Making an Irish Free State City – The 1926 civic survey

Published in the summer of 1926, ‘Cork, A Civic Survey’ was an ambitious document giving an insight into an array of topics.

Prepared by the Cork Town Planning Association, it was published by the University Press of Liverpool and Hodder and Stoughton.

The contents page sets out a focus on an array of features – physical features looking at natural contours and geology, archaeological and historical notes, regional considerations, industries and docks looking at industries, docks and warehouses, population and health, housing, natural zoning, communications looking at roads, tramways and accessibility and railways, cattle traffic and site for markets and abattoir, public buildings, architectural character looking at city streets and quays, open spaces, administration looking at boundaries and extension, and municipal services.

Indeed, a read through of the detailed survey reveals that many of the thoughts are still embedded in the city’s development plan in the present day.

In the regional considerations section, the survey denotes Cork cannot be considered apart from its region, up stream or towards the open sea by “boat, road or railway”.

It continues to add it was unlikely that the city as a town would extend continuously over this region, but satellite growth was growing especially along the waterfront.

The survey records three different types of development – residential, industrial and recreational, in addition of course to the actual growth of the port, whether near the city or at Queenstown (now Cobh).

Residential growth was clearly shown at Monkstown, Blackrock, and Douglas. Industrial growth was at Passage West and Rushbrooke and possibly at Haulbowline Island. Recreational growth was witnessed at Crosshaven.

The survey requested that the harbour region of Cork does not need the attention of the town planner, but that of a port planner who specialises in industrial growth especially in cement manufacture and brickmaking.

Care should be taken that, on the one hand, by a “good system of communication”, and on the other, by the exercise of proper control, from “not detracting from the amenities of one of the most beautiful harbours in the world”.

The survey highlights that residential growth, as has appeared in many places in Cork harbour, as “haphazard and unhygienic”.

The survey outlines both Queenstown and Crosshaven as recreational centres, needed much development, the former in some extension and improvement to the lay-out of its beautiful waterfront, and the latter both as an attractively situated small town and in its communications with the sea coast.

An outline zoning scheme and communication plan could be drafted to meet the regional requirements.

The survey profiles that the chief features to notice about the industrial development of Cork was the sporadic way in which the factories were dotted over a great part of the city.

There was a considerable concentration of industrial development in the Blackpool Valley, and there were indications of a tendency to spread up this valley outside the built-up area.

In contradiction to the industrial scattering, there was a concentration of the warehouse part of the city at the head of the island and along the adjacent quays.

The survey asserts that there was no doubt that the warehousing aspect of Cork was one of its most important functions, and this tendency to grouping should be encouraged.

The survey suggested all “works of whatever character should be kept off streets which are either now or were likely to be required for shopping purposes”. It advised against allowing motor garages to be placed in narrow streets such as Pembroke Street and Oliver Plunkett Street, where they were likely to interfere with traffic.

According to the survey, the most interesting industrial development of recent years was the establishment of Messrs Ford’s Motor Works on part of the old city racecourse, with its own wharf frontage. The company purchased about 130 acres, considerably more than they required for their own purposes.

The Ford Plant, situated in the south docklands, comprised two main buildings constructed of steel and concrete-a foundry and a machine shop, covering between them a floor space of six acres.

Under normal conditions the personnel of the plant reached the figure of 1,800 employees, being concerned chiefly in “supplying the Ford Motor Company, Manchester, with motor and rear axle assemblies and the greater part of their service requirements, as also the complete assembly of the car for sale in the Free State and its service requirements”.

With its docking facilities, ships up to ten thousand tons could berth alongside the plant, thus minimising handling of parts from and to Manchester and foreign branches.

In addition to the Fordson Works and the engineering departments of the shipbuilding and repairing yards Cork possessed several mechanical engineering works where a considerable amount of foundry, mill-wrighting, jobbing and general repair work, as well as some manufacture, was carried on.

A detailed study of the Docks under the control of the Cork Harbour Commissioners was deemed outside the scope of a Civic Survey of Cork City. The Commissioners’ powers extended to the sea and included Cobh (Queenstown).

The point made by the survey involved the question of whether developments lower down harbour had any effect upon the existing riverside quays of Cork.

Again, there was the possibility of extending the city's riverside wharves downstream by absorbing a further piece of The Marina promenade and the reclamation of the river flats at Tivoli on the opposite side for docks and industrial purposes.

In 1922 the Cork Harbour Commissioners had prepared for them by port planner George F Nicholson, of Seattle, a comprehensive plan for the development of Cork Harbour as a national port for Ireland.

The scheme, which was an ambitious one, contemplated the creation of a great transhipment port to the east of Cobh at Cuskinny.

The next historical walking tours with Kieran will be in August for National Heritage Week.