Chapter 2
Core Strategy
Issues / Recommendations / Observations
Sub. No.
Chief Executive’s Response & Recommendation
rise development in the city and refers to recent tall buildings granted permission in the City
out to determine the extent of existing and planned green and blue infrastructure serving Cork City. These studies have guided the approach to compact growth outlined within this plan. In addition, the Cork City Urban Density, Building Height and Tall Buildings Study was prepared to inform the potential for and capacity of Cork City to accommodate increased building heights and includes examination of potential impacts to the City’s built heritage. Recommendation: No change (vi) Response: Objective 2.19 (Windfall Sites) sets out greater detail in this regard, including the following “...redevelopment of these sites, if or when they become available, will require careful consideration. For such sites, Cork City Council will require agreement on a detailed framework plan at an early stage to ensure best practice regeneration and design based on the character.” Please al so refer to the response and recommendation to OPR submission 426 “Observation 2”. Recommendation: Refer to the recommendation to OPR submission 426 “Observation 2”. No further change. (vii) Response: The need for long term planning to facilitate complex urban developments, such as City Docks and Tivoli Docks, is recognised in the Draft Plan (refer to objectives 2.7, 2.17 and 2.19). The Core Strategy applies a long term strategic view, including a 2040 vision (refer to section 2.20-2.22 and fig. 2.8). Chapter 10 (Key Growth Areas and Neighbourhood Development Sites) includes detailed polices on the long-term
(vi) The language used in section 2.33 (Windfall Sites) is a little passive and should be revised to reflect a more proactive approach and commitment to engaging with the owners of public and private landowners (2.18-2.20) with a view to producing masterplans / development frameworks over the lifetime of the Development Plan.
(vii) Cautions against not having a contingency plan in place for the failure of the Docklands to be developed then additional lands should be considered.
141
Powered by FlippingBook