Events Centre

Padraig Mor · 02-08-2019 10:13am

ofcork wrote: »

Didn't o callaghan have to pay a levy to the council for not building an event centre in mahon.

Yes, but the amount was far less than that 'lost' by the council in not selling the site to the highest bidder (but which didn't include an event centre in the plans).

flo8s967qjh0nd · 07-08-2019 9:46pm

Does anybody know of the government is due to announce the funding for the event centre yet? Or is that all delayed along with the planning?

kub · 07-08-2019 9:49pm

Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: »

Does anybody know of the government is due to announce the funding for the event centre yet? Or is that all delayed along with the planning?

It is delayed due to this stupidity by BAM and the City Council.

As regards Government announcements, expect an announcement after Brexit that the Government will not now be able to fund it.

flo8s967qjh0nd · 26-08-2019 12:19pm

BAM have now submitted that environmental report that the city council requested. If you ask me (I know, you didn't), this was an attempt by city council to delay a decision in order to give government more time to try and get a deal on funding. Meanwhile costs are continuing to increase.
It's looking increasingly likely that even if the latest changes get a positive response from planners (and not to mention a possible appeal), the government are no closer to agreeing a funding deal that will please everyone.

snotboogie · 26-08-2019 12:36pm

Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: »

BAM have now submitted that environmental report that the city council requested. If you ask me (I know, you didn't), this was an attempt by city council to delay a decision in order to give government more time to try and get a deal on funding. Meanwhile costs are continuing to increase.
It's looking increasingly likely that even if the latest changes get a positive response from planners (and not to mention a possible appeal), the government are no closer to agreeing a funding deal that will please everyone.

I don't think funding is the issue, I understand this has already been approved, the problem is that the validity of the tender will be open to challenge by the extra funding.

flo8s967qjh0nd · 26-08-2019 3:30pm

snotboogie wrote: »

I don't think funding is the issue, I understand this has already been approved, the problem is that the validity of the tender will be open to challenge by the extra funding.

I'm not sure if this is correct. There is still the issue of the loan/not a loan. If funding was sorted, why not come out and say it?

snotboogie · 26-08-2019 3:38pm

Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: »

I'm not sure if this is correct. There is still the issue of the loan/not a loan. If funding was sorted, why not come out and say it?

They did last Christmas, loan not a loan is them trying to get around the tender issues. Officially they are waiting for City Council approval of the funding which has been ongoing for 8 months with no update.

flo8s967qjh0nd · 26-08-2019 5:26pm

snotboogie wrote: »

They did last Christmas, loan not a loan is them trying to get around the tender issues. Officially they are waiting for City Council approval of the funding which has been ongoing for 8 months with no update.

Ok. I have a different take on it but if you're correct, everything relies on the planning now. Interesting times ahead.

Roger Hassenforder · 26-08-2019 5:52pm

Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: »

Ok. I have a different take on it but if you're correct, everything relies on the planning now. Interesting times ahead.

I dont think BAM are too comfortable with the "loan" aspect.

who_me · 26-08-2019 6:00pm

It was suggested here (a few pages ago, I think) that the Council would be responsible for the building of the footbridges to/from the site, as a way of 'helping the developers without helping the developers'.. Which makes sense to me, if the bridges are to be open to the public then the council paying for them isn't a terrible idea. Whether or not they would make much of a difference to the financial viability of the project is another matter.

snotboogie · 26-08-2019 6:21pm

Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: »

Ok. I have a different take on it but if you're correct, everything relies on the planning now. Interesting times ahead.

No what I'm saying is actually worse. If the council approve the funding it will almost certainly be challenged (probably by Killarney hoteliers) who will hold it up for years in the courts and have a great chance at winning and scuppering the whole project

rebs23 · 27-08-2019 10:34am

snotboogie wrote: »

No what I'm saying is actually worse. If the council approve the funding it will almost certainly be challenged (probably by Killarney hoteliers) who will hold it up for years in the courts and have a great chance at winning and scuppering the whole project

I would imagine if they went down that road and objected there could be serious repercussions. Kerry Airport might find itself without a Government subvention.

bingo9999 · 27-08-2019 11:13am

Either way, if that is the inevitable outcome then lets move ahead and get to that point, then we can drop the current plans and re-tender. We could have jumped ahead to that re-tender point several years ago when LiveNation raised the concerns on viability with current size.

Just...do..soomething to take it forward for the love of god

Meursault · 29-08-2019 11:21pm

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Events-centre-latest-BAM-responds-to-City-Halls-request-for-a-Nature-Impact-Statement-6c53fa62-5e4f-41e2-a3b7-87a6688fe07d-ds

Seems like a positive development?

Roger Hassenforder · 30-08-2019 12:46am

Meursault wrote: »

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Events-centre-latest-BAM-responds-to-City-Halls-request-for-a-Nature-Impact-Statement-6c53fa62-5e4f-41e2-a3b7-87a6688fe07d-ds

Seems like a positive development?

