-Donnacha-

The layout for Midleton station can be viewed here;

http://www.iarnrodeireann.ie/projects/RailwayOrderDocumentsCD/03_GMR_DRAWINGS/01_STRUCTURES_PLANS/S05_Proposed_Midleton_Station.pdf

The CPOs for the Midleton North Ring Road (1st phase) were published recently, they’ll bring traffic in from the N25 directly to the new station access road to the north of the station. That road will also extend (as per the SLAP) to the N25 at the East of the town eventually.

Any word on the 80 acre site for sale at Knockgriffin?

The existing roadworks on the N25 near Midleton may have something to do with the fact that there will be two new flyovers going up there shortly, one for Amgen and one for a new housing development (Castlerock?)

In answer to your first question, I said that aiports aren’t meant to be gorgeous. You don’t have to agree!

Consider the original Terminal building, it’s a rather splendid construction lost in the current maze of extensions to the Terminal. Personally I find it painful on the eye to see something like this, a work of art so seriously compromised. A similar effect will be had if/when the new Terminal goes up.

Given that aiports will require to be extended or modernised every so often surely the most sensible thing to be would be to either build a monolith that could cope with all forseeable predictions (like Stazione Centrale in Milan) – although this would mean having forward vision and willingness to invest money in the future (in low supply in todays Ireland) or alternatively build something functional that can be easilly extended. I’m thinking of the Concourse building in NUI, Galway which has been extended so many times without taking away from the integrity of its design.

Terminal 2 is being designed by Parr Architects.

http://www.parrarchitects.com/

Cork (and Limerick) cities have seriously tight boundries, much more so than Dublin. The fact that there’s development land close to the city centre wouldn’t actually improve the population statistics. There is practically no land available for development within the city council area that isn’t in some other sort of use. Even relatively close parts of the outskirts of Douglas are in County Cork.

The population decline’s purely a misrepresentation of raw statistics by news outlets.

As for Cork being near Shannon airport ? Where did you get that idea? There’s NO WAY you could link Cork to Shannon in 40 mins, even with 125 mph trians you’d be looking at over an hour.

It’s 75 miles / 120 KM suggesting that using Shannon would be even remotely accessible from Cork is a stretch of the imagination.

Shannon’s 86.6KM from Glaway (an hours drive) and only 20KM from Limerick. So, yes those two places do fall within its catchement area, although Galway’s highly marginal.

Also, Cork doesn’t just serve London… it has a huge range of direct destinations. All that shannon has is a couple of artificially created transatlantic routes which, when open skies happen may well disappear anyway with the end of the Stopover.

Directly serves:
Amsterdam Aer Lingus
Alicante Aer Lingus
Barcelona Aer Lingus
Belfast Aer Arann
Birmingham Aer Arann
Birmingham bmi baby
Bristol Aer Arann
Budapest Malev
Cardiff bmi baby
Dublin Aer Arann
Durham Tees Valley bmi baby
Edinburgh Aer Arann
Glasgow Loganair
Leeds Bradford Aer Arann
Liverpool Ryanair
London Gatwick Easyjet
London Heathrow Aer Lingus
London Stansted Ryanair
Malaga Aer Lingus
Manchester bmi baby
Munich Aer Lingus
Newcastle Jet2.com
Nice Aer Lingus
Paris Aer Lingus
Prague Czech Airlines
Rome Aer Lingus
Southampton Aer Arann
Warsaw Aer Lingus

And just added:

Gdansk – Wizz Air
Krakow – Central Wings
Wroclaw – Centarl Wings
Galway – Aer Arran
Leeds – Aer Arran
Birmingham – Aer Lingus
Berlin – Aer Lingus
Madrid – Aer Lingus
Prague – Aer Lingus
Lanzorate – Aer Lingus
Tenerife – Aer Lingus
Katwice – Wizz Air
Nantes – Aer Arran
Lorient – Aer Arran

Easy Transatlatnic access via : LHR, Gatwick, Paris Charles de Gaul and Amsterdam — it takes less time than going via Dublin or Shannon over land!

