Look at de state of Cork, like!
- This topic has 1,897 replies, 111 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’m sure the WMC crowd won’t mind this little plug in their favour – but the new Where’s Me Culture? Magazine is due for publication this Wednesday (11th) so I’m told, so I’m guessing it should be available later this week, early next week??? Correct me on that if I’m wrong. :confused: Either way, I know some of you are involved with WMC in some form or shape (albeit the WMC forum or badge wear-ers!!!), so it may be worth keeping an eye out for it.
Anyone interested in an alternative perspective on the Capital of Culture take should visit -> Where’s Me Culture?
Whether your interest is architectural, artistic, music etc etc. Its a nice insight.
I have two questions, 1. Does any one know if planning is going to be granted for a hotel on Parnell Place Beasly St, South Mall?
2. What is the plan for the building on the corner of Caroline St, Oliver Plunket st. opp Scotts Bar????@shrink2cork wrote:
I have two questions, 1. Does any one know if planning is going to be granted for a hotel on Parnell Place Beasly St, South Mall?
2. What is the plan for the building on the corner of Caroline St, Oliver Plunket st. opp Scotts Bar????No, the plans for a 121 bedroom, 80,000sq ft hotel with underground car-parking and spa facility by Monoghan-based Pitwood Ltd, is still currently in Further Information. Niall Fitzsimons are the consulting engineers. CCC are still awaiting the details back – but I’m informed, there is no real problem with the plans other than a few issues regarding the Parnell Street frontage (2 PS facades) and traffic management. I think there may have also been worries about the southern elevation’s height facing back onto Beasley Street and its effect on 93 South Mall (TCH HQ). I have to say, I like the plans and think it would be a great addition to a long-overdue redevelopment site. Parnell Place will be subject to a lot more action in the future as well.
As for the old Spanish restaurant on Oliver Plunkett Street, I’m afraid I don’t know! :confused: 😀
any more comment on Daniel Libeskind last week? massive mix of people at the lecture, architects, developers and the arty folk. I’d like peoples odds on whether any Cork developer would commission Libeskind for a landmark building? (notwithstanding he probably charges squillions to design something now!).
Well one and all,after many months of pullin n dragin it looks like our schitzophrenic City Council are going to grant planning for Eglinton St.ITS A BIG STEP FORWARD.OFC will have the biggest errection in Cork (for a while at least).
The development will lead to a lot of building envy,so it looks like Cork City Council will indeed be the much needed Viagra of Cork development.Pug – one developer managed to catch a quick discussion with Libeskind after his presentation in Cork Opera House (I’m told), don’t know the details of what was said, but if one were to speculate, one’s head might dizzy. I don’t see Cork homing a Libeskind design anytime in the near future – well, other than 18 Turns. 😉
rodger – the mood is favourable indeed regarding Eglinton Street, Wilson Architecture will be lodging the required ‘Clarification/Further Info’ imminently. The word is good, but I like to see final reports just to be sure. Then there’s always the threat of ABP, but I think relative compromise has been attained on most sides. There’ll always be those difficult individuals though. Construction, I was told, was originally slated for late-Summer/Autumn (subject to appeal), however, it may be pushed back to early 2006 subsequent of an arrangement. Funnily enough, regarding its height – at 70m, it may be the tallest building in Ireland (assuming Paul Keogh’s design doesn’t commence beforehand), but its still shorter than the wingspan of the new Airbus A380 or even the fuselage of the same aircraft (at 73m). However, if you include the spire, Eglinton Street may just top it. 😮 Apparently spires are included in a building’s height, not aerials – don’t know when that rule was decided, perhaps since the Petronas Towers/Sears Tower debate. Frankly, I think spires are cheating. :p
What brings you you’re news my man?
Lexington ,in answer to your question a dodgy bloke down the pub told me.So the 747 is no longer the yard stick for the description of big/FECKIN HUGE things.Has anyone checked out http://www.niallmclaughlin.com,I think the kid has talent and may bring him leeside.
