Part 8 Design Statement - Elizabeth Fort, Cork City

PART 8 – DESIGN STATEMENT & ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR Outdoor Public Spaces Scheme & Associated Works

AT Elizabeth Fort, Cork City BY CORK CITY ARCHITECTS DEPT February 2022

CONTENTS

DESIGN STATEMENT 1.0 Project Introduction & Background 1.1 Existing Site 1.2 Proposed Works 1.3 Proposed Design, Site Strategy & Public Realm 1.4 Development Plan Objectives 1.5 Site Services

ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.0 Introduction 2.1 Assessment of Significance 2.2 Assessment of Impacts & Mitigation 2.3 Policy Objectives & Conclusion

APPENDIX A – City Architects Drawing Issue Sheet B – Historical Evolution & Appraisal – Conservation Assessment ‐ David Kelly Engineers & Margaret Quinlan Architects C – Draft City Development Plan 2022 ‐ 2028 ‐ Maps D – Current City Development Plan 2015 ‐ 2021 – Maps & Objectives E – Existing Site Services Layouts

DESIGN STATEMENT

1.0

PROJECT INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND The Outdoor Public Space Scheme was launched in 2021 by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport & Media. The scheme is “ a targeted and public realm capital improvement programme to fund local authorities to adapt, equip or otherwise improve outdoor public spaces for arts & culture events and also festivals, taking account of public health guidelines” . While its primary objective is to support the recovery of the creative, cultural, entertaining and events sector, the scheme is also intended to have benefits for the tourism and hospitality sectors and by extension the city inhabitants via public realm improvements. Following approval by Council at its meeting of 14 June 2021 a funding application was prepared focussing on the development of facilities at Elizabeth Fort on Barrack St. This application was subsequently approved by the Department and €250,000 has been awarded under the scheme to enable Cork City Council to adapt and improve the outdoor space at Elizabeth Fort for as an arts and cultural space – without compromising its current use as a visitor attraction. Match funding from Cork City Council of at least €27,777 is also a requirement for the project.

Fig.1: Site location

1.1

EXISTING SITE

Elizabeth Fort is an early 17th century stone bastioned fort. Built on high ground outside the city walls, the fort overlooks the heart of the city, and is one of the most dramatically positioned fortifications in Ireland. The fort has several raised corner bastions which are accessible via a number of stone steps and/or recent timber walkways and stair interventions. The fort is one of the oldest upstanding structures in Cork City, and part of a system of fortifications located around Cork and its harbour. Elizabeth Fort has been in continued and varied use for over 400 years and is of major historic significance in the development and growth of the city. One of the focal points of the siege of Cork in 1690, the fort also served as a convict depot for prisoners awaiting transportation to Australia and most recently a garda barracks. Within the fort there is a two storey L ‐ shaped masonry structure which formerly hosted a garda barracks, training area and dwelling houses. This area now houses a public exhibition, as well as offices for Visit Cork and accommodation via the Landmark Trust. Elizabeth Fort has been open to the public, free of charge since Cork City Council took on its guardianship in 2015 and in 2019 attracted over 70,000 visitors. In 2019 the visitor offering was enhanced with a new permanent exhibition “Walls, Women, Water” which tells the story of the development of the fort, and of Cork City, through maps, images and text. Elizabeth Fort is listed in the Record of Monuments and Places (CO074 ‐ 03901) and the entire complex is listed in the Record of Protected Structures in the current City Development Plan. The site also falls within the South Parish Architectural Conservation Area in both the current City Development Plan 2015 ‐ 2021 & Draft CDP 2022 ‐ 2028. The site is also listed on the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage, which notes that it is of national importance for its archaeological, architectural, and historical interest. Over recent years Elizabeth Fort has been increasingly used as a venue for outdoor theatrical and musical performances, workshops, and other events. Across Europe historic buildings such as Elizabeth Fort often host such events, ensuring that historic buildings and locations remain in use also helping to secure their future viability. The site is ideally located ( Fig.1 ) adjacent to the Barrack St. area currently undergoing regeneration with huge potential for cultural and community lead activities. In tandem with nearby St.Finbarre’s Cathedral, Elizabeth Fort is an important visitor attraction for Cork.

Fig.2: Artists Reconstruction of 17 th Century scene of Elizabeth Fort

1.2

PROPOSED WORKS Please refer to attached City Architects Dept. drawings for further details. The proposed works are outlined as follows: 1. External Stage: Timber framed stage structure for a variety of outdoor cultural events (with removable waterproof covering) located to corner of existing ‘parade area’ within the Fort. 2. Re ‐ surfacing: To the main public space ‘parade area’ within the Fort. Removal of existing concrete / tarmac to be replaced with wheelchair accessible self ‐ binding fine gravel* (*subject to additional funding to be confirmed). 3. Seating: Retrofit public seating to the existing stone upstands to the western perimeter of the parade area within the Fort. 4. Planting: Improved planting to the perimeter green areas adjacent to the parade ground within the Fort. 5. Electrical Upgrade: To existing electrical infrastructure / power outlets on site to allow for a variety of uses via proposed underground trenching to new power outlet locations to the perimeter of the parade area within the Fort. 6. Fire Exit: New alternative means of escape and associated egress via currently bricked ‐ up exit to the perimeter Fort walls exiting to adjacent Fort St. New landing and railings to exit at Fort St. in lieu of 1no. existing car parking space.

Fig.3: Proposed Site Plan.

