POM

@malec wrote:

I was going to say this is just another half-arsed design but I quite like it now. I was thinking something more striking would be better in that area but this does fit nicely with county hall. It’s a bit too boxy and boring but if it wasn’t tthen maybe it would have clashed too much. I also think it looks better with the reduced height. I’ve nothing against tall buildings (in fact I love them) but I’d hate to see county hall’s stand-alone look go.

I’m still waiting until we get a sexy 20-storey tower for the docklands. It’ll have to be something with curves, not square shaped. I’m thinking something along Paul Kenny’s The Treasury but in tower form 😀

Though I think it is an improvement on the original, its still to boxy and just so bland it makes me sleepy. A curve glazed feature from the ground up, to accentuate the corner, wouldn’t go astray. The sharp edges could be retained by a central glazed feature would at least jazz the tower up a bit. Th height and new materials seem much more attractive…from a distance I don’t think this will impact County Hall too much but from Victoria Cross it would probably limit views big time. I can’t make up my mind on this one…which probably says it all really. I have a feeling people will cite this scheme as another one to add to their arsenal of stupid anti-highrise slurs.

As for docklands tall buildings, I agree that design teams should start thinking outside the lines and embrace some subtle (or not so subtle) curves and twists to buzz up future high-rise proposals. Tall buildings in the docklands should make a statement. It should be a case of design influence versus restrictive requirements. And by that I mean more Turning Torsos, Il Curvo and Swiss Re buildings and less Santry Cross and Sunbeams.

Just reading the Galway thread there. I think its brilliant for Galway with the news about the CIE lands being redeveloped and I’m very glad to hear it, but it simply highlights the fact to me that CIE are arsing around with Horgan’s Quay in Cork. Its amazing how fast they can move when they want to, yet 8 years later we’re still hanging around waiting for CIE and Manor Park to get a move on with no clear date for an application anytime soon. It really is a disgrace and an awful big let down for the whole city. It strikes me as a further representation the Government and its bodies have for Cork (i.e. School of Music, Bus Station, Cork Airport, Horgan’s Quay, Decentralisation). I know there are issues involved, but drive can sort out such issues fairly lively. Lex posted some images of early drawings by O’Mahony Pike on Horgans Quay here before. I hope that what is, if it ever does get lodged, will be a dramatic improvement on those efforts. I’m really hoping O’Mahony Pike show more Gallery Quay mixed with Dennehy’s Cross than Charlotte Quay here. Dramatic edges and extensive glazing opening out to face the river are needed here. Design issues aside, I continue to resent the prolonged and inadequate progress by CIE on Horgan’s Quay. Four million euro novelty revamps may look nice on paper but they are just that, novelty…just like the Bus Station revamp and just like the inability to provide Cork Airport with proper airbridges and then still expect it to carry the debt despite promises.

Thanks for those Lex. I’ve probably said this before on here but one of my main concerns about the Sunbeam project, and I think the picture above demonstrates this well, is its cluttered nature. In actual fact, I have no problem with the density, the development is intersected by roadways (not entirely visible in the picture above) which creates a nice urban canyon-ated feel to it. The development is like its own little urban centre within a centre and yet at the same time does particularly over dominated the surrounding area. I think in this way the height and massing is actual pretty effective. My issue is with the finish design. Its very cluttered and seems to take on board no distinctive form other than a messy, bland and rather boxy one. There is something rather boring about this development. There seems to be no great variation in finished materials, no colouration to complement the extended setting of the scheme and appears rather drab. The one feature that seems to stand out is obviously the 18 storey tower, but not for the right reasons. It is utterly lost in the rest of the project. What was needed here was a tall, sleek and slender design without the balconies!! The tower is a good example of how balconies can ‘cheap’-up a design. Extended glazing features and a more slender structure is needed. The towers orientation falls flat. Why they put it on an axis to address the city end of its setting is a mystery. A tall feature tower like this one would complement the area wonderfully if only it was appropriated properly. To achieve its supposed gateway status, clearly the tower should have been reoriented to face the valley mouth on the northern section of the site addressing the Mallow Road as it enters Blackpool and acting as a proper landmark. In its current state it just looks lost and a little silly. Having said all that, I do like the raised communal space which has been provided for potential residents. It gives them a shared space to occupy amongst themselves rather than trying to mesh it in with some sort of novelty public area. I like that a riverside public area is provided seperately. Hopefully the raised communal garden will promote enhanced interaction among the residents as a community and not lost in a complex of other activities. I hope the architects when redesigning the project, if it is to be resubmitted for planning, take note of at least some of these points, keeping the good elements and working to improve the others.

