kite
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@Pug wrote:
thats when the plans are made public, i suspect its already decided so they might be arguing over the last details – CCC really dont have a come back with eglinton st zooming up at a rate of knots
It depends on who is asking for the planning on site, a member of the Cork mafia, or some someboby outside the “Golden Circle”?
@Micko wrote:
Stupid question, but does anyone know why you can listen to the radio the whole way through the Lee Tunnel at the moment ?
FM transmitters were installed in the tunnel last month (while plugging the leaks:eek: )
@orion wrote:
Guide price on Wilton Centre is €320-330m not what papers reported last week €285m)
Dublin prices have arrived in Cork but are there any silly fools willing to pay this?
It most certainly wil not be a Cork based developer as the fat has all been stripped out by Joe OD, based
on maxing the local area plan. An other interesting taught is that the councilors in bishopstown aka Gerry(i want to be a TD) and Mary (i only like bungalows)Sheilds pushed and pushed for the very plan which has given Wilton the increase in value by HEIGHT and floor area So when this giant shopping centre is put into planning will these same people run around flapping? One thing for sure if I was (i am not) Joe OD, I would fund Gerrys(i am a teacher get me out of here!) campaign next year as a thank you or maybe he is already!!!!!!😮 J.Buttimer seems to be making a habit, and a fool out of himself the way he prances around mouthing off at every opportunity.
Joe O’D backing him for election?, what is the name of the developer who funds the Bishopstown GAA club where “our” Jerry is president???:rolleyes:Judge seeks criteria for legal challenges to planning rulings
Mary Carolan writes in today’s ITThe Supreme Court has been asked by a High Court judge to set out the criteria upon which the courts can decide that a person has shown the necessary “substantial interest” to allow them to bring legal challenges to planning decisions.
Mr Justice Frank Clarke said yesterday he was satisfied this point of law, which arose in proceedings related to a planned €400 million integrated tourism resort centre near Kinsale, Co Cork, was of such “exceptional public importance” that it required to be determined by the Supreme Court.
It could be reasonably said the law on the issue “stands in a state of uncertainty”, the issue was arising in a significant number of cases and there would be a significant public benefit in having a Supreme Court decision on it, the judge added.
The issue relates to the constitutionally important question of the entitlement of people to have access to the courts to challenge planning and environmental decisions, the judge said. Its determination would be of benefit to both objectors and developers.
The point of law arose in proceedings in which Thomas Hard- ing, a retired merchant seaman, applied for leave to the High Court to bring a challenge aimed at overturning planning permission for the Kinsale development.
The Planning and Development Act 2000 introduced a stricter requirement for such challenges, stipulating that any such challenge may only be brought by a person who has a “substantial interest”.
In a judgment last month, Mr Justice Clarke ruled that Mr Harding of Ardback Heights, Kinsale, had not established the sufficient “substantial interest” to give him the necessary legal standing to bring the judicial review challenge. The judge said that, under the traditional test for legal standing, it was probable Mr Harding would have had sufficient connection with the Kinsale area to establish a sufficient interest so as to give him legal standing. However, the degree of connection with the area which Mr Harding had set out in affidavits failed to meet the more stringent test introduced in the Act.
Mr Harding then asked the judge to refer a number of questions arising from his judgment for determination by the Supreme Court. Ruling on that application yesterday, the judge said he would certify one question for determination.
That question asks: “What are the criteria by reference to which a person may be said to have a ‘substantial interest’ even though they do not have a financial or property interest within the meaning of Section 50 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 and has this court properly applied such criteria to the instant case?”
The case arose after planning permission was granted to Kinsale Developments Ltd for the building of the centre at Preghane, Ballmacus, Kinsale.
From today’s IE property section.
Under The Hammer:😀 “PROP forward takes on a whole new meaning when it comes to sniffing out a delicious 12-acre site on Templehill, Cork.
Yet again, its truffle-time for developers who hope to turn Cork Constitution’s ground to gold-plated concrete in the short, rather than long term. The club’s committee are saying nothing at present and, according to one insider, overtures have been kept very hush-hush, unlike the rumours surrounding Douglas GAA, who are said to be assiduously courted by Frinailla.