PROPOSED DESIGN, SITE STRATEGY & PUBLIC REALM The centrepiece of the proposed works involves the installation of a timber framed and timber clad external Stage structure to be located to in the northeast corner of the existing “parade area” (See Fig.6 ‐ page18). The Stage will be a fixed structure designed to be in place for a period of minimum 5 ‐ 10 years (to be further reviewed within 3 years in terms of impact and use) to host a wide range of performances and workshops. The choice of materials and proposed design is sympathetic to the historic context. The structure also incorporates public seating to the front of the stage when not in use (Fig.4 ‐ overleaf). An accessible ramp and steps provide access to the stage from the rear backstage area. A waterproof covering for performances (Fig.5 ‐ page 8) will be designed to be removable when the Stage is not in use for longer periods.

1.3

The Stage is located to project across the main parade ground and with a raised platform of circa 40sq.m can accommodate a wide range of uses and performances. The size and scale of the Stage is in proportion to the surrounding Fort perimeter walls and will not be viewable from any public vantage point outside of the Fort.

An existing boarded up door opening to the rear of the proposed stage will be provided with a new timber clad gate allowing for a separate back ‐ stage entrance for performers and to compliment alternative means of escape during events. Supporting power outlets will be installed adjacent to the stage and other strategic locations around the perimeter of the open public space to provide the necessary infrastructure to facilitate a wide range of events within the Fort. Retrofit seating is proposed to the western edge of the existing stone upstands to the perimeter of the parade ground which form an important element of the proposed public realm upgrade. The seating is so designed for the enjoyment of the historic surrounds for everyday visitors alike. The option to resurface most of the parade ground is at the time of writing also being considered by Cork City Council as part of the proposed works. This element is subject to additional funding to be confirmed. In principle this would involve removal of the existing top layer of tarmac and concrete which is in poor condition to be replaced by a wheelchair accessible self ‐ binding fine gravel or equivalent material used in public spaces and similar historic settings (See Figs.8&9 ‐ page19). A future improved and community driven planting scheme is also proposed to the existing green areas to the perimeter of the parade ground. A number of organised child friendly play events already occur within the Fort. The proposed public realm improvements will compliment and enhance such activities into the future.

Fig.4: Proposed Stage Structure Rendering – Daytime View without Waterproof Covering

Fig.5: Proposed Stage Structure Rendering – Night ‐ time Performance with Waterproof Covering

In addition to the proposed Outdoor Public Spaces Scheme and to facilitate audiences for outdoor cultural events an alternative Fire Exit is proposed to accommodate larger events via an existing bricked ‐ up exit to adjacent Fort St (See Fig.7 ‐ Page18). Proposed new landing and railings to exit at Fort St. in lieu of 1no. existing car parking space. All proposed works will be overseen by suitably qualified Conservation Engineers in liaison with Cork City Council’s Conservation Officer and the City Architects Department. Specific works which require monitoring by a qualified licensed Archaeologist are also outlined in detail within the Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment part of this report. Cork City Council with endeavour to minimise the impact on the Fort’s current uses, neighbouring homes, and businesses during the construction period, which is envisaged to last a maximum duration of only 2 ‐ 3 months. Cork City Council will also develop a policy regarding use of the outdoor stage at Elizabeth Fort and events may take place during the day or evening but in all cases, patrons will be required to vacate the premises no later than 11pm.

1.4

DEVELOPMENT PLAN OBJECTIVES / ZONING The Current Cork City Development Plan 2015 ‐ 2021 sites Elizabeth Fort within the following zones: ‐ South Parish Architectural Conservation Area ‐ Cultural Precinct See Appendix D: Current City Development Plans Maps & Objectives for further details. Draft Cork City Development Plan 2022 ‐ 2028 The Draft Cork City Development Plan 2022 ‐ 2028 which is due to come into effect in August 2022 sites Elizabeth Fort within the following zones: ‐ City Centre ‐ South Parish Architectural Conservation Area ‐ Cultural Precinct ‐ Historic Spine The following related policy objectives which the project adheres to, demonstrate the multifaceted nature of the proposals for Elizabeth Fort. Elizabeth Fort is also noted as one of the few surviving above ground medieval and early post medieval structures in Cork City (para. 8.8 – Archaeology, p.259) and is also mentioned in relation to ‘Quality Attractions and Night ‐ Time Economy’ (para 10.13). Draft City Development Plan Objectives :

Objective 2.8 ‐ The 15 ‐ Minute City Objective 2.11 ‐ Design ‐ Led City Objective 2.14 ‐ Neighbourhood Mix Objective 3.14 ‐ Community Infrastructure and Services Objective 3.17 ‐ Community Hubs Objective 3.18 ‐ Adaptable Community Facilities Objective 3.20 ‐ Cork City as a Child ‐ Friendly City

Objective 3.22 ‐ Cork Learning City Objective 6.18 ‐ Public Open Space

Objective 8.2 ‐ Protection of Archaeological Resource Objective 8.17 ‐ Conservation of the City’s Built Heritage Objective 8.18 ‐ Reuse & Refurbishment Historic Buildings Objective 8.23 – Development in Architectural Conservation Areas Objective 10.1 ‐ Strategic City Centre Objectives Objective 10.8 ‐ City Centre Tourism Objective 10.9 ‐ City Centre Leisure and Entertainment