@altuistic wrote:

On another subject our beloved Minister for Transport apparently says a Dublin Docklands railway station will be up and running by 2007. Now this isnt a knock at Dublin at all at all but more an observation on our politicians but didnt Minister Cullen promise to get Horgans Quay and Kent Station rolling at the start of last year and didnt his predecessor promise a debt free Cork airport? Did the current Minister intervene with the DAA decided to knock off airbridges at Cork airport from 4 to 1?? Not that I remember. No such cutbacks at the new terminal in Dublin which will cost 1.2 billion euros. Its amazing how Mr Cullens second rate attitude to Cork astounds me. Why must we put up with second rate?? Horgans Quay, our airbridges and promises on Cork airport debt are overdue!

Then again Martin Cullen has demonstrated his ‘abilities’ more than once: e-voting, Horgan’s Quay, Cork Bus Station, Cork Airport…anyone care to add to the list? In failing to act on Horgan’s Quay and Cork Airport, Minister Cullen is sending a clear message to the Cork electorate about his Government…I wonder is it such a wise one so close to general election?

My hang up is the Emmet Place frontage as well, its very bland and blocky when what was needed here was a proposal which utilised the superb vantage along Emmet Place from the quays. The frontage fails to capitalise on its location and I would, had I my way, push for an enhanced treatment and redesign. It stacks up poorly – in fact I would propose an adjusted replication of the zinc shell stepping as found on the corner of Academy Street and Emmet Place. This would bring more consistency to the frontage, provide a more gradual incline to the taller sections and give something a bit more exciting to look at visually. Also a sympathetic copper treatment would compliment the “doll house” building in the middle of this frontage better than glass on the eastern side. I can’t see 9 storeys getting through unhinged, I’d expect 2 storeys to be knocked off the higher apex sections. 7 storeys seems more reasonable. Other than that its not a bad design for such a complicated site and I especially like the northern section of the Academy Street frontage.

And whats all this I hear on the radio that its a 450 million euro development??!! Exaggerration much? It makes for nice sensationalism but a scheme of this make-up with a 450 million euro value would be unviable. I think a more conservative 100 million euro…maybe 150 million as lex said would be a bit more realistic.

@kite wrote:

:confused: Is this a good or bad idea?, does this mean that the CSD group are now getting a payoff in the way of an action plan for Bishopstown? Is all the bull and cribbing about development that this crowd but out out over the past few years now paying off?

Not really. Blackrock had an action plan for its harbour. Blackpool had one too. I don’t see any harm in an action plan, its formulation isn’t a blueprint according to lobbyists. The plan will be assessing sectors of the Bishopstown area and devising the best framework for each.

Though I’m delighted that the Metropole proposal is a s further step in hopefully what will be a large-scale and long overdue much needed redevelopment of Patricks Quay, I am somewhat disappointed by the O’Mahony Pike design here. When you look at a proposal like Dennehys Cross and then this, its hard to put the 2 in frame as being from the same firm. I see and applaud what the architects is trying to do here, allow for varying parapet heights so as to break up bulk and compliment surrounding structures. I agree with malec, the site could do with a tall feature, but the overall resulting articulation is poorly executed and creates a very disjointed 20 car pile up. It reminds me of the proposal for Sunbeam with the 18 storey element lost in a jumble of block heights. As par lex’s post, the planner has demanded a redesign of the tower and limit on height as well as some elevational alterations. Maybe this will aid the scheme. Anyone know how the problem with the leisure lease worked out? If its not settled the scheme probably won’t be able to move until 2008 (???).