Whether or not Cork Con will take the carrot of bigger, better and more accessible, is moot, as the developer’s pitch, (believed to be a joint name firm), hasn’t reached the firm proposal stage. It does beg the question, however, why didn’t anyone think of this before?
Twelve acres in the Ballintemple / Blackrock axis?
PRICELESS”.@wearnicehats wrote:
The purpose of the title European Capital of Culture (ECC) is meant to highlight existing cultural excellence and to encourage cities to develop and innovate in the cultural field. It is meant to be an opportunity to show that culture is central to the life of a city, and demonstrate its contribution to regeneration, social inclusion, education and business….
……..You can judge for yourself how Cork did on the above ( I can’t comment as I was out of the country that year)
:rolleyes: Lucky you to have been out of the Country for 2005
@Frank Taylor wrote:
Temple Bar was a decrepit slum 20 years ago. Many of the buidings were derelict. It is now considered a huge success in urban renewal terms – in the 1990s, Temple Bar Properties welcomed a constant stream of curious city planners and TV crews from around the world, interested to discover the secrets. While there is a lot of boozing, there are a large number of successful cultural venues, some streets have been beautifully restored such as Eustace and Crowe St. Plenty of high end residential units, many without parking. It is a lively area and a tourist magnet.
It was natural that Laura Magahy gained a reputation for a Midas touch even if it was not to be repeated.
You can declaim the tax incentives but property throughout the country was tax incentivised with little to show for it.
🙂 One or two mistakes in the area but a 95% success rate on what went before Ms.Magahy’s transformation.
Today’s Irish Examiner
By Tommy BarkerCONTROVERSIAL property investor Joe O’Donovan is putting Cork’s Wilton Shopping Centre on the market for €285 million, less than two months after 172 people lost their jobs there.
The Wilton complex was bought just two years ago for €124m from Tesco, who paid €80m for it in 2002.
The Cork centre, which was at the centre of a rent row after anchor tenant Roches Stores closed and left 172 staff out of work, is being marketed with joint agents DTZ and CBRE.
The complex is being earmarked for major development. Subject to planning, CBRE says it could quadruple to become a new western suburban town centre with a shopping mall, apartments, offices, basement car parking for 1,480 cars and medical centre on up to four floors.
Mr O’Donovan had initially bought 60% of the shopping centre in partnership with Howard Holdings. Last month, he bought out Howard’s 40% share for an undisclosed sum.
The huge price differential being sought is justified by investment specialist Sean O’Brien of CB Richard Ellis, selling for Mr O’Donovan, claiming “it is the best development opportunity in Corkâ€. The site sits on 17 acres, with scope to develop a new town centre and to go from 150,000 sq ft of buildings to 750,000 sq ft.
However, Tesco has retained ownership of its new 55,000 sq ft store and controls a significant portion of the parking area.
Mr O’Donovan hit the headlines in October after he and Marks and Spencer failed to agree over the rental value of retail space.
Roches had agreed a deal with M&S for the British retailer to take over its lease on the 45,000 square foot anchor tenant’s plot for the same rental price. It also agreed to take on the former Roches staff.
However, Mr O’Donovan demanded that M&S pay an increased rent. When agreement could not be reached, the deal fell apart. &
Last night, Linda Tanham of the retail staff union Mandate said: “The debacle with Roches and M&S did seem to be all about money. We did always suspect that there had to be an ulterior motive. Any shopping centre would jump at the chance to have a retailer like M&S going into it.â€
Wilton traders’ spokesman Jim Byrne said traders would have an open mind on any possible redevelopment, and said they’d be glad not to have to deal with Mr O’Donovan as landlord.
“People are entitled to a profit, but it shouldn’t be on the backs of traders. Our business is down 25% or 30% since Roches closed. We will make a sale difficult for him until our concerns are addressed. It is like a bad divorce and a messy divide.â€
Mr O’Donovan could not be contacted for comment last night.
🙂 Lidi’s plans to locate in Churchfield remained intact as the City Manager facing yet another defeat on the matter last night promised to use a Part 8 Planning on other parts of the site to prevent piecemeal development.
