Plans for new apartments opposite Kent train station in Cork approved despite objection from local residents

Iarnród Éireann has raised concerns about the development and its potential to adversely to affect the Kent Station railway tunnel.  Picture: Larry Cummins

Planning permission has been granted for two apartment blocks opposite Kent railway station in Cork city, despite opposition from a local residents’ and heritage group.

An Coimisiún Pleanála rejected an appeal by Summerhill Residents’ Association & Heritage Preservation Group against a decision of Cork City Council in April 2024 to approve plans for the construction of 19 apartments in two four-storey blocks on a site at Lower Glanmire Road.

The ruling also permits the developer, S&L Supple and Lynch, to partially demolish an existing stone boundary wall as well as create a communal garden.

Subject to compliance with a number of planning conditions, the Commission said the proposed development would not seriously injure the amenities or character of the area or of other properties in the vicinity.

It also concluded that the plans would have no significant transport or traffic impacts and would “generally promote the efficient development of housing on an accessible and sustainable site.” The Commission was also satisfied that the development would not be prejudicial to public health and would comply with the policies and objectives of the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028.

Iarnród Éireann has raised concerns about the development and its potential to adversely to affect the Kent Station railway tunnel.

In its appeal, the residents and heritage group pointed out that planning permission had previously been refused for an apartment development on the site in 2000 and 2002.

Although the Commission’s predecessor, An Bord Pleanála, had granted planning permission for an apartment scheme on the site in 2024, which was never developed, the appellants pointed out that the board’s own planning inspector had recommended that the plans should be rejected.

The objectors claimed the latest project constitutes overdevelopment of the site with an excessive number of apartments in terms of height, scale and massing.

They argued the apartments would be “visually obtrusive and intrusive” and would offer a poor quality of accommodation for occupants with insufficient open space.

The appellant said residents of the apartments would also be affected by noise from the rail tunnel as well as air pollution.

They also criticised the absence of any parking for residents of the proposed apartments and expressed concern about the stability of the site given a record of slippages from the nearby cliff face in the past.

However, consultants for S&L Supple and Lynch claimed the site was vacant and underutilised, while the plans were in compliance with guidelines for the construction of apartments.

They also said the latest design was “a more appropriate and efficiently designed scheme” than previous proposals.

A planning inspector with the Commission said the appellant’s concern that the apartments would be largely rented to short-term and transient tenants with no interest in the locality were “unfounded.”