nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

N8/N25/N40 - Dunkettle Interchange [open to traffic]

Stupido

NRA have this morning advertised for engineering consultancy to design medium to long term solution to the junction!

:):)

Find more posts tagged with

m8 motorway

n40

Quick Links

Comments

Chris_5339762

Its all very frustrating, but its something at least. That N8 - M8 link may take a little bit of the pressure off in the evenings, as there will be less red time and less backing up on the roundabout.

Unless Sisk were all out of proportion on the amount they wanted, I think TII should have accepted things. Say it was €50 million more than the government intended. Its not unreasonable to assume more than €50 million in economic loss will be caused by a years delay in this starting.

Thats Dunkettle stalled for a year and the M28 stalled in the courts. Not looking great really.

marno21

Update from Cork County Council.

Project tender to be awarded in 2020; partial opening in 2022 with full completion in 2023.

Works to be completed between now and tender award.

1. Construction of a freeflow link between the N8 outbound and the M8 northbound (shown in image below in red)
2. Construction of the shared use cycle/pedestrian route adjacent to the Cork – Dublin road link. This will be a segregated route separated from the road link by noise/environmental barriers, as well as vehicle restraint barriers (shown in image below in green)
3. Works to the major utilities crossing the Dunkettle site. These include gas, electricity, fibre optic telecoms and trunk watermains serving Cork City and Little Island. Diversion and protection works to these vital services within a corridor developed during the Stage 1 design process will significantly de-risk the main construction works and reduce the construction programme.

steeler j

how much more was the overrun going to be

Cork Trucker

More of the same from the Irish Examiner

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/100m-dunkettle-interchange-upgrade-delayed-by-a-year-944273.html

Lackadaisical

Gunner3629 wrote: »

The cost of the project may - possibly - be lower but the negative economic effect of further delays will also have a cost.

The issue is one cost is easily measurable and the other is largely opportunity cost, so the tendency will be to go for the hard numbers. It doesn't mean it makes any economic sense, but that's what always happens when management accountancy is driving it.

Gunner3629

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The engineers on TII's side say the cost should be lower than what Sisk are quoting. Tendering amongst multiple contractors will almost certainly result in lower bids than negotiating with only one.

The Children's Hospital was on site before costs spiralled so the option to retender wasn't there.

The cost of the project may - possibly - be lower but the negative economic effect of further delays will also have a cost.

marno21

According to TII's Sean O'Neill, in the next 12 months they plan to complete utility diversions and complete the link between the N8 and the M8.

https://soundcloud.com/opinionline96/2019-08-15-online-jewellery-gone-missing-ryanair-strike-student-accommodation-more

1:35 in.

Pete_Cavan

Gunner3629 wrote: »

Who's the say that after re-tendering the cost will be any lower than what Sisk are quoting.

Even thought Children's hospital is a much bigger cost to the taxpayer, and ultimately spiralled out of all control, why was this action never taken there?

The engineers on TII's side say the cost should be lower than what Sisk are quoting. Tendering amongst multiple contractors will almost certainly result in lower bids than negotiating with only one.

The Children's Hospital was on site before costs spiralled so the option to retender wasn't there.

marno21

Cork Chamber have released a fairly strong press release about this issue

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/Cork-business-losing-faith-in-government-following-latest-Dunkettle-delays-74b699f1-4331-4366-b486-201c236dd37e-ds

marno21

prunudo wrote: »

A lot of threads on here have start dates that long ago unfortunately, depressing state of affairs really.

Case in point the N28 thread, started in the first week of 2005

kub

Gunner3629 wrote: »

Who's the say that after re-tendering the cost will be any lower than what Sisk are quoting.

Even thought Children's hospital is a much bigger cost to the taxpayer, and ultimately spiralled out of all control, why was this action never taken there?

Same can be said about The Events Centre.

Has BAM got a better way with contracts than other construction companies ?

Gunner3629

Limerick74 wrote: »

https://www.tii.ie/news/press-releases/dunkettle-interchange-update/

Who's the say that after re-tendering the cost will be any lower than what Sisk are quoting.

Even thought Children's hospital is a much bigger cost to the taxpayer, and ultimately spiralled out of all control, why was this action never taken there?