The Councillors who opposed Lidl for the RIGHT reasons (piecemeal development) in the face of huge local support for the supermarket at any cost need to be applauded, i.e Cllrs. McCarthy, Burke, O’Brien.
I must admit, I would have been in favour of allowing Lidl in as a stand alone venture, but fair dues to the above mentioned people for holding on for an ideal outcome. 😎p.s. I can feel another few compulsory purchase orders coming on to rid the area of low value industry in the area.
Wonder if Cork were the Capital of Culture next year would the list of “sponsors” remain the same as 2005 after last night’s vote?@d_d_dallas wrote:
quote: “Herr Joe Gavin’s ambition for city domination must have received a serious setback (as did his performance related pay bonus, i.e. development levies & extracting the proposed 2 euro bin tag levy from the poorest of our city’s population…”
Ever considered writing for the Daily Mail?!?
Seriously though, it’s possible to call the Emperor naked without descending to hysteria (or gloating on his or anyone’s annual bonus).
Mr, Gavin was asked in the Council chamber to disclose his 2004 bonus which is performance (income to CCC) related, he refused.
It may be difficult for some to feel that planning decisions are fair when the bigger the levy etc,etc;)@d_d_dallas wrote:
Enough of the slanderous JG knocking tone. It’s getting old. Fast.
I’m sorry but I cannot subscribe to the “Emperor’s new clothes†type agenda of some posters.
Mr. Gavin has done a lot of good for Cork City in many areas, but when the ultimate planning officer goes on solo runs pressing his own agenda it needs to be pointed out.
After all “Developments in Cork†rely on one man at the end of the day..Joe Gavin.
With power comes responsibility, with ultimate power comes ??? 😉😮 What a Country we have become since been “awash with money”, “the richest Country in Europe”, ‘the third richest Country in the WORLD”, “needing workers from all over the world to come here to serve in our hotels and restaurants, work as builders laborers” etc…:mad: (pity the fat bitch that proposed this nonsense did not allow lawyers, accountants, doctors, dentists, politicians come here to stop the Irish MAFIA (Dail Eireann) selling us down the river?
Now they want to destroy our heritage such as St. Colmans??
Call me a racist if that’s what is needed, but the sooner we wake up and say “This is OUR culture, OUR Country, if you don’t like it, or you want to sell us down the Swanney then F.OFF back to Muslim Land the better!!:mad:😮 From the Sunday Independent 26-11-06
Classy facades overshadowed by tat
Sunday November 26th 2006
IT’S still elegant, but like that glitzy cocktail dress that has been out on the tiles too many times, Grafton Street is looking a little shabby, careworn and missing a few sequins.
In these final days of November, Ireland’s premier shopping street should be at its best, adorned in festive finery and thronged with happy shoppers buying the first of their Christmas gifts.
The decorations are up, but the short stroll from Stephen’s Green to Westmoreland Street reveals that the most valuable real estate in the country has become bleak and a little tatty.
It’s not helped by a litter bin at the Stephen’s Green end so brimmed with free sheets, coffee cups and other detritus of the streets that a passing drunk had no option but to leave the empty bottle of cheap vodka beside, but not in, the black bin.
It is at this end of Grafton Street that the problems identified by the city council are most clearly evident. There are too many telephone shops, too many convenience stores and low-end souvenir shops.
In quick succession the street that should be heaven has the garish procession of ugly retail units – the nightclub blue O2 telephone store, the Londis supermarket with its free-standing street displays of dated postcards, and the Vodafone shop painted in-your-face Manchester United red. On the opposite side of the street, the Camera Centre advertises its wares in a Texan-sized font. Understated it is not.
It’s a depressing start, but there is a little relief further on. Zerep, Richard Allen and Sisley are coolly contemporary and pleasing to the eye, though the Laura Ashley shop – with its magnolia facade – is grubby.
Dunnes Stores on Grafton Street is admittedly a very small outlet of this wealthy supermarket giant in terms of square feet of retail space, but it is surprising that Margaret Heffernan would allow one of her stores to look so shabby.