Objective 2.8 ‐ The 15 ‐ Minute City To support the delivery of a 15 ‐ Minute City delivering Compact Liveable Growth through walkable neighbourhoods, towns, and communities with a mix of uses, house types and tenures that foster a diverse, resilient, socially inclusive and responsive city. Strategic infrastructure and large ‐ scale developments shall demonstrate how they contribute to a 15 ‐ minute city and enhance Cork City’s liveability. Objective 2.11 ‐ Design ‐ Led City Follow a design ‐ led approach that delivers sustainable, high quality placemaking. Development shall contribute positively to the quality of the surrounding built and natural environment and shall be planned and designed with reference to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Objective 2.14 ‐ Neighbourhood Mix Promote high quality neighbourhoods by increasing the range of community, recreational, local enterprise, cultural and leisure related facilities. Objective 3.14 ‐ Community Infrastructure and Services To work with our communities and infrastructure providers in facilitating the development and provision of a range of accessible, socially inclusive, multi ‐ functional and diverse community facilities throughout the City. Objective 3.17 ‐ Community Hubs To promote the co ‐ location and sharing of community, enterprise, recreation and open space infrastructure to create community hubs of scale at locations that can be accessed by walking, cycling and public transport and subject to there being no significant adverse impacts on local amenity. Objective 3.18 ‐ Adaptable Community Facilities To support provision of community facilities that are multi ‐ functional and sufficiently adaptable, or can be adapted, to cater for a variety of use now and in the future as needs change. Objective 3.20 ‐ Cork City as a Child ‐ Friendly City To promote Cork as a child ‐ friendly city by considering the needs of children in terms of appropriate design when changes are proposed to the built environment. Objective 3.22 ‐ Cork Learning City To support the work and initiatives of Cork Learning City in promoting and facilitating lifelong learning. Objective 6.18 ‐ Public Open Space “a. To protect, retain, improve and provide for areas of public open space for recreation and amenity purposes. There will be a presumption against development of land zoned Public Open Space for alternative purposes. b. There will be presumption against development on all open space in residential estates in the city, including any green area / public amenity area that formed part of an executed planning permission for development and was identified for the purposes of recreation / amenity open

space, and also including land which has been habitually used as public open space. Such lands shall be protected for recreation, open space and amenity purposes. c. The development of open spaces should “aim to enhance and protect natural features and views and be set in safe and secure environments with the emphasis on active open spaces accessible to and enjoyed by all sectors of the community. d. To follow an approach of qualitative as well as quantitative standards for open spaces providing high quality open spaces with high levels of access to recreation for local communities. e. Specific design outcomes should be framed in relation to the nature of spaces being created or enhanced (e.g. in relation to main tenancy, nature exposure and connectivity, strategic landscape and social role).” Objective 8.12 ‐ Cork as a City of Culture To celebrate Cork as a city of culture and to support the further development of Cork as a centre for arts, culture and creativity; Cork City Council will aim to further expand and improve on the provision of such facilities and consider cultural provision in development management. Objective 8.2 ‐ Protection of Archaeological Resource See Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment – Section 2.3 – Policy Objectives & Conclusion. Objective 8.17 – Conservation of the City’s Built Heritage See Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment – Section 2.3 – Policy Objectives & Conclusion. Objective 8.18 ‐ Reuse & Refurbishment Historic Buildings See Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment – Section 2.3 – Policy Objectives & Conclusion. Objective 8.23 – Development in Architectural Conservation Areas See Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment – Section 2.3 – Policy Objectives & Conclusion. Objective 10.1 ‐ Strategic City Centre Objectives a. To strengthen and build upon the potential of Cork City Centre as the vibrant heart of the City and region and as a great place to live, work, recreate and visit. b. To support the preparation and outcomes of the Cork City Centre Revitalisation Action Plan 2021 ‐ 2025 c. To continue to identify innovative solutions to the development and enhancement of the City Centre. d. To encourage and provide for a mix of uses including residential, business and commercial, recreation and leisure, tourism, culture and the arts. e. To expand the range of services in the City Centre, ensuring that it can function both as the hub of activity for the metropolitan area, while also functioning as a meaningful neighbourhood for those who live there. f. To support the potential of the City Centre as an important location to do business, developing indigenous and international enterprises and enhancing its role as the primary destination for retail and office use in the region. Objective 10.8 ‐ City Centre Tourism To support the City Centre as a destination for national and international tourism and to expand the draw and offer of the City Centre. This will include targeted measures to enhance these

historic areas such as investing in Shandon and Elizabeth Fort and promoting the historic spine linking these areas along Shandon Street, North and South Main Street and Barrack Street. Objective 10.9 ‐ City Centre Leisure and Entertainment To support the development of leisure and entertainment facilities such as restaurants, public houses, concert venues, cinemas, visitor attractions and other leisure facilities and recognise the role that leisure plays in the vibrancy and attractiveness of the City Centre. Such developments will be discouraged in areas where they are likely to impact negatively on the residential amenity and established character of the City Centre. Objective 10.12 ‐ City Centre Public Realm a. To enhance and properly maintain the public realm and improve the pedestrian experience for all the city’s users including children, families, the elderly and the disabled. c. To improve upon the existing provision of areas of amenity and public open space……”

Having regard to the land use zonings and objectives for the site in the Cork City Development Plan 2015 ‐ 2021 and the Draft Cork City Development Plan 2022 ‐ 2028 , the principle of the proposed development is supported.

