lexington

@A-ha wrote:

Thinking about it recently after seeing that horrible photo of Victoria Cross, would you blame the locals for wanting to cap suburban building heights at three storeys. I think that Victoria Cross scared people sh*tless. It’s a manky building and if I thought that I’d have to look at a group of those out side my sitting room window, I’d die. But obviously, the residents aren’t with it if they think that people will stand for more of those shoeboxes to be built. It was a once off…… I hope, and I can’t see buildings like that getting the go ahead in Cork again.

I assume you’re referring to Victoria Mills designed by Derek Tynan & Associates?

You must remember CCC Planners were presented with a variety of model alternatives during preplanning discussions – the one which exists was the agreed option. Generally, and this is a preference issue, I do not like Derek Tynan & Associates’ work as a rule. That isn’t a knock to the firm’s talent in the least, structurally, many of their projects – including Victoria Mills – are actually very very clever. However from an aesthetic perspective I (I personally) think Victoria Mills does not compliment its location from a wider perspective (but that’s not to say, to many others, it is not a very good project). There are a myriad of arguments regarding perception – however this is my personal opinion and is not to conflict with the opinion of others. That said, a height cap is non-sensical – with respect to the example you cite, the logic of such a cap in application to Victoria Mills is arguing that it is disliked based on its height? Or rather, that its (as some residents may argue) its supposed “ugliness” is emphasised by its height? I disagree, I think its height is quite suitable for its location. The devil, as they say, is in the detail – or rather, its design. It’s not the paper’s fault the contract is cruel. Assessing its purpose, the site size on which it is built is pretty special – the building’s height in part has allowed it achieve a capacity without consuming the entire site in concrete and allowing for open spaces which take advantage of its pretty river setting from ground level. People forget that these student developments (which are winding down somewhat now) take students (a % of them that is) out of investor housing, which does in turn edge at the fabric of the original housing’s material use which is owner-occupancy (including families). In that sense, purpose built, quality student accommodation is a positive contribution. Had the 3 storey cap been in place at the time of Victoria Mills conception, the likelihood is that the site (were it granted) would be consumed in a low-rise block (if the developers deemed it viable) which could still have the same basic design. Other arguments for height include viability in light of land values and the associated broader economic impact that has. By extension, take CUH and its new Maternity Wing and proposed Cardia/Renal Unit – both 6-storeys, given the restricted site, structural issues and breakmark capacity issues – it is quite likely, such vitality needed provisions would have been severely compromised under a cap – if built. Blanket caps restricted development capacity and associated benefits – but I’ll let you review those issues in previous posts. You can be sure, if height wasn’t an issue – some people will always find an issue to raise war over, whether that’s usage, proximity, colouration, location, design, whatever…there’ll always be something.

As for Victoria Mills being a ‘one-off’, I don’t think its that simple. Personally think we have to keep pushing the architectural boundaries. Cork is well positioned to seek higher standards and I think some developers are responding. There is no such thing as a bar too high as I see it. In this push for new and higher standards, various developments will present various interpretations – some we will like, some we won’t like so much. The trick will be to produce, not monotonous (God no!), but sympathetic architecture which either adds positively to an area or sets a new precedent. Small steps to this have been produced so far, we must now encourage developers and architects alike to be willing to experiment in conceptualisation stages allowing for a positive realisation. It’s a small pet wish of mine to drag Cork to a level in which all citizens and visitors alike can find a sense of satisfaction in the buildings that surround them – and in some cases awe. It’s a long hard road, but the goal should be to make visitors from other cities come to Cork and leave thinking, “That’s how it should be done!” as oppose to the other way around. 🙂

@Aidan wrote:

Lexington, do you know if the Cork Commuter Rail (including the Midleton link) can go ahead before Kent Station is redeveloped? That image you’ve posted above seems to show the existing station building (its a PS, and can’t be touched) only, and no mention of the new station further east or the associated car park.