It looks as though the painters were in, completed the undercoat and were called away to another job – never to return.
The litter bins in the rest of Grafton Street have all been emptied and the ochre paving is clean and litter-free.
There are other shops which deserve their spot on Grafton Street. Jigsaw, Miss Selfridge, Champion Sports – and even Burger King – with low-key signage, pass muster.
Monsoon is a mid-market fashion shop, but its rich gold and mulberry makeover looks classy and the window dressers have done an outstanding job with their festive display. But Monsoon abuts the hideous HMV store dressed in a pink livery not seen in nature. It’s all rather depressing.
What is strange is that the financial services stores that dot the street are the worst. The Permanent TSB building at the junction of Harry Street is a concrete bunker of unrelenting squalor.
About 80,000 people walk up Grafton Street every day. It is shocking that some of the wealthiest institutions in the country don’t put their best foot forward.
There are four nice shops in a row: Boodles, Karen Millen, Rocks and Peter Marks. All combine elegance with a contemporary feel. The old stonework of the block is showcased to good effect.
Opposite, there is yet another phone shop. The Carphone Warehouse store looks as though it should be stuck in the backlands of an industrial estate off the Naas Road. It isn’t particularly ugly, just inappropriate in the middle of this pedestrian boulevard.
When it first opened, designer label shrine BT2 had a certain urban chic – but it has dated badly. It looks half-finished rather than cutting edge these days.
Bewley’s is still beautiful, but the great old lady of Grafton Street looks out on yet another phone shop – this time Meteor.
Ernest Jones is a new jewellery outlet on Grafton Street, specialising in diamonds and watches. It has an elegant, stylish but very British shopfront which does not sit well on the street. The large coat of arms adornment ‘Bewley’s is still beautiful, but the great old lady of Grafton Street looks out on yet another phone shop – this time Meteor’
might be more appropriate on Winchester High Street rather than the heart of ould Dublin.
The dark green Body Shop store, like the brand itself, has relaxed into comfortable middle age. It’s reminiscent of looking through old albums at a car boot sale and finding an LP cover which, by its typeface alone, immediately catapults one back to house party in the early Seventies.
Marks & Spencer is a fine store, elegant clean and inviting, but just along the street there is, yes that’s right, yet another phone shop – O2 Experience.
Brown Thomas is a beacon of classy elegance, with a rather arty but beautiful window display on a carnival/circus theme, but on the opposite side of the street the Grafton Arcade is shuttered up and could definitely do with being power-hosed.
The street peters out with a row of inoffensive but uninspiring shops. An exception is River Island. This is a fine shop front with a monochrome theme that is spare and bright.
The worst by far is the AIB Service Centre – it’s dirty looking and does the financial services giant no favours. There is one more phone store – Vodafone again – and the final shop as you exit Grafton Street is the Mortgage Store. This is another financial services provider reluctant to speculate some of its profits on dressing up its real estate on the best pitch in Dublin. It’s bewildering, and sad.
Jerome Reilly
Pope backs Bishop’s Cathedral plans
Form the Evening Echo 25-11-06
By: Ronan BagnallTHE BISHOP Of Cloyne Dr John Magee will put forward new proposals to change St. Colman’s Cathedral in Cobh in the coming weeks.
Bishop Magee said his new plans for the cathedral were endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI on a recent trip to Rome.
He called a meeting of all priests in the Diocese earlier this week to inform them of his latest proposal.
Bishop Magee’s previous attempt to re-order the church caused a “storm of controversy in Cobh earlier this year and a group of local objectors campaigned against the plan.
The trustees of St Colman’s Cathedral, which includes Bishop Magee, had planned to relocate the altar rails and extend the sanctuary to the nave, which would have involved disturbing the mosaic floor.
However, An Bord Pleanala rejected the planning application because St Colman’s was “a most important example of 19-century Gothic architecture.â€
In July, Bishop Magee decided against pursuing the matter to the High Court, but insisted the present state of the church did not meet the proper liturgical requirements.
His latest plan to change the cathedral is likely to be met with similar opposition from the. Friends of St Cohman’s Cathedral (FOSCC), the group who strongly fought against his initial proposal.