1.5

SITE SERVICES

The project has minimal or no impact on existing services on ‐ site. The proposed electrical upgrade works are within the Fort complex only and connect to the existing internal mains switch board. The potential resurfacing works connect to existing surface water gullies within the parade ground area. No new connections are proposed to existing mains services external to the Elizabeth Fort Site. See Appendix E: Existing Site Services Layouts for further details including ESB, Gas Networks Ireland, Irish Water Mains & Drainage and Virgin Media area utilities layouts.

ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.0 INTRODUCTION The proposed interventions within the Fort as outlined within the Design Statement are designed to have minimal impact on the existing protected structures and archaeology of Elizabeth Fort. All proposed works will be overseen by a suitably qualified Conservation Engineer and the City Architects Department in liaison with Cork City Council’s Conservation Officer and Archaeologist. Specific works which will require on ‐ site monitoring by a qualified licensed Archaeologist are also outlined in detail below in 2.2 ‐ Assessment of Impacts and Mitigations . Works to a monument in the ownership of a Local Authority require ministerial consent as well as planning permission in advance of works commencing on ‐ site. The City Archaeologist will apply for Ministerial Consent. The aim of the architectural project is to minimise necessary alterations and to compliment and expand existing uses of an iconic Cork structure. The design proposes, through careful siting, material choice and detailing, to enhance the Elizabeth Fort as a visitor attraction, cultural venue and as an integral part of the City’s public realm. As noted, Elizabeth Fort is listed in the Record of Monuments and Places (CO074 ‐ 03901). The entire complex is also listed in the Record of Protected Structures (RPS No. PS005) in both the current and draft City Development Plans and falls within the South Parish Architectural Conservation Area. The Site is also located along the designated ‘Historic Spine’ in the draft City Development Plan (See Appendix C – Draft City Development Plan 2022 ‐ 2028 ‐ Maps). A detailed ‘Historical Evolution & Appraisal – Conservation Assessment’ on Elizabeth Fort was carried out by David Kelly Engineers & Margaret Quinlan (Grade 1 Conservation Architects) in 2017 (See Appendix B). The Conservation Assessment acts as an important guidance document for the proposed project and contains detailed background information in terms of the Fort’s Historical Development, Descriptions, Condition Report, Significance, Guiding Principles & General Recommendations. Site Investigation information will be used to inform the detail design and works on ‐ site. Extensive Geophysical Surveys have been carried out on the Fort which indicate limited if any archaeology above circa 6 ‐ 700mm below existing ground level. Any excavations associated with the works will be limited to between 300 ‐ 600mm deep and will be monitored on ‐ site by a suitably qualified licensed Archaeologist. Existing topographical and underground utility surveys have also been carried out.

2.1 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

As per Kelly Quinlan Assessment (Appendix B), Elizabeth Fort is:

‐ “one of the oldest upstanding structures in the city of Cork

‐ one in a system of fortifications around Cork and its harbour

‐ of major historic importance in the development and growth of Cork city

‐ in continuous and varied use over a period of more than 400 years

‐ a highly significant site related to the military and social history of Cork

‐ a complete and intact site without encroachment

‐ of a visual character that is intact and recognisable

‐ a place that, in addition to its early fabric, contains well preserved examples from the 1930’s of the early architecture of the State ‐ buildings of considerable interest and charm which are designed to respect the entrance axis and scale of the courtyard ‐ a place of great historical, educational, and cultural value which contributes an important layer to the historical development of the city. It is strategically located close to the historic centre of Cork and beside the 7th century foundation of St Finbarr.” 2.2 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS The impact assessment will highlight how the elements of the historic structure’s special character (those which contribute to its special architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social and/or technical interest) would be materially altered by the development. Impacts to the cultural heritage of the proposed development are graded under the headings:

‐ Positive/Negative ‐ Long Term/Short Term ‐ Reversible/Irreversible ‐ High/Moderate/Low/Negligible/None

The magnitude of these impacts can range from ‘high’ in the case of drastic alterations or demolitions, to ‘negligible’ or ‘none’ where little or no change will ensue as a result of the impact. Some impacts can either be ‘beneficial’ or ‘adverse’ depending on whether the heritage character of the feature being impacted upon is enhanced or degraded as a result. A ‘neutral’ impact will be neither beneficial nor adverse.

The potential impacts of the proposal are classed under the above criteria. The table below illustrates the various elements of significance, the potential impacts and the mitigation measures used.

Proposed Works Element 1. Timber Framed External Stage

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Proposal: Timber framed and timber clad external stage structure with removable waterproof covering. (See Figs. 4&5 ‐ page7/8) Impacts: Positive, Short Term, Reversible, Moderate.

By Remedy: Choice of Timber material and detailing sensitive to the historic context and compliments the existing non ‐ original timber walkways. By Remedy: Waterproof covering designed to be removable when not in use further reducing visual impact. By Remedy: Stage location to corner of parade ground adjacent to Northeast bastion reduces visual impact on the historic fabric whilst also allowing access to Fort Walls for any cleaning / maintenance. (See Fig.6 ‐ page18) By Remedy: Stage pad foundations designed to be mainly above ground. Minor excavation works to be monitored on ‐ site by suitably qualified licenced archaeologist. By Remedy: Top layer circa 100mm only of existing tarmac, concrete and gravel to be removed as per Architects Drawings. Excavation works to be monitored on ‐ site by suitably qualified licenced archaeologist. Any historic material if discovered, to be discussed with the City Conservation Officer and Archaeologist.