I don’t have a copy of the Faber Maunsell Report, or any of the IE doc, but I seem to remember that there were through traffic issues with Kent Station, what with Commuter Rail and inter city sharing the same platforms.

(thanks for the ref to Cork CoCo)

According to Transport21 the extended Midelton Line should come into full operation for late 2008/2009 (as best I remember, feel free to correct that). It is hoped that MPH and CIE should have applications lodged on Horgan’s Quay for sometime in 2006 – according to an individual involved in the project, no date is set as a number of issues have yet to be ironed out regarding the development (not least quayside discussions with the PoC, settlement on issues of heights and densities etc etc). The plus side is that OMP, the associated consulting engineers (whose name for some reason escapes me :rolleyes: ) and TPA have a lot of work behind the project established and a number of options have been presented to CCC. Final designs and layouts etc – should be run through the mill over the coming months – how many months that will take, I don’t know, but let’s say for argument applications are lodged late 2006, undoubtedly we can expect submissions, further information (perhaps 2 sets) and if it’s not appealed third-party, conditions could be appealed on a 1st Party Basis. So let’s be reasonable and give the project 1 and half years in planning. That’s late 2007/2008 before the project gets a clear. If the DoT keep their word, Midelton Line work should be well under construction by then. If MPH steam into the project, we’re saying Phase 1, Kent Station and the new National Route work (which will go hand-in-hand) should be complete about 18-months later – give or take. So by mid-to-late 2009 Kent Station should be reoriented and able, and completion will run relatively in sync with the Midelton Extension completion (perhaps a little later – however temporary measures will be implemented to facilitate such an occurence). Through commuter traffic is facilitated by aligned tracks running south of the existing terminus and between the new concourse to the south – which will (if MPH have their way) integrate as part of a larger mixed-use project forming part of the Alfred Street extension.

Kent Station reoriented to face water – new concourse adjacent to the new National Route

Regarding the existing Kent Station Terminal, true – it is a PS and is in line for retention, however it can be adjusted subject to justification, and indeed it will have to be in some capacity. Works are soon to be underway to revamp the station to facilitate the medium-term as a matter of interest.

Regarding the terminal, the North Docklands Local Area Plan states:
“The remnant of the 1860s railway station is extremely important from an industrial archaeological viewpoint as it is the earliest and only surviving side entry railway terminus building in Ireland. Its significance is that it provides invaluable evidence of the former layout of the original railway station. The implications of its significance need to be further considered in any redevelopment of the site. The central range of 5
rooms forming the Station Masters Office remain (Rynne, 2002) of the former station.”

If you compare the layout stated in CCC’s NDAP, and prior to that the CCDS 2004, the O’Mahony Pike drawings I posted earlier – are near on the button. Clearly the product of extensive dialogue between the 2 parties. See the CCC proposed layout below.

Important to this project and to the larger Docklands Development Strategy (North and South) will be the progress made by the Port of Cork in relocating it’s activities to its lands near Ringaskiddy – and by extension, the efficient, on-time completion of the N28 Dual-Carriageway link Cork city to Ringaskiddy will be important for the PoC. A Stakeholders Forum is being established by CCC (to be operated by the Docklands Development Division at Naviagtion House) to ensure an efficient dialogue for all parties involved in the North Docklands Development, and the South Docklands. This will hopefully satisfy the PoC’s complaints that it has not been provided a sufficient level of updating and overall input into docklands progress. Though CCC dispute Mr. Keating’s claims, I don’t think anyone can argue the vital importance to future docklands development (and its associated economic importance) that the role of the PoC will play in staging movement out to Ringaskiddy. Startegy Assessment Reports have been commissioned by the PoC on the move – at a cost of approx. €200m, it’s no small undertaking. It’s in everybody’s interest that the move goes efficently and swiftly. For the PoC’s own expansion and progressive interests, the move is a most important realisation for them. I would, in the long-term, be of the view that both CCC and CorkCoCo, in conjunction with the DoT/RPA etc should look very seriously into providing a competent rail-link to Ringaskiddy from the city (possibly with stops at Carrigaline – the most car dependent town in Ireland), Rochestown and linking up with the old rail corridor via Mahon Point and into the city, via the docklands. It makes good economic, environmental and social sense.