As for the Cork population, it’s got a metro area approaching 300,000 people.

You’ll see the city’s core population starting to grow a little I think when some of these new docklands developments take off. The simple fact is that Cork city has very limited housing stock within the city bounds itself and what is there is either very mature corporation estates or extremely pricy inner suburbs that are out of the reach of your average first time buyer by a long shot.

Both aesthetics and unsustainability. But unsustainability is a much more significant problem.

They tend to look like these:

http://www1.myhome.ie/search/property.asp?id=279467&np=&rt=search&searchlist=

http://www1.myhome.ie/search/property.asp?id=271272&np=&rt=search&searchlist=

http://www1.myhome.ie/search/property.asp?id=271849&np=&rt=search&searchlist=

@publicrealm wrote:

Certainly the extract you quoted would imply this Bruges.

I can only hope that what the Inspector meant was that a slight eparture from the strict Georgian townhouse pattern is acceptable – i.e. that certain very limited expressions of ‘personal taste’ may be permissible (provided they are reversible).

Any general deference to personal taste would open up an appalling vista – might as well scrap the record of PS’s and be done with it.

(I hope the Minister for the Environment and destruction of Heritage hasn’t yet heard of Archeire (or the interweb) 🙂

The principle behind the Illium decision would appear to be that the designation of the INTERIOR of a private dwelling as a protected structure should not unduly restrict the right of the family to arrange the layout of the interior to suit their domestic requirements. It would be unreasonable to insist that just because a family lives in a protected structure they must consult with Ian Lumley and Dr. Freddie O Dwyer when they want to rearrange the furniture.

It is important however not to read too much into the Illium decision. Mr Desmond was in an unusually strong position as he already had planning permission by default as a result of a spectacular own goal by the Dublin City Council planners and conservation officers. In deciding to grant permission under PL 29S.131528 the Board was not comparing the proposal with a do nothing scenario but rather with the scheme which was already been deemed to be permitted by the High Court judgement of O’Leary J. in October 2004.

@publicrealm wrote:

I have not posted to this thread before and have not read all the previous posts so apologies if I am repeating previous points – but I am intrigued by the above quote.

Might the same logic not be extended to encompass the more usual type of Protected Structure’?

For example is it reasonable to expect, say Dermot Desmond, to merely observe the law as far as can be reconciled with his particular needs?

He might believe in installing a dumb waiter in a PS for example – I would not share his ‘belief ‘but is his belief not akin to the ‘liturgical preference’ above?

(and what would happen to the (protected) decorative features of Catholic churches if the liturgical preferences chose to dispense with graven images/stained glass etc. and revert to a more fundamental style?)

The Illium Properties case is more interesting than Cobh Cathedral as the conservation issues are not overlain by obscure and largely irrelevant liturgical arguments.

The Inspector’s Report on PL 29S.131528 took the view that while the works were more charaeristic of a Palladian style villa rather than a Georgian period townhouse “they constitute an expression of individual aesthetic taste which, given the ‘private dwelling’ nature of this protected structure and the reversibility inherent in their application as decorative features, can reasonably be described as acceptable interventions”

This seems to imply that if the protected structure is your private dwelling you are entitled to modify the interior in accordance with your personal taste provided the works are reversible.

I bet that An Taisce report was written by the Dublin branch. You can tell by the absence of words like “criminal” and “infection”.

Someone has to own it by definition. But you might not be able to find them.
You have to get agreement with the OWNER of the land, not someone who has a right of way over it – the permission of person in the house at the end of the lane only matters if they are the actual owner.

If it is owned by the person who sold you the site then provided there is no access, then you get a Right of Way through the shortest way to leave the property.

Easements may be gained by use for 20 years (if I remember correctly). So it should be possible to simply use the lane for the next 20 years and hope that noone tells you to stop. (I wouldn’t recommend that though)

Talk to your solicitor.

Don’t forget Sirius, that a further catch is that since the price of A3 land is so high, it is virtually impossible for a person to be in a position to buy a site and build a house, and not already have a house bought somewhere else.
(Though they can always fib…)