2. Resurfacing to the Main Public Space* (NB: *Subject to additional funding TBC).

Proposal: Proposed wheelchair accessible self ‐ binding fine gravel to replace existing tarmac, concrete and gravel surfaces to the main public open space ‘parade ground’. Impacts: Positive, Long Term, Reversible, High.

By Remedy: The proposed resurfacing material to be a wheelchair accessible self ‐ binding fine gravel or equivalent. Such material has a rustic quality which is sympathetic and suitable to historic settings and is a marked visual improvement to the existing tarmac and concrete surfacing (See Figs. 8&9 ‐ page19). By Remedy: Timber materials to compliment proposed stage.

3. Retrofit Seating

Proposal: Retrofit Seating to existing 20 th Century stone upstands to the perimeter of the parade ground. Impacts: Positive, Long Term, Reversible, Low. Proposal: Planting scheme to existing soft landscaping to perimeter of parade ground. Impacts: Positive, Long Term, Reversible, Negligible. Proposal: Proposed additional power outlets to be installed to strategic locations via underground trenching. Impacts: Positive, Long Term, Reversible, Moderate.

4. Improved Planting

By Remedy: Proposed planting to be sensitive to historic context and within proportion / scale of existing soft landscaped areas.

5. Upgrade to Electrical Infrastructure

By Remedy: Maximum 600mm deep trenched required. Excavation works to be monitored on ‐ site by suitably qualified licenced archaeologist. Any historic material if discovered, to be discussed with the City Conservation Officer and Archaeologist. By Remedy: 3no. proposed power outlets to be mounted on low level enclosures off ‐ set from existing built fabric.

6. New Fire Exit

Proposal: Alternative Fire Exit via proposed ramp to currently bricked ‐ up opening in Fort perimeter walls exiting to Fort st. NB: The brick archway is a later circa 19 th century addition. (See Fig. 7 ‐ overleaf) Impacts: Positive, Long Term, Irreversible, Moderate.

By Remedy: Excavation works to be monitored on ‐ site by suitably qualified licenced archaeologist. Any historic material if discovered, to be discussed with the City Conservation Officer and Archaeologist. By Remedy: Methodology required for removal of stone and associated temporary structural supports for brick arches to Conservation Engineer specification and detail. Only fabric blocking a 19th ‐ century opening to be removed as part of these works. By Remedy: Key mitigation is the public benefit of providing necessary safety measures for larger events. Suitable materials to be considered for the internal ramp and low ‐ level retaining walls. Handrails colour to match existing on ‐ site. Concrete landing external to Fort St. subject to safety requirements. Proposed timber door to be similar to the main entrance doors and sympathetic to the character of the structure.

Fig.6: Proposed Stage Structure Location – Northeast Bastion of Parade Ground

Fig.7: Proposed Fire Exit via existing bricked ‐ up Archway: View from inside Fort

Figs.8&9: Proposed Resurfacing Material: Precedent Example ‐ Swords Castle

2.3 POLICY OBJECTIVES & CONCLUSION The following policy objectives from both the draft and current City Development Plans specifically relating to Heritage and Elizabeth Fort are as outlined below. For clarity, sections of particular relevance to the current proposals have been underlined. It is considered that the proposed works would accord with these objectives: Draft CDP 2022 ‐ 2028: Objective 8.2 ‐ Protection of the Archaeological Resource a. Cork City Council will protect and enhance the archaeological value of the sites (and their settings) listed in the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) and the Historic Environment Viewer. b. Cork City Council will ensure that development proposals will protect and preserve archaeological sites discovered since the publication of the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP). c. To ensure the preservation of archaeological remains in ‐ situ in accordance with national policy (and in the interests of sustainability) impacts on the buried archaeological environment should be avoided where possible. b. To ensure that Cork’s Built Heritage contributes fully to the social and economic life of the city and to pursue actions that ensure Cork’s built heritage will benefit from good custodianship and building occupation. Objective 8.18 ‐ Reuse & Refurbishment Historic Buildings a. The City Council will actively encourage the re ‐ use of historic buildings in the interests of conservation and environmental sustainability to minimise waste and optimise on the embodied energy in existing buildings. b. Uses which will have a minimal impact on the character of historic structures will be encouraged. c. Alterations will adhere to best practice conservation standards. d. The reinstatement of lost features and removal of unsympathetic additions will be encouraged where appropriate. e. It is recognised that the protection and retention of historic buildings within the medieval city, has the dual advantage of protecting the rich archaeological resource and the Recorded Monument of the City Wall. Objective 8.17 – Conservation of the City’s Built Heritage a. To seek to ensure the conservation of Cork City’s built heritage. Objective 8.23 – Development in Architectural Conservation Areas Development in Architectural Conservation Areas should have regard to the following: a. Works that impact negatively upon features within the public realm, such as stone setts, cobbles or other historic paving, railings, street furniture, stone kerbing etc. shall not be generally permitted.