@Radioactiveman wrote:

Does anyone know what the eventual decision was by ABP on Frinailla’s Lady’s Well development?

A decision is now not due until November 7th 2005, as ABP have pushed back the decision date yet again.

@Aidan wrote:

Lex, is the last report listed in the bibliography of that tender document publicly available? (“The Competitiveness of Cork: An Economic Analysis”)

As far as I am aware, yes, it can be attained via request. Contact Cork City Council on 021-4966222 to double-check that.

Also, check out their website – which usually posts vague but regular property outlook updates under the section entitled Publications. Click here.

😀 When Reliance Bearings Company put their premises of just under 0.5acres at Anderson’s Quay on the market in early summer of this year – much speculation amounted what would become of this prime site at the epicentre of Cork’s emerging and vibrant new office quarter. Up to 4 solid bids were secured by Hamilton Osbourne King who were handling the sale – which guided at approximately €5m. Interest came from as far as Dublin, but in the end, the property was sold for a figure over €2m in excess of the guide to O’Callaghan Properties (OCP).

It has emerged, and which was published in the press today as I understand it, that OCP have enlisted Wilson Architecture to provide the design on a landmark office development of over 100,000sq ft. Reports that OCP had entered discussions with Tommy Maher regarding his adjoining premises to the west (which he purchased from OFC previously), the CSPCA and the proprietors of the Tyre Fitting premises. The possibility that OCP will commence discussions with the Simon Community premises to the east, would open the potential for an impressive development site. The office building is expected to peak at up to 6-storeys and be built of a large basement car-park for between 130 to 150 cars with retail usage on the ground floor.

Perhaps impressed with Wilson Architecture efforts across the river at St. Patrick’s Quay for Paul Kenny, OCP will now seek to replicate a similarly impressive quayside structure. The Anderson’s Quay development will be flanked by new developments at Clontarf Street (revised drawings expected to be submitted soon), Deane Street and Lapps Quay. A planning application on this new proposal is not likely until sometime early in the new year.

Anyhow, lets get this thread back to its purpose before Lex goes off in a huff

:p Not an issue – besides transport is an important factor in any area’s development and associated infastructure ultimately has an impact on the type of new structures produced, and by extension, their design.

As for the corner building on South Mall/Parliament Street – Michael Corbett is renovating the premises as far as I’m aware.

I saw a few posts back that there may be development on Clontarf Street. For some reason I can’t remember where that actually is. I’ve tried looking at maps online and still cannot locate it! Can someone let me know, and also what development is planned for there if any? Cheers.

The site is located between Clontarf and Deane Streets, it is the small triangular site visible on one of the images in the first section of this post. DAT Partnerships are seeking a 9-storey office development on the site, designed by Daniel Luxton of Coughlan de Keyser. However a revised design is to be submitted which includes height reductions to the southern elevation.

@ToMuchFreeTime wrote:

Does any one have any thoughts on the new transport plan released yesterday??
For such a big plan there doesn’t seem to be much information available on it.

It looks like alot of the plan is centred in dublin which is a shame because we should be
promoting other parts of the country as places to live and help promote the so farr failed sacial plan.

any ideas on what projects on due for cork other that the rail system.
I think there should have been more in it for cork it would help present it as a real
option to live other than dublin!!!!!!!!!!111

It is Dublin-centric, but there are a number of issues here – first off, Dublin and the Greater Dublin Area (GDA) home 33% of the nation’s population – in implementing a Transport Plan like ‘Transport 21’ you can’t ignore the needs and requirements of that population. The catch is, that peripheral and commuter development can stand to further promote unsustainable growth patterns in that region. This would fly in the face of NSS agendas. So what do you do? Leave a bad situation get worse, or help aid it and run the risk of furthering that problem in the future?

