But in its appeal, Lidl outlines a range of measures, including a hi-tech CCTV system it says will help prevent underage drinking and anti-social behaviour.