b. Design and detailing that responds respectfully to the historic environment in a way that contributes new values from our own time. This can be achieved by considering layout, scale, materials and finishes and patterns such as plot divisions in the surrounding area. c. Historic materials and methods of construction should be retained and repaired where this is reasonable, e.g. historic windows and doors, original roof coverings, metal rainwater goods should be retained along with original forms and locations of openings etc. d. Repairs or the addition of new materials should be appropriate and in keeping with the character of the original structures. Chapter 11.204 ‐ Surveys, Test Trenching and Monitoring Archaeological surveys, test excavation and /or monitoring will be required for development proposals in areas of archaeological importance, if the application is likely to impact upon in ‐ situ archaeological structures or deposits. Current CDP 2015 ‐ 2021: Objective 8.3 Maritime Harbour “c. Work with the relevant agencies to develop the expression of the military heritage of the city and enable public access to such sites as Elizabeth Fort and Collin’s Barracks Military Museum;” Objective 8.6 Medieval Spine and Cultural Quarters “It is an objective to promote the development of attractiveness the medieval spine and adjoining cultural quarters by: “a. Supporting and encouraging the development of heritage, cultural or tourist venues and the promotion of cultural events within these areas in key sites such as Elizabeth Fort , the Vision Centre, Triskel Christchurch, the South Presentation Convent/ Nano Nagle Centre, Beamish and Crawford, and the Butter Exchange, Shandon” “c. Improving permeability through the medieval spine by developing public realm improvements at key points along the medieval spine (i.e. the medieval gateways of North and South Gate Bridges) and at key city vantage points to the north and south of the medieval spine (Shandon and St. Patrick’s Hill/Bell’s Field to the north and Elizabeth Fort to the south);” “e. Expanding upon the range and nature of uses ‘open to consideration’ within the Cultural Quarters (Chapter 13 City Centre and Docklands)”

The proposals seek to comply and align with key objectives as previously highlighted and further noted below: ‐ “…seek to improve public awareness and increase knowledge and appreciation of the medieval city walls” and defences. ‐ Draft CDP ‐ 8.5(b) ‐ “Uses which will have a minimal impact on the character of historic structures will be encouraged.” ‐ Draft CDP ‐ 8.18(b)

‐ “Alterations will adhere to best practice conservation standards.” ‐ Draft CDP ‐ 8.18(c)

‐ “…..enable public access to such sites as Elizabeth Fort” ‐ Current CDP – 8.3(c)

‐ “It is an objective to promote the development of attractiveness……Supporting and encouraging the development of heritage, cultural or tourist venues and the promotion of cultural events within these areas in key sites such as Elizabeth Fort…” ‐ Current CDP – 8.6(a) ‐ “Improving permeability through the medieval spine by developing public realm improvements…” ‐ Current CDP – 8.6(c) ‐ “Expanding upon the range and nature of uses ‘open to consideration’…” ‐ Current CDP – 8.6(e) With reference to the ‘6. Guiding Principles and Recommendations’ within the Kelly Quinlan ‘Conservation Assessment’ (See Appendix B) we also wish to highlight the following with respect to the proposals: 6.2 “Future developments should maintain the built elements, the relationships between them, and the relationship between the Fort interior and the surrounding urban context.”

6.3 “the fort should continue to dominate visually internally and externally.”

‐ ….generally, interventions affecting the fabric should be avoided.”

‐ “the axial approach through the main entrance is an important element and should be maintained.” ‐ “the hard landscaping and ground finishes must be maintained as simple, robust finishes in character with the character of the fort and should not be cluttered or softened….”

6.5 “The quality of design in any intervention, no matter how modest, is critical.”

6.6 “The open space within the Fort lends itself to many potential uses involving the public, so that access and egress need to be considered from the perspective of maintaining elements of significance as well as from the perspective of public safety. Encroachments on

this space should be minimised, and if possible avoided. New uses for the 20th century elements are already in train. It is vital that future uses should maintain the relationship of interior spaces with the open space of the square.” 6.7 “Carry out investigations to maximise knowledge of the monument in advance of proposals and the constraints that will apply to future works. This applies particularly to below ground work…..” 6.8 “Similarly, the general issues regarding fire, health and safety should be established so that general constraints are known in advance of proposals.” 6.11 “In conclusion, the fort has immense potential ‐ cultural, historical and educational and many proposals will have the potential to succeed in introducing new and compatible uses. The critical issue is that any new interventions and uses must not unduly impact on the significance of the monument. Design of proposals should be of high quality, contemporary and aim to minimise physical and visual impact on the historic fabric.” In conclusion the proposals align with the recommendations as highlighted above. Every effort has been made to avoid any impact to the existing built fabric of Elizabeth Fort. It is worth noting that the only historic fabric to be altered or removed is that of the later 19 th Century opening to Fort St. to make way for an alternative emergency exit. In principle the proposals will adhere to best practice conservation standards where possible and the interventions within the site will have an overall positive impact and promote expanding uses and awareness of one of Cork City’s most valuable heritage assets.

APPENDIX A

‐ City Architects Drawing Issue Sheet

City Architect's Department

ELIZABETH FORT - OUTDOOR PUBLIC REALM UPGRADES

Drawing Issue Sheet Job Number: Distribution: Users Quantity Surveyor: Civil/Structural Consultant: Mechanical & Electrical Consultant: Fire Consultant PSDP: Clerk of Works / RE Contractor

Attn.