Though I welcome the plan – it is a little bit the victim of its predecessors and other associated policies. The country is too centralised. It’s a nice idea in theory – but geography has much to do with also. The settlement patterns in this country make a simplistic transport plan the thing of myth. You have regionally important urban centres at Sligo, Galway and Limerick all dotting the Western sea-board with service populations of 200,000 (Sligo and the wider North Western Region), 200,000 (Galway Region), 220,000 (Limerick and Midwest Region) – they need to be serviced and linked too. A prime example of the over centralised nature of this country is evident in it’s rail network – to travel by rail from Galway to Cork, one must first travel to Dublin. I am a little disappointed that the proposed Western Rail Corridor in Transport 21 has not taken a more strategic view and provided a full-length rail link as far as Cork. In terms of economics, perhaps, a more viable option exists in a Cork-Limerick intercity/commuter service (not necessarily proper Intercity services – Arrow type services would comfortably suffice).

The Commuter Rail Network provision is positive – links to Midelton and Mallow (with necessary service stations to be provided in areas like Blarney, Carrigtwohill and perhaps at the Park&Ride mooted for Dunkettle) will be vital. Cork is interesting in that it is developing large ring commuter towns at places like Midelton, Carrigaline (the most car-dependent town in Ireland), Macroom and Mallow – among others – which feed the city increasingly so. Cork city itself is restricted in its growth capacity due to Local Authority, geographical and zoning issues – which furthers the argument for building up in areas like the Cork City Docklands (to try and bring more families and businesses back into the city). These towns should all be in line for sufficient commuter rail services – with populations in places like Ballincollig, Carrigaline and Midelton all projected to reach 40,000+ by 2020, viability is not really a question so much as should be a positive consideration. By the time Transport 21 is complete – these towns and their commuters to Cork city will be choking the existing infastructure. As they say, prevention is better than the cure. Also, Cork’s population in the city is more heavily concentrated in the south – 2.5km traffic james either side of the Kinsale Road Roundabout are not the answer – I accept the provision of the new flyover, but the traffic volume on the South Ring is hindered by capacity – this will only serve to get worse as the population grows. Feeder towns like Kinsale, Carrigaline, Crosshaven, Bandon, Halfway, Innishannon etc should all be considered in terms of infastructural access too – and I don’t believe the car is the long-term strategic answer to this.

What the Transport Plan should consider is the creation of viable growth alternatives outside Dublin. Though the political and some economic arguments associated behind decentralisation and industry provision historically support dispersal over broader areas (e.g. West, North West etc) – to support a viable economic development option, balanced axis and sustainable alternative – I do believe the Transport Plan should be addressing now necessary infastructural support to allow for the sustained and balanced regional development of somewhere such as Cork. The Metropolitan Region of Cork population grew by 10% in the period 1996 to 2002 (versus a 3% city centre DED decline – although those figures a arguable) and is set to grow by a further 10% over the next 5 years. The sustainable concentration of this growth is not favourable without proper facilitation.

@Quest wrote:

Anyone any thoughts on the Market Square Development in Mallow?

Questions I would like answered if possible are…

Why are Flemmings so overdue when O’Flynns can deliver in Ballincollig on time?
Who are confirmed tennants and who are rumoured (and how many units are not taken yet)?
Who is taking the cinema and when is it due to open?
What are peoples thoughts on the building itself? (Local opinion is divided but on the whole quite unimpressed)

Economically it’s good for the town and I think, long-run it will be a positive addition.

As for the design – the Fleming Group, when it comes to their project designs, have never left me particularly inspired. Perhaps their best effort is found along George’s Quay in Cork city (Trinity Court), where design demands are becoming a little more hardlined.

Tenants – in part can be found earlier in this thread here.

Gate Cinemas – that of The Gate Multiplex, Cinema World and Market Green in Midleton will be operating the cineplex.