Ok, don’t shoot me down here, but would anyone agree with me when i question the justification of incorporating protected structures into new developments, at the expense of aesthetics and practicality? Fine, there are some great listed buildings around Cork that stand out in their own right and hold their own, and should never even be considered as part of another development, but when it comes to a case like Paul Kenny’s proposal, or say Lavitt’s quay, I question the retention of such ‘protected’ strutures. While they may have certain historical merit, their location,prominance or addition to the streetscape is dubious. Personally i think Mr. Kenny’s proposal looks interesting, i wont get too excited yet, but as Lexington suggested himself, the incorporation of the structures into this scheme add an imbalance to the overall structure, which is a pity, and since they are going to be covered by glass anyway, and surrounded by a totally uncomplementing development, why not knock them?! Again, dont get me wrong here, i just think that the development would stand to benefit from more freedom in it’s design. The whole of St. Patricks quay, and the north quays in general, are a mess anyway, and are hardly of a sensitive nature, so i say allow as much freedom and imagination as possibly to exploit this potential – Im not exactly advocating knocking crawford art gallery out of it (though there are a few buildings i wouldnt mind doing that to haha ;)).
Opinions/ideas?@rodger wrote:
Lexington ,in answer to your question a dodgy bloke down the pub told me.So the 747 is no longer the yard stick for the description of big/FECKIN HUGE things.Has anyone checked out http://www.niallmclaughlin.com,I think the kid has talent and may bring him leeside.
Doesn’t matter what you think… it won’t get a look in at planning unless these structures are protected.
These are heritage buildings whose design still looks great over a century after they were built. They represent part of the history of the docklands that contributed to the wealth and growth of Cork City.
The phrase “thowing out the baby with the bathwater” comes to mind.
phatman wrote:Ok, don’t shoot me down here, but would anyone agree with me when i question the justification of incorporating protected structures into new developments, at the expense of aesthetics and practicality? Fine, there are some great listed buildings around Cork that stand out in their own right and hold their own, and should never even be considered as part of another development, but when it comes to a case like Paul Kenny’s proposal, or say Lavitt’s quay, I question the retention of such ‘protected’ strutures. While they may have certain historical merit, their location,prominance or addition to the streetscape is dubious. Personally i think Mr. Kenny’s proposal looks interesting, i wont get too excited yet, but as Lexington suggested himself, the incorporation of the structures into this scheme add an imbalance to the overall structure, which is a pity, and since they are going to be covered by glass anyway, and surrounded by a totally uncomplementing development, why not knock them?! Again, dont get me wrong here, i just think that the development would stand to benefit from more freedom in it’s design. The whole of St. Patricks quay, and the north quays in general, are a mess anyway, and are hardly of a sensitive nature, so i say allow as much freedom and imagination as possibly to exploit this potential – Im not exactly advocating knocking crawford art gallery out of it (though there are a few buildings i wouldnt mind doing that to haha ]@phatman wrote:
….. the incorporation of the structures into this scheme add an imbalance to the overall structure, which is a pity, and since they are going to be covered by glass anyway, and surrounded by a totally uncomplementing development, why not knock them?!
You’ve hit the nail on the head there… ANY new building should compliment its environment and comliment or indeed contrast with adjacent buildings (protected or not).
I would suggest that a) the new development can work well by sharply contrasting adjacent buildings
b)in the case of protected buildings, if a new development is going to cause unsightly imbalance or visual “awkwardness” (for want of a better word) then the new building should not be built.
c)Paul Kenny’s new development i feel works well. There should be no question of altering protected facades to fit in with new designs. It should, of course be vice versa. A good architect will make it work, as they have to a great extent here.Lex, is this type of development similar in design to what has been suggested for Deloitte headquarters opposite City Hall?
🙂 Slattery Travel’s Slattery USA division will be commencing charter flights on a 2x weekly basis between Cork and New York JFK using Ryan International (a Chicago-based, predominantly charter, airline). The route will be served by a Boeing 757 (tight!), service will begin on Thursday 27th of October. The service is hoped to kick start further moves by airport and airline industries to push for a scheduled service in the long-term. Despite the announcement, a spokesman for Aer Arann says the move does not disrupt hsis airline’s ongoing investigations in commencing a scheduled service between the 2 cities. However, investment remains the largest obstacle to their plans.
For a look at the ‘interesting’ airline, take a look at its website (noting that its been ‘Under Construction’ for 2 years now!) -> http://www.flyryan.com/home/
🙂 Howard Holdings (Fuchsia Investments) have submitted revised plans for its hotel plan in Kinsale. The site is currently being used as a temporary car-park facility between Emmet and Long Quays. The new plans will provide for a 102-bedroom hotel, boardwalk, 7 apartment suites, retail units, boardwalk stalls and a 273 space basement car-park over 2 levels, accessible to the public.