Status: PART 8 E - Electronic copy for information

H - Hard copy

Date of issue:

Document Title:

no:

Scale: Size:

Site Location Map

000 001 002 005 101 102 103 106 201 202 206 207 208 301 302 303 304

1:500 A1 P 1:200 A1 P 1:100 A1 P 1:200 A1 P

Existing Site Survey Plan

Existing Site Survey Internal Elevations

Demolition Plan

Proposed Site Layout Plan Proposed Stage - Site Sections

1:200 A1 P 1:100 A1 P

A1 P A1 P

Proposed Perimeter Seating Plans and Elevations

As Noted 1:100/1:20

Proposed External Backstage Door

Proposed Timber Frame Stage - GA Plan Layouts Proposed Timber Frame Stage - Elevations and Sections Proposed Timber Frame Stage - Render Images Day Proposed Timber Frame Stage - Render Images Night Proposed Timber Frame Stage - 3D Perspectives

1:50 A1 P 1:50 A1 P n/a A1 P n/a A1 P n/a A1 P

A1 P

Existing Site Plan and Elevations of Proposed Escape Route Location

1:100/1:20

Proposed Site Plan

1:100 A1 P 1:25 A1 P 1:25 A1 P

Proposed Plan and Elevations of Emergency Exit

Proposed Sections of Emergency Exit

Status Codes: I: Information P: Pre-Tender PX: Pre-Tender Revison no.X T: Tender C: Contract X: Construction

Signed:

Sheet No. 1 of 1

20220306_Elizabeth Fort - Outdoor Public Realm Upgrades - Project Drawing Issue sheet_PART 8.xlsx

APPENDIX B ‐ Historical Evolution & Appraisal – Conservation Assessment. David Kelly Engineers & Margaret Quinlan Architects

E LIZABETH F ORT

REPORT H ISTORICAL E VOLUTION AND A PPRAISAL C ONSERVATION A SSESSMENT

DAVID KELLY PARTNERSHIP WITH

MARGARET QUINLAN ARCHITECTS

E LIZABETH F ORT REPORT H ISTORICAL E VOLUTION AND A PPRAISAL C ONSERVATION A SSESSMENT

October 2017

Nelson House, Emmet Place Youghal, County Cork t. +353 (0)24 92412 e. info @ dkp.ie

Elizabeth Fort

Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction Team Methodology Statutory Protection

Statement of Significance

Historical Development The fort context Historical background Timeline Evolution of the fabric Description The fort The buildings within fort

5 Condition Report

6 Guiding Principles and General Recommendations

Appendices Appendix I Appendix II Appendix III

Drawings Maps Photographs

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Executive Summary

This report gives a summary of the history of Elizabeth Fort and the evolution of the complex, based on documentary sources and the evidence of the fabric. It makes an appraisal of the monument in context, both in relation to historical events and the physical changes that have taken place over time. Based on this appraisal, the significance of Elizabeth Fort is established, identifying those special qualities which must be recognised and protected in its care and in any future proposals and developments. The principal elements of its significance combine to make Elizabeth Fort a place of cultural, historical and educational value within the city. An assessment is made of the condition of the fabric and summary recommendations are made. The report sets out the general principles that should be adopted in maintaining the significance of the monument and makes recommendations for assessing future proposals for its use.

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Elizabeth Fort

1 Introduction

1.1 Team

The team consisted of David Kelly Partnership David Kelly John Kelly Margaret Quinlan Architects Margaret Quinlan

Aighleann O’Shaughnessy

Archaeografix

Dave Pollock

1.2 Outline of Methodology Research was conducted into historical sources including the files in the O ffi ce of Public Works. A list of all available maps and a map study were compiled to inform the fabric evolution. A summary historical account was prepared and a timeline extracted from it. A Statement of Significance was prepared based on the assessment of the monument in its setting. Fieldwork was carried out consisting of a visual examination of the fabric to complement the documentary research. The fieldwork included a condition assessment of the fabric and recommendations. A photographic survey was carried out.

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

1.3 Statutory Protection

Record of Monuments and Places Elizabeth Fort is listed in the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) No. CO074-03901 and is thereby protected under National Monuments legislation. It is classified as a star- shaped Fort. New sites discovered since the publication of the RMP are available on the website www.archaeology.ie . ! Elizabeth Fort and the site of the church of St. Mary Del Nard within the fort are scheduled for Inclusion in the next revision of the Record of Monuments and Places. The scope note on www.archaeology.ie is as follows: CO074-03901- Class: Bastioned fort The following description is derived from the published 'Archaeological Inventory of County Cork. Volume 2: East and South Cork' (Dublin: Stationery O ffi ce, 1994) Original fort constructed c. 1601, consisted of large irregular earthen structure, built around pre-existing church (CO074-03902-). Replaced by stronger more regular fortification c. 1624; Cromwell said to have raised the walls in 1649; in decayed condition by 1677; new barrack built inside fort in 1719. Irregular quadrilateral with two pentangular bastions on S corners and two sub-rectangular bastions on N corners; built of regular coursed limestone blocks lying in places on underlying bedrock. Demi-oval shaped bastion projects from centre of N wall. S curtain wall removed; new wall constructed between S bastions. Walls, battered externally, survive to internal height of 4-5m, 2m above this appears rebuilt. Addition with entrance gateway added outside original curtain wall to E. L-shaped building along S and W sides of interior accomodates modern Garda barracks. Cork City Development Plan 2015 - 2021 Elizabeth Fort • is not listed as a National Monument in the Cork City Development Plan • is listed in the Record of Protected Structures in the current Plan. RPS No. PS005 • falls within the South Parish Architectural Conservation Area in the current Plan

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Elizabeth Fort

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Elizabeth Fort

Statement of Significance

Elizabeth Fort is • one of the oldest upstanding structures in the city of Cork • one in a system of fortifications around Cork and its harbour • of major historic importance in the development and growth of Cork city • in continuous and varied use over a period of more than 400 years • a highly significant site related to the military and social history of Cork • a complete and intact site without encroachment • of a visual character that is intact and recognisable • a place that, in addition to its early fabric, contains well- preserved examples from the 1930’s of the early architecture of the State - buildings of considerable interest and charm which are designed to respect the entrance axis and scale of the courtyard • a place of great historical, educational and cultural value which contributes an important layer to the historical development of the city. It is strategically located close to the historic centre of Cork and beside the 7th century foundation of St Finbarr.

