Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Events Centre

Options
1…2930323435…65

Comments

  • Options
    #932
    ofcork
    Registered Users Posts: 5,388 ✭✭✭ofcork


    Archaeological finds at the site only going to delay things further.


  • Options
    #933
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    ofcork wrote: »
    Archaeological finds at the site only going to delay things further.

    That's the least of the issues with the Event Centre at this stage.


  • Options
    #934
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Article in the examiner saying there are now attempts being made to save the event centre. The additional funding of €10m likely won't be enough it seems. A "new initiative" will be announced within weeks. I wonder is this new initiative a scaled down event centre? Smaller capacity perhaps or less flexible to make it cheaper? Either way the farce rolls on.

    Bid to save the Event Centre


  • Options
    #935
    tototoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 828 ✭✭✭tototoe


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    Article in the examiner saying there are now attempts being made to save the event centre. The additional funding of €10m likely won't be enough it seems. A "new initiative" will be announced within weeks. I wonder is this new initiative a scaled down event centre? Smaller capacity perhaps or less flexible to make it cheaper? Either way the farce rolls on.

    Bid to save the Event Centre
    Nice the way they mention enda turned the sod and don't mention Coveney doing the same. There was more than 1 shovel involved in that sod turning


  • Options
    #936
    CHealy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭CHealy


    Just call a day on it now, start immediately on designing one at the docklands as part of their regeneration. I was all for the Beamish site, and I still am, but it aint happening and the sooner someone calls it we can hopefully move on to a new design somewhere else. Years wasted by this mess.

    This stinks of last chance saloon.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #937
    snotboogie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,601 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    CHealy wrote: »
    Just call a day on it now, start immediately on designing one at the docklands as part of their regeneration. I was all for the Beamish site, and I still am, but it aint happening and the sooner someone calls it we can hopefully move on to a new design somewhere else. Years wasted by this mess.

    This stinks of last chance saloon.
    Wasn't there meant to be a solution one way or another by the end of January? Judging by that article this will rumble along in limbo until the summer at least...


  • Options
    #938
    who_me
    Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    CHealy wrote: »
    Just call a day on it now, start immediately on designing one at the docklands as part of their regeneration. I was all for the Beamish site, and I still am, but it aint happening and the sooner someone calls it we can hopefully move on to a new design somewhere else. Years wasted by this mess.

    This stinks of last chance saloon.

    Remember when one was to be built as part of the Mahon Point development? Then Howard Holdings wanted to build one in the docklands. In the most recent tender, I'm not certain we went with the best proposal, but in any case it looks like it's not going to happen this time either.

    Whatever happens, I hope some lessons are learned from this mess. Why did Live Nation decide on a costly redesign so late in the process? Were they not consulted by BAM sooner? If they were, what changed their minds?

    Why has the proposal been changed so often? (Twice already, by my reckoning, and a third if Live Nations changes are accepted). Is this a sign the approval process takes too long? Or is it indicative of a 'bait and switch' approach where the tenderer wins the tender with an attractive, underpriced bid then alters it and ups the price once other parties are already committed to the deal.


  • Options
    #939
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    CHealy wrote: »
    Just call a day on it now, start immediately on designing one at the docklands as part of their regeneration. I was all for the Beamish site, and I still am, but it aint happening and the sooner someone calls it we can hopefully move on to a new design somewhere else. Years wasted by this mess.

    This stinks of last chance saloon.

    I'm not sure what this latest news means. I still think it will happen.

    If it doesn't happen on the Beamish site, that site will remain derelict for the next 40 years.


  • Options
    #940
    Rhys Essien
    Registered Users Posts: 3,029 ✭✭✭Rhys Essien


    I’m staying positive that it will go ahead.In the scheme of things,an extra €10/20 million is pittance.They can pull a figure of €1 billion out of the sky for the new children’s hospital and a mini extension to the Luas costs €400m.I think Cork deserves a return on taxpayers money.


  • Options
    #941
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Rhys Essien wrote: »
    I’m staying positive that it will go ahead.In the scheme of things,an extra €10/20 million is pittance.They can pull a figure of €1 billion out of the sky for the new children’s hospital and a mini extension to the Luas costs €400m.I think Cork deserves a return on taxpayers money.

    The problem is that the government can't put in more than €10m without the tender process collapsing and it's literally back to square one. Reading between the lines it seems €10m is not enough to build it and the government can't put in more than €10m without the tender process collapsing. Hence the talk now of a "new initiative".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #942
    snotboogie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,601 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    mire wrote: »
    CHealy wrote: »
    Just call a day on it now, start immediately on designing one at the docklands as part of their regeneration. I was all for the Beamish site, and I still am, but it aint happening and the sooner someone calls it we can hopefully move on to a new design somewhere else. Years wasted by this mess.