Limerick74

https://www.tii.ie/news/press-releases/dunkettle-interchange-update/

prunudo

Odelay wrote: »

Lol. Posted in April 2009

A lot of threads on here have start dates that long ago unfortunately, depressing state of affairs really.

Odelay

Drax wrote: »

Excellent news indeed... expect it in around 10 years. :pac:

Lol. Posted in April 2009

marno21

If this lark continues it’ll be Senator Simon Coventry at the opening

Cork getting short changed again as usual. Funny how the rules apply here but not to the Children’s Hospital or the Broadband Plan

Cork Trucker

Gunner3629 wrote: »

Could have a new government by then. Very frustrating.

Another recession as well possibly, Germany's economy contracted by 0.1% in the last quarter, this & Brexit would mess things up here, throw a new government into the mix and it might not be their priority the same way the M20 and Northern Ring Road aren't for the current administration.

Gunner3629

Could have a new government by then. Very frustrating.

Canyon86

Cork Trucker wrote: »

What a fcuking joke, but not unexpected

https://twitter.com/JoeLeogue/status/1161940871086039040

Crazy stuff!!

Cork Trucker

What a fcuking joke, but not unexpected

https://twitter.com/JoeLeogue/status/1161940871086039040

highwaymaniac

tonc76 wrote: »

Regarding the interpretation of the ground investigation results, testing has been ongoing throughout phase 2 of the tender so this is additional info that TII's engineers would not have had when estimating the scheme cost prior to the tender commencing. As a result couldn't it be possible that the estimate is off the mark as a result?

With this form of contract as I understand it, the majority, and if not all, of the risk lies with the contractor so a premium will be paid regardless. Cost increases which are justified and verified, based on actual quantities and tendered rates would possibly offer better bang for your buck but the cost could also spiral if the original construction cost estimate was off the mark.

I'd hate to see the project delayed and retendered as it is badly needed. If it does happen though it would be interesting to see the difference in construction cost between the "new" phase and the cost that TII and sisk are supposedly negotiating over at the moment.

The Geology of Cork Harbour has been extensively studied and reported, in addition there is ground investigation information from the tunnel and original dunkettle interchange projects. The fake news that is being peddled that the ground conditions are worse than expected just does not stand up to scrutiny. It is a marine environment of tidal mudflats, with significant depths of alluvium with glacial deposits of gravel underneath. The ground conditions are poor there is no secret around that. Bridges will need to be piled, staged construction and surcharged embankments etc.

At this stage I can see this definitely being retendered. The issue here is that the initial cost estimate by TII was a guesstimate so they don't know by how much prooft and risk Sisk are applying.

tonc76

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Much of the results of the ground investigation comes down to interpretation, two engineers could look at a borehole log and make a case for two very different solutions needed. If the engineers on TII's side do not agree with the conclusions drawn by the engineers on Sisk's side, this process should be scrapped. Sisk have nothing to lose here and will be looking to squeeze everything they can out of TII, who will suffer a lot of reputational damage and bad PR if the project doesn't go ahead.

The cost that Sisk are due to submit may be the final but it will be inflated with premiums for risk. Costs not rising from the contract award sounds good but not if you are paying over the odds to begin with. Cost increases which are justified and verified, based on actual quantities and tendered rates are better than contract price jacked up before any work is done based on "what if".

Regarding the interpretation of the ground investigation results, testing has been ongoing throughout phase 2 of the tender so this is additional info that TII's engineers would not have had when estimating the scheme cost prior to the tender commencing. As a result couldn't it be possible that the estimate is off the mark as a result?

With this form of contract as I understand it, the majority, and if not all, of the risk lies with the contractor so a premium will be paid regardless. Cost increases which are justified and verified, based on actual quantities and tendered rates would possibly offer better bang for your buck but the cost could also spiral if the original construction cost estimate was off the mark.

I'd hate to see the project delayed and retendered as it is badly needed. If it does happen though it would be interesting to see the difference in construction cost between the "new" phase and the cost that TII and sisk are supposedly negotiating over at the moment.

Pete_Cavan

SeanW wrote: »

If it goes back to tender, is there anything to be gained by breaking the project up into chunks?

For example, the slip road from the N8 East to the M8 North is mostly a re-use of an old road, I'd imagine these ground issues are less of a factor there or that this should be one of the easier parts. If the project is to be re-tendered, then could Sisk be told "go ahead and build that slip road, the rest will be re-tendered"? Or would the government have to tender that slip road as well?