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Historical Development

3.1

The fort context

The design of Elizabeth Fort was based on the star fortifications which evolved in Europe from the 15 th century on. The change from medieval fortress to star fort came about as the use of cannon developed. They were further developed in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries primarily in response to the French invasion of the Italian peninsula. In order to counteract the power of new weapons, defensive walls were made lower and thicker and were built of earth and/or stone or brick. The development of bastions with sharply constructed corners provided cover for each other, while deep ditches outside the walls were another line of defence from attack. The bastions were surmounted by parapets, with access by steps or ramps. The design came to its ultimate development in the designs by Vauban and others in the late 17 th century. After the siege of 1690, when Elizabeth Fort was taken, it was no longer an e ff ective defensive structure against advancements in artillery. The area immediately outside the fort had been developed and built upon, so that modernisation by expansion was not an option. A description of the fort in 1690 from Wolseley’s John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough states: “Fort Elizabeth was a strong, square, well-built modern work with four bastions and a sort of ravelin in the middle of its northern face. The rock on which this fort stands was scarped towards the city, but its south face was weak and it was looked into by the Catt….The terre-plein of the bastions is about sixty-five feet higher than the city at the North and South Gates. ”

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Elizabeth Fort

3.2 Historical Background From the earliest Anglo-Norman times Cork was a walled city depending on the walls and Shandon Castle (located outside the walls on the north side of the city) for its defence, but with the development of artillery its position became weak due to the many surrounding hills. The defeat of the Earl of Desmond by the English in 1583 and subsequent confiscation of his lands led to the plantation of Munster by Queen Elizabeth 1. By the end of the 16 th century, several thousand English families had arrived in Munster to profit from the land tracts available to them. These planters in turn looked for protection, which came in the form of several thousand English soldiers. In January 1590, the order was given by Elizabeth I, in fear of a Spanish invasion as well as the fear of attack from the native Irish, to construct star-shaped forts outside the town walls of each major Irish coastal walled town, in particular Waterford, Limerick, Galway and Cork. In Cork, the harbour was deemed important to defend but the construction of any new forts was delayed due to the on- going interference by Irish rebels, and work proceeded slowly. In 1599, a new Lord President of Munster, Sir George Carew was appointed to quell the native rebel Irish factions. After the Spanish attack on Kinsale in 1601, it was decided by Carew that Cork harbour would have to be immediately defended. A new star-shaped fort was constructed on Haulbowline Island in the harbour, and a new fort at Castle Park was constructed called James Fort (after James I) in Kinsale Harbour. Camden Fort Meagher near Crosshaven in Cork Harbour originally dated from around 1550 and was further added to in 1600. The largest and most impressive fortification, Charles Fort, was not constructed until 1680. In addition, in 1601, a star-shaped fort, Elizabeth Fort, was constructed around St Mary del Nard, an earlier church, described as derelict by 1601, though it had been a functioning church in 1580. It was located just outside South Gate drawbridge of the city on a limestone outcrop that overlooked the southern road leading into the walled town. Before the construction of Elizabeth Fort, Cork city was well protected by its city walls and towers, with additional

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

protection by the river to the north and south, as well as by marshland to the east and west. The higher ground outside the walls, overlooking the walled city from both north and south, was unprotected. The original fort was an irregular work of stone, timber and earth, thrown up while the bastioned fort at Haulbowline was under construction. The fort was garrisoned by October 1602 even though it was unfinished. In 1603 the people of Cork refused to recognise the crowning of James I. Elizabeth Fort was attacked by an unnamed faction of rebels and much of it was destroyed. Within a month, Carew forced the citizens of the city to rebuild the fort at their own expense. In 1624, work to rebuild Elizabeth Fort commenced. A plan of the completed fort by Captain Nicholas Pynnar dated 1626 is the basis of the fort as it now stands. It stands roughly in the same location as the fort of 1601, but it is not possible to know how exactly it followed the footprint. In 1698 a barracks was built nearby. In 1719 a barracks was erected within the fort. In the early 1800s after a new barracks was built for the British military on the north side of the city, the barracks within the fort was converted into a women's prison. In the following years it was used as a prison, a food depot, a hospital and towards the end of the century as a station for the Cork City Artillery Militia. It was handed over to the Irish state in 1920-21. The buildings in the interior were burned during the civil war and a new barracks constructed in 1929.

3.3 Timeline of the development of Elizabeth Fort 1601

Sir George Carew, then President of Munster, initiated the building of Elizabeth fort on a spur of rock overlooking Cork on the south side of the river Lee, a stone and earthen walled structure, built around a pre-existing church, St Mary del Nard. The people of Cork refused to recognise the crowning of James 1. Elizabeth Fort was attacked by an unnamed faction of rebels and much of it was destroyed. Within a

1603

David Kelly Partnership with Margaret Quinlan Architects

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86-87 Page 88-89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94-95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98-99 Page 100-101 Page 102-103 Page 104-105 Page 106-107 Page 108-109

corkcity.ie