Dbu wrote: » I wonder when will we hear from BAM? If at all
Dbu wrote: » Not a word from BAM, my guess is that all parties are at loggerheads and the announcement before Christmas was orchestrated by government to keep us happy for another few months and move the pressure from them directly onto BAMS shoulders. I really now am of the opinion that this is dead in the water Am I right in thinking that BAM now actually own the site outright? Did they buy out Heineken? I may be wrong.
Meursault wrote: » How is it dead in the water when the extra funding was approved only a few weeks ago? What statement do you expect from BAM? Isnt the Event Centre awaiting planning approval? I am not sure why they would be making any statements or plans for the Event Centre, until they have the planning permission to proceed. "Dead in the water" is a bit OTT. Its like some people are desperate for this to fail, so they can tell everyone they knew it all along and nobody would listen.
Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: » Simon Coveney's language before Christmas when announcing the extra funding was very interesting. Almost a 'take it or leave it' tone with no indication that he had even spoken to BAM about what happens next. It really seems as if BAM and the funders (i.e. government) aren't even speaking at this point.This COULD still go ahead but I don't think Coveney and his crew have any clue what fast one BAM are going to pull next. This is all to play for still.
AwaitYourReply wrote: » It would be fantastic to see a complete rejuvenation of not just the former Beamish & Crawford brewery site but also the whole of South Main Street and the adjoining streets which have suffered with so many business units out of action for a considerable period of time. These public/private partnerships are too complicated and fraught with problems and do not seem like the best model to advance such projects within a reasonable time-frame. If this ever proceeds, the construction costs will probably be way off given the prolonged delays with the project. There was similar frustrations and delays after the former School of Music premises on Union Quay was closed and by the time the new building was finally approved and actually opened. I also recall when Cork University Maternity Hospital (CUMH) was built, it lay there empty and unused for a long time before it was able to open and that was still before the economic downturn had hit! Meanwhile, I do sometimes wonder about the loss of traffic lanes for public transport/taxis/cabs/cars in the surrounding streets like(i.e.) South Main Street, Barrack Street, French's Quay etc; if the Cork Events Centre does eventually go ahead at the proposed former brewery site.
munstermagic11 wrote: » Delay, after delay, after delay.https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/fears-for-cork-event-centre-as-state-classifies-9m-of-funding-as-loan-900434.html More money about to be wasted on legal advise, meetings, and more delays. City Councils management of this has been abysmal. Coveny full of BS as well.
marno21 wrote: » To be honest, Id rather Coveney was focused on his Ministerial brief which requires a lot of attention at this stage rather than trying to micromanage this dumpster fire
who_me wrote: » As far as I'm concerned, BAM shouldn't have another public (or public-private) tender accepted in this country again, until all 3 major projects are delivered. The port relocation had a "€12 million euro budgeting error". The hotel development was approved, but has been left as a huge unsightly pile of rubble in the city centre with no sign of movement. And the Event Centre development has been repeatedly altered and scaled back, with the cost shooting through the roof, and no Event Centre yet started. Wouldn't it be nice if we stopped rewarding incompetence? (and it's arguable it's being charitable in assuming it's just incompetence).
gifted wrote: » Have a guess who's doing the new children's hospital in dublin???......https://www.bam.com/en/press/press-releases/2017/8/bam-acquires-contract-for-the-new-childrens-hospital-project-dublin
who_me wrote: » THAT new hospital? Jesus!!
snotboogie wrote: » Fact is there isn't enough alternatives. Can anybody give a summary of the latest update? The 9 million is a loan and this was known by BAM but the City Council are getting legal advice about this? Is that correct?
Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: » I'm not sure it was known by BAM that this would be a loan. This certainly wasn't anything that was being floated before Christmas. I believe it came as a shock to them. That leaves them 9million down on funding the project from where they thought they would be. Sure, they could find 9m themselves no problem but that's not likely to happen. It seems like this is the latest crisis to hit this project and all issues that should have been foreseen at the tendering stage. I'm sure it will limp on for another 12 months anyway. It always does.
Nancy Unkempt Shop wrote: » This has to go ahead or everybody looses. I don't know anybody involved who stands to gain from this not going ahead (except maybe the taxpayer, but that's debatable). That being said, I am not at all confident it will go ahead.
Markcheese wrote: » Give bam a virtual blank cheque, and see how much this will end up costing the state, just another 9 million, oh we had to change the design to meet planning, more money please. New foundation design more money please. Construction costs have gone up, more money please. The fit out needs to be done, more money please. It'll just keep going...
rob316 wrote: » BAM are defrauding the taxpayer with their gross underbidding on contracts. Nothing is ever getting done.
