developments in cork

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

this is hilarious

Quote:
Warning on high-rise fire hazards
Michael O’Regan

High-rise buildings could be a fire hazard, John Dennehy (FF, Cork South Central) warned.

Much of the building boom consisted of such developments, he said. “No doubt we have all seen Towering Inferno and said it was a great film, very exciting and so on, but it is only a film. Arising out of that, there are many serious questions. I ask whether, in regard to the county hall in Cork, the trade union building, Liberty Hall, and many other buildings, we have the ability to fight a fire in them. We certainly do not have the fleet of helicopters that were available to the fire chief in the film.”

Mr Dennehy, who was speaking during the resumed debate on the building control Bill, said he was very concerned that commercial arguments would take precedence over fire safety requirements.

Bernard Durkan (FG, Kildare North) said there was a “terrible blight” on modern development. Up to 10 or 15 years ago, the quality of development was exceptionally high. “That is not the case any more. Now we have what is known as the duplex system. This is essentially the construction of one house on top of the other, with an external stairway leading into the upper house.” He said such houses did nothing for the people who lived in them.

Peter Kelly (FF, Longford-Roscommon) said the Bill required that architects be registered. “The public will welcome this, as I do.”

🙁 Jumping on daddys bandwagon Dennehy Jnr. Cllr.Fergal has a question before city manager Mr.Joe Gavin for Monday night asking why planning permission was granted to Frinaillas Dennehys Cross development after they (councillors) voted for a height cap. This follows csd members meeting with some councillors in City hall this week looking again for a section 140.
Just who is running the city, councillors OR csd?

@kite wrote:

🙁 Jumping on daddys bandwagon Dennehy Jnr. Cllr.Fergal has a question before city manager Mr.Joe Gavin for Monday night asking why planning permission was granted to Frinaillas Dennehys Cross development after they (councillors) voted for a height cap.

You can’t enact the policy until it has been ratified and written/worded into the city development plan. Before this can be done the council have to define the suburbs. CSD and their councillors could do with exercising a little patience.

@ewankennedy wrote:

You can’t enact the policy until it has been ratified and written/worded into the city development plan. Before this can be done the council have to define the suburbs.

I totally agree….. why Ballincollig and the like is still under County Council contol is beyond me. It’s part of the city now and should be under the control of the city council….. or else, even set up its own Borough Council, it has a larger population than both Waterford and Kilkenny put together.

@POM wrote:

The problem with that kite is that you get a group which seemingly represents the ‘greedy developers’ and thats not a very sympathetic movement. The issue with the height caps is that it isn’t sustainable as a proposal in any event, city management know this. Its legality is questionable and even if it is ratified, it simply means developers are going to lodge plans the same as always, simply using the city council as a novelty stop before forwarding to An Bord Pleanala. All the councillors have done is given An Bord Pleanala more power and their own council less say it what goes on it their community. Despite what lobby groups or city planners campaign, it ultimately hasn’t stopped anything, just made it more inconvenient for everyone involved (including lobby groups who will now obilgatorily have to pay 700 euros everytime they want to lodge an objection as their Cork city council objection won’t matter a penny in the long run).

🙂 Point taken, i suppose you are right…when did the 700 euro charge to go to ABP come into effect? must have missed that one.

Following on DTZ Pieda Consulting appointment to undertake an economic study for the docklands Cllr.Colm Burke (FG) has a motion before councilors as follows;
“In view of the fact that UCC are planning to increase the number of students attending the collage from 15,000 to 21,000 that CCC should not grant any further planning permission in the Collage Road / Western Road area, and that all future development at the collage should be in the Docklands area of the city” (motion 14.16)
Will this provide the kickstart the docklands needs?

Some southside councillors are said to be considering putting a motion of “No Confidence” against city manager Joe Gavin on Monday 13th March if he fails to act on the height cap motion passed by city council last year. The motion may not go ahead however if the group does not get the support of two of the “anti high-rise councilors” David McCarthy and Jerry Buttimer who are opposed to such a motion.

@POM wrote:

Some of our councillors seriously need a past-time…badminton perhaps?

😀 Yep, knitting, bridge, or licking envelopes (brown ones!!) are pass times that also spring to mind?

@lexington wrote:

I think part of the purpose of the Good Shepherds design is not to overwhelm or detract from the historic convent buildings. In this sense, the design is actually a most considered design – it recognises its relation to the George Ashlin buildings and rather than make a bold, loud statement which tries to compete with the convent structures, it takes a more humble, simplistic note while utilising little touches here and there to assert its own innovation.

---

Point taken.

On a side note i find it rather positive to hear the Patricks quay office development is to go ahead even without the Revenue as tenants. i think it will add rather nicely to teh quayside. A nice contemporary addition. Any news on the Metropole plans?

I think part of the purpose of the Good Shepherds design is not to overwhelm or detract from the historic convent buildings. In this sense, the design is actually a most considered design – it recognises its relation to the George Ashlin buildings and rather than make a bold, loud statement which tries to compete with the convent structures, it takes a more humble, simplistic note while utilising little touches here and there to assert its own innovation.

🙂 The images of the Good Shepherds look great to me (an non professional)…….what about that exciting news Lex? i need to get to sleep, it is the weekend after all!

@Micko wrote:

Puts Cork in perspective considering the total great area of Belfast is only 550,000 ish.

Saying Cork only has a population of 126,000 makes it look tiny.

Yeah but you have to remember thats a very limited area and does not capture the city proper. Also you have to consider Cork serves a population of 400,000 + and a within 40 mins drive a population of up to 500,000. The city is about 350,000 metropolitan so its not a teeny as you may think in that sense.