RM – the Deloitte proposal was to be designed by Tom Couglan (Coughlan de Keyser Architects of No.5/No.6 Lapps Quay fame). The proposal entailled a vertical extension with cantivelered extension over the pavement and a predominantly glass quayside frontage (and PS encasing) rising up to a level pretty much on par with No.5 Lapps Quay. However, I have not yet seen the actual complete design, so I can’t specify anymore than that. Sorry! 😮
mickeydocs – the only thing I would say about PS issues is that, in some cases, the restrictions regarding incorporation are so prohibitive that they restrict what architects can and cannot do with a new development. I think Wilson made the best of an awkward situation with Paul Kenny’s RC development so kudos is due there, but RORSA really were caught with the Howard Holdings/Comfort Inn development on Lavitts Quay. The integration of No.16 is necessary by policy, but logistically and aesthetically inconvenient. I’m hoping the revised scheme through Significant Further Information, will address the awful design of the original application, and make the No.16 issue work a little better. I don’t deny the difficulty RORSA have in designing a decent structure at this site (which Mr. Arthur totally messed about with too), but the design was still inadequate. The interior of No.16 is most interesting, but the building is almost impossible to incorporate and make the quayside look good if you consider the planning impositions. If Mr. Arthur’s premises at No.15 were out of the picture, the design could be a lot more interesting. For example, if the building commanded a quay frontage, rather than its current retracted position, and arch over No.16 whilst drawing it in closer to the new development, with perhaps some attractive backlighting to illuminate the PS at night from its cave like position??? Some radical northern facade alterations would need to be made – but they need to be made anyway given its current design.
Interestingly enough, Howard Holdings were granted permission to demolish the Tedcastles premises on Lapps Quay (also a PS) when they applied for City Quarter’s planning. It was pointlessly given that status – and despite planning policy, CCC seem ready to bend the rules a little when it suits them! 😀
CCC recently granted permission to AIB to demolish their exisiting bank premises at Watercourse Road, Blackpool, to construct a new two storey bank building with corporate signage, to relocate the ATM facility and to provide 17 no. staff car parking spaces, including all associated works on their site.
The building was designed by BCG architects and according to CCC report it “meets the challenges of the site in an inventive manner and satisfies the objectives of the Development Plan in relation to high quality design”.
The proposed building is two-storey stepping down to a single storey element at the corner of O’Connell Street and Watercourse Road. The front (Watercourse Road) elevation is clad in sanded limestone with sections of inset polished limestone creating points of interest. The ATM is located on the front elevation, while the main entrance to the bank is dual aspect with access from both Watercourse Road and O’Connell Street.
Sadly, I have it on good authority that the CCC decision will be appealled to An Bord Pleanala.I just hope ABP have the resources to deal with all these nasty appeals,people feel that ABP are some kind of prince in shinning armour comming to the aid of the little man,THEY ARE NOT.
Many appealants have only one goal in mind,to stop the development.I think its about time that interested parties in Cork formed a data base of these people,to use a crude phrase you should not piss in the well you drink from.
We have actualy found in the past that we have given work to people that objected to our developments!
The time to object is at the development plan stage not when someone has borrowed millions on the strength of the development plan.Any thoughts ?Wow, I love that picture so much. Everytime I see it I go all tingly (if thats a word, lol). Cant wait to see the real thing some day soon!
I have just been reading the Dublin street lighting thread and Washington St. popped into my head. This area has potential as a kind of Temple Bar area (Washinton Village), but does anyone think the area needs a makeover as regards street lighting (and possibly a few other things) and are there any plans?
Recently I was walking from McCurtain St to Washington St via Patrick St on a Sat night, the atmosphere seemed to get alot more menacing when you reached Washington St, the street seems very drab and dark………maybe that’s just all the muckers outside Reardans!! 😀
Street lighting should be improved, but there are other changes needed too. The footpaths should be widened by removing one of the outbound traffic lanes. The business owners themselves need to improve their frontage, particularly between Grand Parade and South Main St. The side wall of St Augustine’s church adds a huge dead area to the street. Somehow, I can’t ever see that changing.
