In recent years, the demand for housing in Cork City has grown significantly, fueling the development of numerous apartment complexes throughout the city. However, residents of the city’s northside may have to wait a little longer for new accommodation options due to a recent planning refusal for dozens of apartments at the former site of a metal company. This decision marks a significant setback for developers, but has sparked outcry from local residents who are eager for more housing options in their community. In this article, we’ll explore the details behind the planning refusal and the implications it holds for the ongoing struggle to meet Cork City’s growing housing needs.
Cork City Council has refused a planning application for a residential development proposed at the former Hammond Lane premises on Spring Lane in Blackpool. The application was made by Gerard and Teresa O’Sullivan in January, and proposed the construction of three apartment buildings containing 62 units, following the demolition of four industrial buildings and a two-storey office block. The site was previously used as a scrap metal yard and tannery. The residential scheme was designed to feature a range of one, two and three-bedroom apartments, 16 car parking spaces, cycle storage, and new pedestrian crossing, footpaths and road markings. The project would have entailed the redesign of the junction at Spring Lane and Dublin Hill, in addition to traffic calming measures.
However, a number of submissions and objections were made in relation to the proposal. One local resident stated that the development was “totally at odds with the character and existing structures in Spring Lane”. Traffic was also seen as a major issue, with one party fearing that the development would bring “unprecedented traffic to the area”. Cork City Council refused planning permission, stating that the development would seriously injure the visual amenities of the area due to its height, design, prominent location and contextual relationship with surrounding residential properties. The council also noted that the proposed development failed to provide adequate amenity for future residents, and was inconsistent with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Among the council’s reasons for rejecting the scheme was the flood risk. The site adjoins the Glen River, an area prone to surface water flooding, and the council observed that the applicant had not demonstrated that the development would not lead to an increased risk of flooding, especially considering the currently proposed Blackpool Flood Relief Scheme, which involves work on the subject site. The council therefore concluded that the development would be premature, pending the outcome of the Relief Scheme.
The site has remained vacant for a number of years, and the O’Sullivans’ planning statement contended that it is easily accessible to a range of services, education, employment and amenities in the immediate surrounding area, and would provide a good standard of residential amenity to future residents. The statement also stressed that the layout of the proposed development took into account the neighbouring residential properties on Spring Lane and the Clúid Housing development to the south, as well as the details of pre-application consultations with the local authority.
However, the council deemed that the applicant had not done enough to address the potential impact of the development on the local area’s visual amenities or the quality of the accommodation proposed. The proximity of the proposed buildings to existing residential properties would lead to a reduced level of privacy and seriously injure existing residential amenity, in particular at building one and three, according to the council. As such, the plans were refused, and the development will not proceed; the O’Sullivan’s may choose to appeal the decision.