FOSCC spokesman, Adrian O’Donovan said: “We will strongly object to any plan that will lead to the destruction of our Catherdal.
Any planning application to Cobh Town Council will be thoroughly considered before we decide to take action.â€
The FOSCC are demanding written evidence that Pope Benedict has endorsed the new plan.@samuel j wrote:
Well hopefully the next few months will see a clearer picture of where it all heading and regardless than something good comes of it all and Warehouse section gets some lease of life…..
My main point was and still is, is that in general Port of Cork are probably one of the better organisations around and again in general not one known for feet dragging… so still wonder if we are seeing the full picture.You did mention them holding the city to ransom…. I think this is unfair…. the investment needed to create a downriver port is immense. Whereas I would agree that an upriver Dublin style dockland rejuvenation is needed and welcome, Dublin was a much different csse as most of the docklands there that were given life had been dormant for years and were not working berths/quays as effectively Dublin Port had already moved to Alexandra Road long before.
Overall I agree with you on it being the way forward but just don’t feel POC should be blamed for all ills
I could agree with you were it not for the fact that the overall responsibility for planning, looking after our heritage, etc. is in the hands of Cork City Council and the CEO of same, Mr. Joe Gavin.
The crossover of responsibilities, wages (expenses), and members of the board of the Port of Cork leaves a lot to be desired, especially when these guys are coming to the taxpayer of the city looking for a handout to relocate while leaving one of the most important buildings (a listed building) in the city fall into a serious state of disrepair.
:rolleyes: A conflict of interest or what?
Management of these type of company’s never seem to just retire on a huge pension for sitting on their asses for years, but are “appointed” to other Boards, charitable organizations, the arts etc without a care for the destruction they have left behind.😉 Where is a former City Manager employed?
😉 Where is a former CEO of the POC employed?
😮 Where will J.G. end up now that Dublin rejected him?
:rolleyes: Will, (can) things change in the future?@samuel j wrote:
The judgement makes interesting reading…
If bonded lads still in it would their existing lease terms not apply in maintenance… i.e they should be doing it.Key yes but do you know or have you seen any proposals for it ultimate use in a docklands scenario..bulldoze away as many warehouses on the Dublin quays were… perhaps they were of not sufficent condition or architectural value ot retain… but dublin quays changed radically.. for the good I Feel as IFSC etc. alive again
I presume you are for the retention and renovation of the Bonded warhouse or do you see it as an acceptable casualty if it was the key to the overall development.Presume you’ve seen this pdf, it gives a fair idea of size of development needed to move downriver
• The “lads†are still there and the terms of the lease and the dilapidation schedule still apply (unless a “sweetheart deal†was done before or during the HC case)
• Proposals (including plans) were shown in confidence to the CCC planners, and were printed by the EE (in error I believe) with a photo of a FF TD proclaiming “his vision†for the Docks!!
• Bulldozing was not on the agenda back then. The plans submitted were VERY endearing to the existing listed structure of the CBW
• This building should not be a casualty of speculative greed, but should be redeveloped / extended / transformed utilizing the existing structure. The likes of this building will never be built again in the future. (a half trained monkey could design and build the likes of Victoria Mills), :rolleyes: SORRY Monkey, for the insult.@samuel j wrote:
Last time I was in it, it was magnificent…a while back paying mooring fees…
Its unlike them not to maintain property in their control (and I don’t work for um in case you were worried)
as generally throughout many nooks and crannies in the vast Harbour they do their bit… alot more than can said for the various councils who control adjoining properties/areas…but lets not go there.There must be something else we are not aware of as it is not consistent with their usual manner…
forgive me but what are the plans or possible planned usages of Bonded warehouse if the bigger picture Docklands plan does come to fruition….I’m just not sure.
I can imagine they have earned a pittance in rent from it if was a long term lease….this not an excuse but it does make it harder to balance the books, and/or leases title open to legal cases. When did they win…is it even occupied now…I have absolutely no connection with the POC, the CBW or the court case of last year.
I do however want to see the docklands proceed, and the key (no pun) between the existing City and the new city i.e. the Docklands is the CHQ site.
