developments in cork

Howard Holdings are placing themselves in a very progressive position – the company is deciding to take action on all the talk regarding docklands potential and is ready to make something of it. Following the acquisition of the 11-acre Ford Distribution site, Howard are now engaging in discussions with Cork City Council, the GAA and the Munster Agricultural Society about attaining the important Showgrounds lands, or at least, the development rights to these easily developable properties. Further to that, Howard Holdings have conducted and continue to conduct talks with Tedcastle Holdings and their well place lands to the north of the Ford site, facing the River Lee. Should these lands be successfully attained, Howard will be in a prime development position with the largest single development opportunity (in terms of land holdings) in the South Docklands Area, thereby solidifying Howard’s long-term intentions to be the prime development company associated with the Cork docklands. Upwards of €400m is being loosely figured by the company with regard to development opportunities on the 3 mentioned land holdings, and that may not be all. This aggressive approach by Howard will also put pressure on other developers to successfully secure lands and development options within the South Docklands should they wish to plan a significant role in the future of what is essentially the largest, exciting and potentially most rewarding development opportunity in the south of Ireland. With 166 hectares forming part of the overall docklands development strategy, moves are swinging into play very smoothly now. Manor Park Homes, Werdna and the Kenny Group have secured the 3 primary sites associated with the North Docklands Area (however there are plenty of exciting opportunities yet to be realised along the Alfred Street/Railway Street corridor), and now Howard are pushing forward with securing a major land mass to the south. Other key landowners include IAWS, Southern Milling, Odlums, Omnistone, Careys Tool Hire and Shell.

The following months will undoubtedly see who will be established as the key docklands development holders. Indeed a myriad of issues will yet need to materialise before large-scale movement is realised – not least local authority discussion and plan actualisation, but also issues of attaining sustainable investment and employment opportunities and other market realisations. One thing is for sure however, with the Howard Holdings name moving so proactively toward land holding acquisitions, the heat is now on. Whether for investment or development, the drive is a clear issue of opportunity and confidence. The important thing for developers will be that land values remain reasonable – this will also be important for existing landowners who would be foolish to price themselves out of a good opportunity for them as well. Over the coming months, a clearer picture should be painted on who is going to have a say on how the future of the docklands is shaped.

However, in terms of development, a ‘goldrush’ scenario will not benefit the docklands, developers or the city at large, but rather a considerate and well phased redevelopment by noteworthy, key players that will afford imagination, design quality and sustainable progression of what is essentially a new ‘city’. Steady as she goes.

to be updated soon.

This update concerns the piece kindly published here.

@Thomond Park wrote:

That is cheerleading at its worst

I simply put that statement up because I withdrew an earlier post until it is approved and had notified that the subject post would be updated later as other members had complained that I use not to indicate to them when I had updated or was going to update posts with additional information. I now always (well 95% of the time) indicate at the bottom of my posts when and for what reasons I have updated a post. It seems like an awful waste of space not to utilise a post properly, so I will be getting back to it (hopefully) at a later stage should the post I initially made find approval – if it doesn’t, so be it. Better safe than sorry. :p

An alternative perspective on the proposed motion before Cork City Council tonight, proposed by Councillor Dave McCarthy, and which seeks to impose a development ban on developments over 3-storeys across Cork’s suburbs. The campaign has been given a lot clout lately in the local media – and so be it, but here’s an alternative perspective on the motion. Click here.

It’s no harm to have a little balance. I hope to bring you news on the outcome of the motion tomorrow. In my own opinion, it is one that makes little social, economic or sustainable sense. A number of opponents have indicated their disapproval of the motion including Director of Planning Jim O’Donovan and Fine Gael Councillor and Former Lord Mayor Colm Burke.

Another topic of discussion among CCC tonight is the proposition of a Bishopstown Area Development Plan, forwarded by Councillors Brian Bermingham and Jerry Buttimer – indeed, I agree with the councillors and its supporters on the materialisation of such a plan, and hope it will provide some form of relevant guideline (and I stress ‘guideline’) with regards prospective development in the area over the coming years. That’s not to say development must be stalled in light of this plan’s formulation, but it should produce a constructive foresight on its completion.

Also calls by some local residents in the area for new local service amenities, such as parks and cinemas etc on the Dennehy’s Cross site are noted. I do not perceive the provision of a ‘cinema’ for example on the Dennehy’s Cross site – but for residents to enjoy such amenities, they need to have a relevant market base. As is, this market does not even support basic provisions such as a butchers, post office etc and that the development opposed by some will actually create a more sustainable environment for such amenities in the future. I support their efforts to attain such facilities – but I hope that they would understand that residential developments in the area will support such facilities realisation rather than inhibit it. Given the nearby student population base and emerging developments in the area – a small cineplex and associated facilities should be quite possible for all residents in the area at some prospective future date – however, there is another site near Dennehy’s Cross which I would deem much more suitable for such development (which could include a public park) – but the site would be subject to the current land-owner’s sale discretion.

@anto wrote:

not too impressed with that I have to say, Doesn’t exactly respect the grain of the street,

Well it is only the 1st step in a larger scale rejuvenation process of the whole Cornmarket Street area. A new development/action plan has been published by CCC – and private development plans on 2 other fronts are also being examined. The plan is too realise Cornmarket Street as a natural extension of the Core Retail Area that is Patrick’s Street.