For those of you who can’t wait to get a glimpse of the DAT Partnership’s plans for Clontarf Street…here it is! Its perspective is taken from one of the elevational drawings by CdK (Tom & Daniel) and views the project in an east-to-west persepctive. You may remember in an earlier post that I noted it would be a landmark building in the proper sense of the word, and I think you’ll agree, it is. It represents another really excellent design for Cork following on from Paul Kenny’s RC development and OFC’s Eglinton Street development (both by Wilson Architecture – FOM and POM) and shows what a little imagination and money can do. These type of developments are the ones Cork needs more of and to keep working toward. I suppose that’s why the docklands offer so much potential, it provides a unique opportunity to make Cork an architectural goldmine – and I would encourage any architect and developer reading this to let your imagination flourish, you may never get a better time. CdK are also working on 2 other projects near Clontarf Street (apparently to be named ‘Centre Point’ which I must admit I did not know it had been formalised) at Deloitte and No.5/No.6 Lapps Quay – just to the left (south) of the image thumbnail posted (not seen) and with the refurbished bus-station to the right (north).
:rolleyes: Just regarding the Water Street appeal, with one week left to go before the deadline, I have been talking to someone on the Coranree Dock Road in Limerick, and they have pretty much decided what they are going to do – however, I have promised to keep it quiet as Werdna are anxious to keep ‘the planners guessing’ as it were until the very last moment. I would hope however to make you aware of their plans before it is formally announced. 😎
🙂 Also, you may recall some time ago, comments I made regarding a new city healthcare facility (not yet announced) – well, just so you know, plans are progressing nicely, talks continue in a positive manner. The design is by a leading practice and nearing completion. Estimated project values are between the 40m to 50m euro region (the upward figure associated with a problematic engineering issue), down from an earlier plan at an alternate location for a 100m euro facility. An application is a few months off yet, but it is looking very promising. I’ll keep you informed closer to the application date.
😮 Though I am going to have to keep my mouth dun suas on this for a while, I’ll leave it at this – the highrise docklands project I was hinting at previously, has indeed reached pre-planning discussion stages. The final design will be built up around those talks. I believe Mr. Barker made a hint at the location in today’s IE – regarding the ‘period warehousing’ and the ‘quiet’ exchange of hands. If you’ve followed the clues over the course of my recent posts, you’ve probably got the location figured out by now. But then again, perhaps we just have wires crossed on the exact property. Hmmm.
@Leesider wrote:I have just been reading the Dublin street lighting thread and Washington St. popped into my head. This area has potential as a kind of Temple Bar area (Washinton Village), but does anyone think the area needs a makeover as regards street lighting (and possibly a few other things) and are there any plans?
Recently I was walking from McCurtain St to Washington St via Patrick St on a Sat night, the atmosphere seemed to get alot more menacing when you reached Washington St, the street seems very drab and dark………maybe that’s just all the muckers outside Reardans!! 😀
I agree, Washington Street is in line for a revamp – it’s a great street. John Mannix’s project, if it passes appeal (praise Allah!), should liven up the street somewhat. Funny though how, as the main centre of Cork nightlife and Cork’s legal district, that most of the late-night drunken offenders end up on trial at the same location as their offence! 😉
@lexington wrote:
You may remember in an earlier post that I noted it would be a landmark building in the proper sense of the word, and I think you’ll agree, it is.
Looks great even from the blurry image. This is really a location where nobody can object to this development. Its a central, ‘landmark’ (must be careful not to overuse that word) site not adjacent or obstructing any buildings of major historic importance, lots of new building going on around it— its ideal for a modern, extravagant design such as that proposed. Fingers crossed!
@lexington wrote:Though I am going to have to keep my mouth dun suas on this for a while, I’ll leave it at this – the highrise docklands project I was hinting at previously, has indeed reach pre-planning discussion stages. The final design will be built up around those talks. I believe Mr. Barker made a hint at the location in today’s IE – regarding the ‘period warehousing’ and the ‘quiet’ exchange of hands. If you’ve followed the clues over the course of my recent posts, you’ve probably got the location figured out by now. But then again, perhaps we just have wires crossed on the exact property. Hmmm.
If I’ve guessed the location right, taking into account a recent image posted on this thread, I’d be gravely concerned at this news. That is, if i’ve guessed right. Not every protected structure needs the same treatment as the proposed RC development.
lexington wrote:Funny though how, as the main centre of Cork nightlife and Cork’s legal district, that most of the late-night drunken offenders end up on trial at the same location as their offence! ]
🙂 lol 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
