-Donnacha-

Not sure if the bubble has burst, but something is happening all right.

In East Cork for example I know of a few houses that are now renting for much less than previously, and people having difficulty selling, all one off houses, while prices for houses in villages (new build and existing) are still rising. Cork CoCo plans for the ‘denseification’ of villages have really delivered though, with new services appearing on an ongoing basis.

A lot of the new market entrants (for both rental and purchase) are immigrants also, people who don’t want to live in the middle of nowhere. Thats another driver.

The hotel may have got the go-ahead but what are the conditions attached? i.e. was the height reduced like what normally happens?

Are there any 10 + storey buildings actually under construction or about to go in to construction at the moment ?

Bunch – Tivoli is a big site, about 55ha. And it fulfills an important function now – there aren’t many places in the state where a (relatively) deepwater container port is co-located with a heavy rail link*. Also, there is a lot of space to be filled in the docklands. If it does get fully developed, it’ll take 10-15 years to finish that area. After that point, of course, then Tivoli begins to make perfect sense – however thats a long way away, and the economy could be in a very different place then. Its definitely one to be borne in mind, but I wouldn’t go planning on that basis just yet.

*Now, if you were to suggest a heavy rail link to Ringaskiddy and beyond, I’m all for it. Then you could start running Arrow style services Midleton/Carrigaline, Carrigaline/Mallow. But that is more than a little fanciful.

what’s this I read in de Paper about the Carrigtwohill dev plan being varied to facilitate the amgen development. Anyone know why they couldn’t have used already zoned land?

They were offered a number of IDA ‘developed’ sites in the area, already zoned for industry; they didn’t want them. They were either too small or didn’t have the transport links they wanted. They will have their own overpass and theres been mention of a railway siding also. The initial announcement was for in the region of 1,200 jobs. There has been mention since that the site will be able to accomodate much more than that (as in well over 2,000) if thing go well.

Amgen is an interesting one, there has been rumours about it for nearly 5 years – it went quiet there for a while, and there were stories that it was going to take the Wyeth route (ie go to Dublin). Seems to have ended well though.

once port and port related traffic is completely removed from the city centre quays, Tivoli will be the furthest port location upstream and according to the Port of Cork, a decreasingly attractive site for the container activities it currently facilitates – i think the long term intention is to relocate much of the tivoli shipping and container activities to the new Ringaskiddy development. i’ve always thought of tivoli as a huge opportunity for the city – after the docklands, it is the only large, central land resource within the city –

imagine the land value of tivoli in 5 years time – a huge, flat, south facing site only minutes from city centre, facing the river and with good downstream river views; good road connections in and out of the city and countryside; along a railway line which may have a 15 minute service to kent station – great potential for a station there -also a good site for servicing by passenger river ferry to city centre –

the city council should really think about tivoli – witihin the context of its value as a scarce land resource that could accommodate a large population.

@kilman wrote:

Is it a matter of ripping up the path laying tons of soil and then making the path again.
Could there be pipes running through the garden that could be broken due to the subsidence(causing it to be wet)

Yeah, I’d be a little worried that the surface water pipes from the G.T. would be damaged from the subsidence of the path – in which case you’ve a whole lot of water landing on the foundation of the house. Anyone else care to comment on that?

that csd website is like something a group of angry teenagers would produce -its pathetic.

i see jerry buttimer is quoted on the examiner again today (who provide him with a platform quite regularly) complaining about the mark kelleher proposals in bishopstown – now I dont know anything about the proposed development or its design but the Councillor’s response is predictable and says an awful lot about standards of public representation-

“Fine Gael Cllr Jerry Buttimer said the planning system was undemocratic and called for a moratorium on major developments in the area” “”The planners and developers are fast turning parts of the city into ghettos. We are creating living space for transient communities, with no emphasis on building community or promoting sustainable living” “How can it be correct that one anonymous person or two makes a decision in relation to an area, and ignores the concerns of local residents”

Jerry Buttimer is part of Cork City Council and understands how the planning system works and as a city councillor played an important part in adopting the city development plan – which is a reserved function of elected councillors – so the planning policies and objectives as detailed in the general land use sections of the city development plan and the specific objectives for the south west suburbs were democratically adopted – as part of those policies + objectives – the principle of sustainable development and proper planning is encouraged ie increasing density, reducing unnecessary travel, maximising land and infrastructure resources. i just think his attempt to remove himself from the system by portraying it as undemocratic is a bit dishonest and what i would describe as public misrepresentation

planning applications will go through the relevant and statutory processes – i assume residents and others submitted objections at local planning level – and can appeal the decision to ABP – that is their democratic right – those objections/appeals have to be considered as part of the decision making process (once they are not vexatious, irrelevant etc) – these planning applications are assessed by various persons who are qualified to make infomed judgements (planners, engineers, architects, etc) – i really dont understand why when an individual or group dont like a decision – its undemocratic + when a decision goes their way -its vindication

How old is the property? I’d be more worried about it if it’s brand new, because you don’t know how much further the settlement is likely to go. I’ve seen driveways etc continue to sink over several years.

great debate here people and a very complex issue. i have just a few comments ;

the arguments supporting one-off housing in rural areas often rely on the historical settlement patterns of the country – i.e. the fact that people have always lived in the countryside. however, is it not true that these patterns of settlement were intimately tied to socio-economic processes (an agriculturally based economy that operated at a relatively localised scale) which made rural settlement possible and necessary – the need for close physical and functional linkages to the countryside was the underlying factor in determining peoples’ place of residence – it wasnt a lifestyle choice – it was largely a manifestation of the workings of the rural economy.

today, that rural economy is a very different thing..it doesnt require intensive settlement to make it work – most of the demand for rural housing is urban generated one way or another – coming from individuals/families whose socio-economic ties are predominantly urban-based – i.e. non farming related work. therefore, for most people who want to live in the countryside, it is about choice not necessity – the key question here is – does anyone in the state have a right to build where they wish? – i think the answer is no – if you cannot build anywhere in a city or a town that you wish, is it not equitable that the same rules aply to rural areas? individuals have rights in a democracy but in a republic with a constitution those rights are superceded by the concept of the common good – and this is where sustainability and environmental issues arise.

in summary – a question – if the social and economic conditions which underpin the need for an intensively populated rural society do not exist what justification is there for supporting rural settlement at the scale we currently do?

On this basis, it is not unreasonable to link the two and see what Irish Rail are doing as a crude mechanism to demand additional investment

This is an unreasonable assertion also. It effectively implies that IE is attempting to extract additional funding by stealth from the Govt by ‘gold plating’ an earlier project.

IE have been quite open about the overall planning framework within which this work will take place, its not an attempt to ‘extract’ funding, its part of a longer term project which includes the interconnector (which also happens to be Govt policy). I’m at a loss as to why strategic planning, and investing in infrastructure when its needed, rather than 10 years late, is a bad thing.

Secondly, he should probably be advised that the Dept of Finance, in particular, is well versed at withholding funding even after investment has been made in associated projects. Unfortunately,the construction of the KRP does not copperfasten or guarantee the Interconnector, it just means that the capacity will be there on the network if and when it goes ahead.

The increased frequency of intercity services and Arrow seem not to be fully addressed either, but the effect of that is well beyond my limited expertise.