It is still occupied by the Bonded Warehouses who have to handball every item in and out of the stores due to the low headroom (Victorian times or what?)@samuel j wrote:
Am I wrong in saying that the Custom House itself, offices etc, of the POC or were last time I was up there have been maintained, hence their use for many a fuction during the 2005 Cultural events.
Its the warehouses that are in a state… If a long term tenant does not comply to lease clauses it can a hell of a nightmare for a landlord regardless of who/she is.
would it not have been the job of the CCC to enforce or would you reckon it was a legal minefield they wanted no part of..
Does seem odd for all to go to trouble of letters of this and that but nothing physically done… who were these designed to placate…..The Port of Cork headquarters on Custom House Quay is a truly amazing building in its own right.
However the Port of Cork fought tooth and nail last year to stop a takeover of the Bonded Warehouse lease by a London based business man.
😮 It’s an awful pity that they did not give a sh*t about this landmark building before, or since winning this High Court case.
As for the CCC, they would be jailed for incompetence were it not for the mitigating circumstances of their lack of intelligence.@samuel j wrote:
would you know if that covered the relocation of just say the south jetties,penrose quay areas or included
Tivoli/container berths. Could be wrong but can imagine the Tivoli end move would be very costly.Marine berthage/docks call it what you will are by nature expensive /due to their harsh environment and use can seem very high if comparable to say road or industrial projects.
Would be interesting to know what is in the lets say 100mil…..
😮 The docks area adjacent to the Custom House Quay (occupied by the POC tenants, Cork Bonded Warehousing), these warehouses really are the “Jewel in the Crown” of the docklands area of Cork and one has to wonder why POC are willing to allow this listed building fall into the river when the dilapidation schedule built into the CBW lease makes the tenants liable for repairs?
Also somebody in CCC should be sent to jail for allowing our heritage fall to pieces like this.What has happened since this letter from POC to CBW since the year 2000 (other than a change in CCC management?)
24th March, 2000.
Mr. William O’Mahony,
Managing Director,
Cork Bonded Warehouses Limited, Custom House Quay,
CORK.
RE: Your Lease dated 27th March. 1918.
Dear Mr. O’Mahony,
We received a copy of letter from Mr. John Power, Building Control
Officer, City Hall, Cork addressed to you.
As you are aware, under the terms of the 1918 Lease under which you hold the property there is an obligation on you that you “will (subject as hereinafter mentioned) well and substantially repair cleanse maintain amend and in good and tenantable repair order and condition keep the said premises and all new buildings and works which may at any time during the said tenancy be erected on and all additions made to the said premises and the fixtures therein and the walls fences vaults roads sewers drains and appurtenances thereof with all necessary reparations cleansings and amendments whatsoever (damage by fire excepted) and the said premises so repaired cleansed maintained amended and kept as aforesaid will at the expiration or sooner determination of this demise quietly yield up to the Lessors together with all additions and improvements made thereto in the meantime and all fixtures of every kind in or upon the said premises or which during the said term may be affixed or fastened to or upon the same ..”.
We now call upon you to comply in full with the above covenant having regard to the terms of the aforementioned letter from Mr. John Power, Building Control Officer, with particular reference to the south east corner of your premises and the Schedule of Dilapidations dated June 1999 which was served on you from this office.
We require confirmation from you within 14 days of the receipt of this letter that you will immediately take such steps as to remedy the breach of the above detailed covenant
We are awaiting hearing from you.
Declan Owenssamuel j wrote:True..
Excluding the Tivoli Container berths, much of the bulk cargoes/vessels are already using Ringaskiddy and Port of Cork plans well advanced. Can’t see them lads being an obstacle as they usually not ones for just taking about it but do-ers…
QUOTE]😮 Port of Cork made representations to CCC in the recent past quoting figures of 80, 100, and then 110 million euros as the cost of relocating to the lower harbour.
WHO is going to pay these costs??
Hopefully no individual or company will be allowed to hold the City of Cork to ransom to allow the Docklands development proceed (no matter what local rep’s are batting for them) 😉