I ask because it seems like it might a quick-win to take some of the traffic off the roundabout, if the overall scheme gets delayed.

What you describe sounds like a substantial change from the initial tender so retendering would be appropriate. No doubt Sisk would find other issues to throw in the mix when negotiating the value of that contract and TII will still be in the situation of having to accept Sisk's "best price" or walk away with nothing. Doing the works piecemeal would be more expensive.

Pete_Cavan

tonc76 wrote: »

It appears to me that the ground investigation issued to tendering parties was not robust enough as GI that has been undertaken since has apparently shown the conditions to be much worse than anticipated.

I may have missed this but was the cost that Sisk are currently talking about mentioned, other than the €160m or so figure mentioned by Micheal Martin a few weeks ago?

Also the cost that Sisk are due to submit will be final cost whereas if procured under a different contract type there would be no certainty on final cost which on projects in years past amounted to massive additional cost.

Much of the results of the ground investigation comes down to interpretation, two engineers could look at a borehole log and make a case for two very different solutions needed. If the engineers on TII's side do not agree with the conclusions drawn by the engineers on Sisk's side, this process should be scrapped. Sisk have nothing to lose here and will be looking to squeeze everything they can out of TII, who will suffer a lot of reputational damage and bad PR if the project doesn't go ahead.

The cost that Sisk are due to submit may be the final but it will be inflated with premiums for risk. Costs not rising from the contract award sounds good but not if you are paying over the odds to begin with. Cost increases which are justified and verified, based on actual quantities and tendered rates are better than contract price jacked up before any work is done based on "what if".

SeanW

If it goes back to tender, is there anything to be gained by breaking the project up into chunks?

For example, the slip road from the N8 East to the M8 North is mostly a re-use of an old road, I'd imagine these ground issues are less of a factor there or that this should be one of the easier parts. If the project is to be re-tendered, then could Sisk be told "go ahead and build that slip road, the rest will be re-tendered"? Or would the government have to tender that slip road as well?

I ask because it seems like it might a quick-win to take some of the traffic off the roundabout, if the overall scheme gets delayed.

Jayuu

Gunner3629 wrote: »

They are worried about a few million when the Childrens hospital was 100's of millions over budget.

If it was Dublin it would have been done a decade ago like the Red Cow and Newlands Cross. Just get it done.

But is it only "a few million"? Where are you getting this figure from?
If the increase was something like 5-10 million then I'd agree with you completely. If it's 50-100 million then it's a bigger problem.

I think the majority of people would be in favour of progressing with the scheme from an infrastructure point of view. However if the cost increase is vast then clearly that presents an optics problem for the Government once again and they are likely to shy away from it. That's just reality.

Gunner3629

Markcheese wrote: »

Is it only a few million?
I assume tii have a budget too..
I don't really buy the if it was Dublin thing.. There's projects in Dublin that are looking for cash too... (and I say that as someone who's often stuck on the the N40)

Its ultimately the Governments decision whether the project goes ahead now or is delayed - down to Shane Ross and Cabinet.

There has been a need for this upgrade even before Sarsfield & Bandon Rd Roundabouts were by-passed with flyovers, and that was 2013.

Markcheese

Gunner3629 wrote: »

They are worried about a few million when the Childrens hospital was 100's of millions over budget.

If it was Dublin it would have been done a decade ago like the Red Cow and Newlands Cross. Just get it done.

Is it only a few million?
I assume tii have a budget too..
I don't really buy the if it was Dublin thing.. There's projects in Dublin that are looking for cash too... (and I say that as someone who's often stuck on the the N40)

Gunner3629

Jayuu wrote: »

I guess the question is how much is the potential cost increase? Has there been any figure quoted?

They are worried about a few million when the Childrens hospital was 100's of millions over budget.

If it was Dublin it would have been done a decade ago like the Red Cow and Newlands Cross. Just get it done.

Gunner3629

Lackadaisical wrote: »

Sounds like this will be cancelled then, having already screwed up the tree cover and landscaping around the junction too.

Total mess.

The worst possible scenario is that it will be re-tender, no way it will be cancelled completely - it has to go ahead.

As for the tree cover and landscaping, I'm more concerned about another half decade of commuter hell and the impact it has on the Cork economy. Should have been done years ago.