🙂 4 exciting applications are scheduled for deliberation next week – all on Novemeber 1st 2005…

First off is Frinailla’s Victoria Cross proposal. Originally proposed, the project designed by Geraldine McNamara of Richard Rainey & Associates, sought permission for 25 apartments and commercial unit over 6 (part 7) storeys and a basement car-park, with basement storage. Further Information was requested of the proposal on the 24th August 2005 and received by planners on the 5th of October 2005. The revised plans were subject however to 2 submissions. A decision is set for next week – see an image of the proposal (as originally lodged) below.

I would hope to leave this topic after the following until such a stage as progress is made regarding its outcome…

…Jim O’Donovan, CCC Director of Planning, has apparently stated his opposition publicly, in line with the sentiments of Cork City Manager Joe Gavin and Cork Lord Mayor Deirdre Clune, former Lord Mayor Colm Burke and Fine Gael public representative Brian Bermingham – to the proposed cap on suburban development of over 3-storeys. The legal standing of the motion continues to be questioned as it directly conflicts with national policy on sustainable growth. Despite the various threats by Councillors, notably Dave McCarthy, their efforts are only detailling one occurence – the loss of both councillors and city management’s input into what goes on it their city (that is if the motion is found to legally justified). What is a pity is that residents and their councillors seem to think that what they are doing is for the betterment of their area. The perception that why planners, city management, some public representatives, developers, architects, engineers, consultants, economists and other professionally trained individuals associated with the field oppose the motion is based on greed, is naive. It is simply not in the public good. Metaphorically, the situation with residents and some councillors is the equivalent of a patient attending a doctor’s clinic and stating that they wish to continue smoking; the doctor advises and warns the patient not to smoke or otherwise they’re health will suffer as a result. The patient ignores the advice and continues smoking irrespective. So the patient continues and a few years down the line is diagnosed with lung cancer. This is the same in a sense – councillors and lobbying residents are being warned by those who have been professionally trained and appointed not to proceed with such motions – not because it’s a greed thing, not because its the done thing, but because (like the scenario with doctor) it is in the long-term interests of the community at large (whether those informed can see it or not) and not for short-term gain. As for the democracy of it all, the very motion itself isn’t actually all that democratic when considered holistically. Also, taking the metaphor of the smoker who continues despite advice – the smoker may gain a short-term satisfaction from ignoring the warnings, but ultimately succombs to the consequences of his/her actions. In ignoring the advice, the smoker acts selfishly because the fail to consider how their later health detriment not only affects them, but others (their loved ones for example). The height cap motion stands to disbenefit not only the residents of the affected areas, but also others – and all because of a short-sighted action.

We should consider Mancur Olson’s book “The Rise and Decline of Nations” – it is noted therein, that the downfall of economies and nations (or this case areas) is the result of too much influence enacted at the hands of lobby groups and their champions. Their actions are self-interest and lead to the detriment of well-being in others. Democracy, which some lobby groups associated with ban so vehemently champion, provides for the freedom and tolerance for all elements to co-exist. It is the nature of democracy that sometimes, one group has a larger following than the other (say Catholicism versus Hinduism in Ireland), but it does not seek to over-dominate the other and respects its place as an individual element of any democratic society. Just something to consider.

Issue over until such a time as further news comes available.

While Bowen Construction completed the erection of their 2nd tower crane over the Lancaster Quay site, Michael McNamara Construction were working away at erecting towers cranes over Cork Airport Business Park (new hotel) and UCC’s Boole Library. It is understood, as part of McNamara’s aggressive push into the Cork market, CEO Bernard McNamara (also believed to be involved in the consortium behind a proposed 400MW power plant on Little Island) may have also been in discussions with a docklands landowner about a possible project in Cork’s new urban quarter district. Though nothing is understood to have been solidified, it is understood breif discussions on options have been addressed. It will be interesting to see if anything comes of this – and I will update and/or correct this information subject to any further news.