Angry words exchanged in Cork City Council chamber over new housing developments

Cork City Council’s chamber was the scene of some angry exchanges this week, during a discussion about new housing developments by the local authority.

The arguments began during a debate over three proposed residential developments, the first of those a 52-bedroom refuge for victims of domestic violence, to be built on the site of a former convent at Evergreen Rd.

Independent councillor Albert Deasy expressed concern that the plans constituted “gross overdevelopment” and had insufficient parking, both of which, he said, would have a negative impact on the quality of life for the women and children living there.

He raised similar concerns about plans for 147 apartments on Anglesea Terrace, which will have no parking, asking: “How do you expect women and children to navigate” crossing the road?

He said the development would see people “stacked on top of each other” and constituted “putting people into black boxes with no light, no garden”.

The plans include windows, balconies, and a rooftop garden on the seventh floor, which Mr Deasy said women and children would struggle to access.

Voted against

He voted against each development, saying this was on foot of the Part 8 report by council management, admitting that he had not read all of the planning documentation or put in a submission to the plans, which were not in his ward.

All other councillors present voted in favour, so both plans passed.

Mr Deasy has previously raised concerns with the Part 8 planning system.

A Part 8 development is the process for projects carried out by local authorities. It differs from planning applications put in by private bodies in that more public consultation and a vote of approval by elected councillors is required.

A private planning application only needs approval from the council’s planning staff.

Mr Deasy, who frequently votes against such developments, has previously said such plans are already decided before the consultation phase ends and a vote is held.

Every Part 8 development voted on in this council term has passed by a significant majority.

Monday’s meeting lasted more than five hours, running considerably over its scheduled three hours, with some councillors saying the number of votes significantly delayed proceedings.

Councillors in favour of a development say “agreed”, while those not in agreement may call for a vote. To call a vote, the councillor needs a seconder, in order to ensure there is enough opposition to justify a vote.

Independent Ireland councillor Noel O’Flynn agreed to second Mr Deasy’s proposal for a vote for all three of the Part 8 developments, but voted in favour of each one himself.

Accused

Accused by a colleague of time-wasting by facilitating votes which all ended with just one opposition, Mr O’Flynn said he would always support a vote “for democracy”.

Throughout the meeting, several councillors stood up to say they found Mr Deasy’s comments offensive, with an unusually high level of shouting and insults exchanged across the council chamber.

Labour’s Ciara O’Connor said that opposing a refuge was “indefensible”.

“Consistently voting against housing developments that increase supply, while positioning oneself as an advocate for vulnerable groups, simply does not add up,” Ms O’Connor said.

“Robust debate is welcome but jeering and targeted remarks toward female councillors and staff are not.”

Fianna Fáil councillor Mary Rose Desmond said later it was “a bit of a strange meeting”, explaining she had felt compelled to speak up on the issue.

“I don’t speak for the sake of speaking, I just found that there was a tone being applied to all councillors, that we weren’t doing our jobs correctly because we didn’t agree with the view of one particular councillor. That is not only inaccurate, but undemocratic,” Ms Desmond said.

“I think the Part 8 process is the most democratic we have in planning, I don’t know if it’s really with the Part 8 or the fact that it’s social housing developments he has a problem with.

“The tone also leaned into demeaning women, depicting developments as black, windowless boxes as if the council are shutting women away.

“There was an implication in the commentary that women are less capable of navigating their way in the world.”

Unacceptable

She said Mr Deasy had called her “not ambitious enough”, remarks she described as “unacceptable”.

Social Democrats councillor Niamh O’Connor said she, too, was insulted by Mr Deasy’s comments around women.

“While differing opinions and robust debate are normal and healthy in any democratic forum, council business should always be conducted in a respectful manner,” Ms O’Connor said.

Labour’s Peter Horgan called for Mr Deasy to withdraw a comment in which he had claimed all other councillors “read nothing [and] vote for everything”.

Mr Horgan told The Echo he always engages with the council and his constituents on proposed developments, and that changes have been made on foot of engagements in multiple cases.

“I support Part 8 housing developments wherever I can, but it doesn’t mean I am sitting back. To say all we’re doing is rubber-stamping is just factually incorrect.

“He admitted himself that he hadn’t read all the planning documentation, just the report, but was against it anyway.”

No implication

Independent councillor Albert Deasy has told The Echo that his remarks at Monday’s council meeting “made no implication whatsoever” that women are less capable than men.

He was responding to criticism of his comments during the discussion on three proposed residential developments, including a 52-bedroom refuge for victims of domestic violence on Evergreen Rd.

Mr Deasy expressed concern that the plans constituted “gross overdevelopment” and had insufficient parking, both of which, he said, would have a negative impact on the quality of life of the women and children living there.

“Such claims are a complete mischaracterisation, with no basis in what I said. The focus was on the real human consequences of these developments for families, particularly the added burdens on women, who are very often the main caregivers — mothers managing pregnancy, successive maternity leaves, single parenting, or daily life with young children in cramped, isolated, high-rise settings lacking amenities and safe access.”

Mr Deasy reiterated his comments at the council meeting that the refuge centre has “the real potential to impede people’s opportunity to thrive. Families stacked vertically in a stranger-filled environment, limited play space for children, and added friction over parking and access; the worst impacts fall on women and children, mothers managing daily life in cramped, isolated conditions.”

Noisy and dangerous

In relation to the development at Anglesea Tce, he said: “Living on the Link Rd, noisy and dangerous environment, how are mothers with children expected to cross the link road safely?

“Stacking 147 families on top of each other in environments with inadequate infrastructure, play space, and safety features is a recipe for chaos, isolation, and hardship.

“Acknowledging that the worst impacts often fall on women and children, as primary caregivers, is a recognition of the realities many families face — it highlights their strength and the immense responsibilities they shoulder, not any deficiency. This is about protecting vulnerable residents, not questioning anyone’s ability.”

Mr Deasy concluded: “The real issue is the detrimental effect of these terrible planning decisions on families — young and old — in Cork. We need infrastructure before further large-scale housing in overburdened areas, to support thriving communities rather than high-rise isolation that breeds chaos and hardship.

“I stand over every word spoken in defence of Cork residents’ concerns.”