Those NIS are copy and paste jobs. They're basically saying the development wont adversely affect Cork Harbour nature sites, and they wont pollute the Lee.

Meursault · 30-08-2019 8:52am

If its a box ticking exercise, then so be it. What I am more interested in is the fact they were given a 6 month deadline, but it was completed in a month. That surely is a positive indication that they are still committed to the project.

Roger Hassenforder · 30-08-2019 8:59am

Meursault wrote: »

If its a box ticking exercise, then so be it. What I am more interested in is the fact they were given a 6 month deadline, but it was completed in a month. That surely is a positive indication that they are still committed to the project.

True, but AFAIK there's still some disquiet within the BAM camp re the "loan", and even if/when it does get Planing, the proposed "loan" arrangements have some hurdles to jump yet; a new Cost-benifet analysis by the parent Dept, and further ratification by EU that procurement/tendering is in order.

Ive no confidence in any of the parties, i've abandoned all hope for the moment.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 30-08-2019 11:11am

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Ive no confidence in any of the parties, i've abandoned all hope for the moment.

Until it starts being built, I have no hope for the project. It's been one reason after another, one excuse after another, and one delay after another. I've parked any expectation until concrete starts being laid and we see upward progress.

Meursault · 30-08-2019 2:55pm

Hmm, ok. I really don't understand why people follow the Event Centre thread on here, if they have no hope for the project, other than to log on and tell everyone they have no hope.

I suppose there's plenty of reasons to be despondent, but I havent seen any of the parties looking for a way out so far, even though they could well have used a number of the issues which have arisen as a legitimate reason to pull the plug. If Coveney/FG were looking to limit the damage, they would have pulled out a long time ago, well in advance of a general election.

Anyway, I guess we'll see what happens.....

j8wk2feszrnpao · 30-08-2019 4:21pm

Meursault wrote: »

Hmm, ok. I really don't understand why people follow the Event Centre thread on here, if they have no hope for the project, other than to log on and tell everyone they have no hope.

Cause you’d hope there’s be posts about significant progress were being posted?
Posts with blind optimism aren’t adding much, but they’re entitled to post, like everyone else. Even those who need to question why people post in an open forum.

Meursault · 30-08-2019 5:04pm

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Cause you’d hope there’s be posts about significant progress were being posted?
Posts with blind optimism aren’t adding much, but they’re entitled to post, like everyone else. Even those who need to question why people post in an open forum.

Well, there is progress. Maybe not what you call significant progress, but progress nevertheless. I’m not sure about the “blind optimism” either, unless you are referring to some other post.

I thought it was pretty obvious that I am neither blindly optimistic or utterly pessimistic, which seems to be the more popular sentiment here.

I thought it was worth mentioning the latest development.

Anyway, thank you.

Roger Hassenforder · 30-08-2019 5:20pm

Meursault wrote: »

Hmm, ok. I really don't understand why people follow the Event Centre thread on here, if they have no hope for the project, other than to log on and tell everyone they have no hope.

I suppose there's plenty of reasons to be despondent, but I havent seen any of the parties looking for a way out so far, even though they could well have used a number of the issues which have arisen as a legitimate reason to pull the plug. If Coveney/FG were looking to limit the damage, they would have pulled out a long time ago, well in advance of a general election.

Anyway, I guess we'll see what happens.....

Unless you're a shill, theres absolutely no need for such condemnation of anyone offering an opinion other than FG type promises of progress and roadmaps, and secret meetings. Is there an official narrative we must follow?

We're all as entitled as each other to post our meandering opinions. No one wants this to fail. Some of us are just a bit more sceptical, with too many false promises.
Until i see concrete being pored, i have little hope.

Meursault · 30-08-2019 6:29pm

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Unless you're a shill, theres absolutely no need for such condemnation of anyone offering an opinion other than FG type promises of progress and roadmaps, and secret meetings. Is there an official narrative we must follow?

We're all as entitled as each other to post our meandering opinions. No one wants this to fail. Some of us are just a bit more sceptical, with too many false promises.
Until i see concrete being pored, i have little hope.

A shill! ðŸ˜‚ as if anyone associated with Bam, FG or anyone else would be on Boards pushing their agenda. That’s comical.

Not sure where you are getting the condemnation from my posts either but feel free to point it out to me.

Post away lads. I have no problem with that at all. G’luck

Roger Hassenforder · 31-08-2019 1:13am

Meursault wrote: »

A shill! ðŸ˜‚ as if anyone associated with Bam, FG or anyone else would be on Boards pushing their agenda. That’s comical.

*Arches eye-brow

Meursault wrote: »

Not sure where you are getting the condemnation from my posts either but feel free to point it out to me.

Post away lads. I have no problem with that at all. G’luck

Everyones entitled to give their opinion without having to justify it.

Opinions, theyre like arśeholes. We've all got one!