As for the other end of Patricks Quay. I agree, The Treasury is definitely a step in the right direction, striking yet not overbearing. Mr. Kenny’s efforts here have got me highly anticipating what he has in store for his Grand Parade site.

@Micko wrote:

Just a few questions here.

At the moment, the official population of cork is something like 186,000 with its imediate suburbs. Just wondering, but does anyone know what area’s of cork are technically part of the city.

IMO, places like Ballincollig, Glanmire, Sallybrook, Rochestown, Douglas, Donnybrook and Grange should all be brought in as part of the city and leave them out of COrk Co Co’s juistinction.

If you were to bring all the suburbs in, including Ballincollig, anyone know what hte population would be ? 350,000 ish ?

With my mediocre insight, I think the last Census statistics indicated the city’s population was actually only 123,000. However the figure is misleading as it does not encompass some established boundaries and you are right that a more accurate population would include which are essentially suburbs like Douglas, Rochestown, parts of Ballyvolane, Glanmire and so on. The Metropolitan area and its associated commuter belt I think is more in the region of the 350,000 figure you stated. The probably with jurisdiction is an age old one. Do you think the county council are willing to sacrifice millions in budgetary grants and development rates to the city council without some serious serious negotiation???

@kite wrote:

😡 Scumbags from both sides… let them love Ulster up in East and West Belfast where those RETARDS belong….F**k our do gooder Government for letting those Nazis to come here to give “our” dopes a reason for destroying Dublin. Im Fuck**g mad as hell.

Without taking it political, a democracy guarantees freedom of speech and expression. I don’t agree with the marches, I find them antiquated and gloating, however I am not willing to see our values of democracy eroded by the actions of utter scum. We should be above this. Furthermore, controls should have been established in advance to contain and manage such potential outbursts – we should anticipate nothing more for people like these (unfortunately). The Gardai were in a tough position today, but they need to be equiped with rapid response capacities in order to deal with such scenarios rapidly and effectively. I don’t think they did a poor job by any means but it could have very easily turned the other way. True Republicans would have shown a little more respect for their capital city and supporters of the march should consider the impacts of their petty actions. Undoubtedly, another 50% of the hooliganism on display today was run of the mill gougers looking to stir up a little crap and take advantage of a vulnerable situation. All in all, as my father would say, a shower of gombeens.

I would think that indeed the query is a bit of scare mongering in order to satisfy a campaign agenda, however consider that fire services even in places like New York do not possess ladders that extend 80 floors! The question is not so much about equipment, although it is in part a requirement, it is more so abut 2 other factors – building design and training. Cork City Council’s requirement is to facilitate its fire service with the appropriate training to know how to deal with emergencies associated with taller buildings, and in fact, I understand Cork’s Fire Service have been given some training in this field. The real issue is how taller structures are design to handle fire safety issues. Many taller buildings are built around central concrete cores with internally secure stairwells seperated between the various levels with fire-proof door systems. Of course these systems are limited in their capacity, but often very effective and the “trouble” effect associated with buildings of up to 25 storeys is no different to that of say a 5-storey hospital where residents are often disabled, bed-bound or otherwise restricted. Various sections of the hospital divided into containment cells in the event of a fire. With taller buildings these cells can exist as well. I’m not entirely familiar with the Crows Nest design but from what I’ve seen from the photos it seems to be designed around such a core. If questions are being raised about fire safety, its not about ladders and hoses so much…its about training and design. Part of a planning authority’s job is running through such safety requirements with in-house Fire Safety Officers and I do believe Cork’s system is fairly tight knit, requirements are run through various independent agency designed standards like those of Cantwell Keogh and Associates etc etc. Once a building satisfies these issues it should be well beyond acceptability. Corks Fire Service will of course require additional training as time progresses. I understand that buildings like County Hall and Eglington Street for example would have fire safety plans lodged with the city engineer and it will be up to the fire service to familiarise themselves with this. The arguments made about capabilities sounds good but it is somewhat short sighted.