N8/N25/N40 - Dunkettle Interchange [under construction]

marno21

Apparently €40m saved via retendering process.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-40063922.html

See what I mean re: pricing. The main construction works contract here is not going to cost €215m

marno21

Cork Trucker wrote: »

A year wasted for what? Nothing it seems!

I wouldn't say entirely wasted. There has been a lot of advance works ongoing in the last year especially the gas and water main diversions, and some very visible works like the N8E -> M8N slip road, and the local road works near the Ibis hotel.

This is an extraordinarily complex project and I think this point doesn't get reinforced enough.

Chris_5339762

Eleven and a half years from thread start to a contract being signed. Good lord.

Looking forward to seeing this developing over the next few years.... I come through twice daily so it'll be very interesting.

marno21

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Eleven and a half years from thread start to a contract being signed. Good lord.

Looking forward to seeing this developing over the next few years.... I come through twice daily so it'll be very interesting.

That's actually good by modern standards. The M28 thread turns 16 in January and contract signing is at least 3 years away.

kub

A € 40 million saving to the exchequer by the re-tendering process, that is great. I have to admire the forgive and forget mentality here by officialdom.

grogi

marno21 wrote: »

Apparently €40m saved via retendering process.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-40063922.html

See what I mean re: pricing. The main construction works contract here is not going to cost €215m

How much did economy lost because of the delays?

Pete_Cavan

The project couldn't have started in the last year as the enabling works are still ongoing, no time lost but the €40n has been saved. Some people just don't want to hear good news.

Hibernicis

marno21 wrote: »

Apparently €40m saved via retendering process.

Your inclusion of the word "apparently" made me smile. It is indeed a great achievement if they have actually saved €40m and even better that this was achieved without causing any substantial delays. You'd have to be pretty sure though that like was being compared with like when the old and new costs were compared, and that this isn't just some book keeping exercise to deflect from the criticism that would have resulted if there wasn't a significant saving.

Anyway let's look on the bright side, the project is proceeding at long last.

Hibernicis

marno21 wrote: »

That's actually good by modern standards. The M28 thread turns 16 in January and contract signing is at least 3 years away.

Not to mention the N20/M20 which has been under discussion in one form or another since the completion of Phase 2 of the Cork/Mallow road in 1994. And is still a long way from opening. That one could yet reach 35+ years.

marno21

Hibernicis wrote: »

Your inclusion of the word "apparently" made me smile. It is indeed a great achievement if they have actually saved €40m and even better that this was achieved without causing any substantial delays. You'd have to be pretty sure though that like was being compared with like when the old and new costs were compared, and that this isn't just some book keeping exercise to deflect from the criticism that would have resulted if there wasn't a significant saving.

Anyway let's look on the bright side, the project is proceeding at long last.

Indeed. I used the word apparently because it’s from a newspaper article rather than me first hand examining data. Given the commercial nature of this stuff too it’s likely that’ll be as much as we see.

To your second point; absolutely! Another project ticked off the list. First major road project approved by the Green coalition too which is welcome.

Next up now will be the N5 in early 2021.

hans aus dtschl

It's possible to reduce cost by completing phases of work, through eliminating risks. In some of our projects, we eliminate risks as the project advances and possible negative outcomes don't materialise. If we have to give a fixed fee at the outset of a big project then we need to price to cover ourselves.

I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it is at least been possible in my work.

Pete_Cavan

The original tender was basically ballpark bids followed by negotiations with one contractor. As there was no competition, there was no incentive for that contractor to price realistically, in fact it was in their interest to inflate the price at that stage as the contracting authority had to accept or cancel the entire process and start again. That single contractor was already working there and was armed with lots of information on ground conditions, etc. on which to justify their inflating of the price. Sisk only had to thread the line of pushing up the price as much as possible without going ridiculous, they failed.

It is no surprise that a proper competitive tender process saw much lower bids. It get the job, Sisk had to price realistically and even find ways to reduce costs. I've said it since details of how the previous negotiations were going that a competitive tender would see a much reduced price.

I think it is also worth noting that the previous tender process (a single party negotiation with a contractor already working on the site) would have been likely to attract legal challenges from other contractors so awarding then could easily have resulted in big delays also.

kub

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The original tender was basically ballpark bids followed by negotiations with one contractor. As there was no competition, there was no incentive for that contractor to price realistically, in fact it was in their interest to inflate the price at that stage as the contracting authority had to accept or cancel the entire process and start again. That single contractor was already working there and was armed with lots of information on ground conditions, etc. on which to justify their inflating of the price. Sisk only had to thread the line of pushing up the price as much as possible without going ridiculous, they failed.

It is no surprise that a proper competitive tender process saw much lower bids. It get the job, Sisk had to price realistically and even find ways to reduce costs. I've said it since details of how the previous negotiations were going that a competitive tender would see a much reduced price.

I think it is also worth noting that the previous tender process (a single party negotiation with a contractor already working on the site) would have been likely to attract legal challenges from other contractors so awarding then could easily have resulted in big delays also.

It is reported that Bam were chasing this also, is there a concern here of a legal challenge by them at this stage ?

Pete_Cavan

kub wrote: »

It is reported that Bam were chasing this also, is there a concern here of a legal challenge by them at this stage ?

Possible but this time they used the standard process which has been used to tender just about every government funded project for the last decade, they would need to have a strong case to get a challenge heard. The previous one was a contract which I don't believe has been used in this country before.

monkey8

We were looking at potentially buying Ballinderry house at the junction of the M8 and Richmond L2998. It’s entrance is off a quiet cul de sac but there is talk of that cul de sac being changed into a fly off for the m8 which would have that traffic going right passed the front gate. Does anyone know if that is indeed happening?

cantalach

monkey8 wrote: »

We were looking at potentially buying Ballinderry house at the junction of the M8 and Richmond L2998. It’s entrance is off a quiet cul de sac but there is talk of that cul de sac being changed into a fly off for the m8 which would have that traffic going right passed the front gate. Does anyone know if that is indeed happening?

There is a new entrance onto the M8 for vehicles coming from the city at that location. It is the top-right flow in this drawing:

https://www.dunkettle.ie/media/1337/traffic-movements_from-n8.jpg

Note however that this work has already been built (though not yet opened) under an advanced works contract. In other words, if you visit the property today you’re seeing it as it will be.

AugustusMinimus

monkey8 wrote: »

We were looking at potentially buying Ballinderry house at the junction of the M8 and Richmond L2998. It’s entrance is off a quiet cul de sac but there is talk of that cul de sac being changed into a fly off for the m8 which would have that traffic going right passed the front gate. Does anyone know if that is indeed happening?

There’s a cycle path which will be utilising the cul de sac by that house. The cycle path will open with this scheme.

hans aus dtschl

cantalach wrote: »

if you visit the property today you’re seeing it as it will be.

This.
The works there are basically complete, though the cycleway is not yet open for use.

marno21

Fill material now being stockpiled at the Upjohn/Pfizer premises at Little Island:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awn6-q3-iDE

Aerial view of N8E -> M8N link and future N8E -> Little Island link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj9VZmEa5gs

paddyref

marno21 wrote: »

Fill material now being stockpiled at the Upjohn/Pfizer premises at Little Island:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awn6-q3-iDE

Aerial view of N8E -> M8N link and future N8E -> Little Island link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj9VZmEa5gs

Is that new road to be bored out under the M8 heading east-west?

marno21

paddyref wrote: »

Is that new road to be bored out under the M8 heading east-west?

The M8 itself is to be shifted to the east to allow for the new interchange alignment.

hans aus dtschl

marno21 wrote: »

The M8 itself is to be shifted to the east to allow for the new interchange alignment.

It is to be "bored out" also Marno. It's the direct East-West routing towards Glounthaune.
In reality, I suspect a cut-and-cover with a precast bridge-box or something.

This is the one that I keep harping on about being a good routing for pedestrians/cyclists. Under the furthest-left slip road, then parallel with the new slip that will be "bored out". The drone follows part-way up the new cycleway. Cycleway then continues West for a bit, but the drone doesn't follow. A direct East-West through that "bored out" route would be much better for pedestrians and cyclists, because it'd be flat and direct and have no conflicts. Basically perfect. I fully expect most cyclists to use this "bored out" route regardless what happens. Expect complaints from hard-pressed motorists that there's "a perfectly good cycleway". I expect the few pedestrians will probably stick with the longer slower route.

cantalach

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

It is to be "bored out" also Marno. It's the direct East-West routing towards Glounthaune.
In reality, I suspect a cut-and-cover with a precast bridge-box or something.

This is the one that I keep harping on about being a good routing for pedestrians/cyclists. Under the furthest-left slip road, then parallel with the new slip that will be "bored out". The drone follows part-way up the new cycleway. Cycleway then continues West for a bit, but the drone doesn't follow. A direct East-West through that "bored out" route would be much better for pedestrians and cyclists, because it'd be flat and direct and have no conflicts. Basically perfect. I fully expect most cyclists to use this "bored out" route regardless what happens. Expect complaints from hard-pressed motorists that there's "a perfectly good cycleway". I expect the few pedestrians will probably stick with the longer slower route.

Is it just an illusion or does the new dedicated cycle track in Marno’s second clip seem to narrow a lot around the 2m26s mark?

marno21

cantalach wrote: »

Is it just an illusion or does the new dedicated cycle track in Marno’s second clip seem to narrow a lot around the 2m26s mark?

It does narrow. There will def be scope to widen it when the M8 is moved to the east.

paddyref

marno21 wrote: »

It does narrow. There will def be scope to widen it when the M8 is moved to the east.

How much will the M8 be moved easterly, it's going to be very close to the school.

cantalach

marno21 wrote: »

It does narrow. There will def be scope to widen it when the M8 is moved to the east.

Oh yeah, forgot that.

a/tel

paddyref wrote: »

How much will the M8 be moved easterly, it's going to be very close to the school.

https://www.dunkettle.ie/media/1336/traffic-movements_from-m8.jpg

marno21

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

It is to be "bored out" also Marno. It's the direct East-West routing towards Glounthaune.
In reality, I suspect a cut-and-cover with a precast bridge-box or something.

Sorry, got distracted with CNN.

https://www.dunkettle.ie/media/1336/traffic-movements_from-m8.jpg

I was meaning that the new M8 will be so far to the east at this point that it'll effectively be a new M8 entirely, and they can just put in an underpass for this routing under the new alignment.

paddyref

marno21 wrote: »

Sorry, got distracted with CNN.

https://www.dunkettle.ie/media/1336/traffic-movements_from-m8.jpg

I was meaning that the new M8 will be so far to the east at this point that it'll effectively be a new M8 entirely, and they can just put in an underpass for this routing under the new alignment.

Christ, thats a handy bit of ground off the school, have they confirmed the purchase of the land.

cantalach

paddyref wrote: »

Christ, thats a handy bit of ground off the school, have they confirmed the purchase of the land.

The school didn’t own all the land in that corner formed by the existing M8 and the railway. They really only owned the paved area immediately to the west of the school building, and they’ve only lost a little shkelp off that.