    This stinks of last chance saloon.

    I'm not sure what this latest news means. I still think it will happen.

    If it doesn't happen on the Beamish site, that site will remain derelict for the next 40 years.
    What makes you think that? I'm sure BAM would be delighted to build apartments or offices on the site.


  • Options
    #943
    nlrkjos
    Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭nlrkjos


    Send it down to the docklands or the train station....and keep dead nation out of the tender process.It's gone beyond a joke at this stage.


  • Options
    #944
    EnzoScifo
    Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭EnzoScifo


    nlrkjos wrote: »
    Send it down to the docklands or the train station....and keep dead nation out of the tender process.It's gone beyond a joke at this stage.

    problem with that is Live Nation have a monopoly on gig promotion for the type of acts that would fill an arena.


  • Options
    #945
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    snotboogie wrote: »
    What makes you think that? I'm sure BAM would be delighted to build apartments or offices on the site.

    I think they would be delighted - but I don't think it would get planning permission.

    This site has been derelict for almost 10 years, and the site and the other side of south main street over 20 years. Most of south main street [South of Washington street]is pretty derelict as a result . I don't think either of them are prime office locations and neither of them should be allowed to be developed for student accommodation. As a result I think that something like the event centre, which has a large public subsidy, is probably the only opportunity for the area's regeneration.


  • Options
    #946
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    nlrkjos wrote: »
    Send it down to the docklands or the train station....and keep dead nation out of the tender process.It's gone beyond a joke at this stage.

    The south main street site is a perfect location. It's quite clear that the location isn't a problem - it's the economics of the project.

    Also, why and how would you keep one particular party out of the tender process?


  • Options
    #947
    Meursault
    Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Meursault


    nlrkjos wrote: »
    Send it down to the docklands or the train station....and keep dead nation out of the tender process.It's gone beyond a joke at this stage.

    Whatever about re-locating, the event centre is a non-starter without Live Nation. If you want to see any major acts playing at the event centre then Live Nation need to be involved. This is why BAM went back to the govt to look for extra money to re-design the event centre.

    By the way, this point has been made ad infinitum, but the location was never the issue. the extra funding is what is causing the hold up. the same issue would exist if the event centre was planned for the docklands


  • Options
    #948
    BUNK1982
    Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭BUNK1982


    Meursault wrote: »
    Whatever about re-locating, the event centre is a non-starter without Live Nation. If you want to see any major acts playing at the event centre then Live Nation need to be involved. This is why BAM went back to the govt to look for extra money to re-design the event centre.

    By the way, this point has been made ad infinitum, but the location was never the issue. the extra funding is what is causing the hold up. the same issue would exist if the event centre was planned for the docklands

    Live Nation do seem to be the single point of failure but i wonder is there anyway to circumvent them?

    Clearly the Cork Events Centre isn't a priority for them - could the council do something like handing the running of it over to the Opera house or Live at the Marquee? Maybe ask the two to merge and provide a purpose built facility?

    I really like the location and I can't think of any other similar city centre plot. Most objections to the location centre around parking and traffic but that's 20th century thinking.


  • Options
    #949
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    BUNK1982 wrote: »
    I really like the location and I can't think of any other similar city centre plot. Most objections to the location centre around parking and traffic but that's 20th century thinking.

    You can't dismiss objections as simply "20th Century thinking". Provision needs to made for traffic and parking etc. I went to the Opera house for the panto over Christmas and the traffic before and after was chaotic. And the Opera House only has a fraction of the capacity of the Events Centre.


  • Options
    #950
    BullBlackNova
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,746 ✭✭✭BullBlackNova


    BUNK1982 wrote: »
    Live Nation do seem to be the single point of failure but i wonder is there anyway to circumvent them?

    Clearly the Cork Events Centre isn't a priority for them - could the council do something like handing the running of it over to the Opera house or Live at the Marquee? Maybe ask the two to merge and provide a purpose built facility?

    I really like the location and I can't think of any other similar city centre plot. Most objections to the location centre around parking and traffic but that's 20th century thinking.

    Live Nation's role is pretty important in this. I actually think they should be getting a hell of a lot more flak than they are. It's all currently aimed at Bam when it seems as though it is Live Nation (who were present for the sod-turning and have also remained deadly silent in the media) have insisted on the changes to the build.

    As it is, Bam can't/won't run the facility. They don't have the expertise so that makes sense. Live Nation currently has a contract and you'd assume it has some pretty iron-clad guarantees that keep that in place for now. Obviously, if the funding situation changes and the project falls through, it all changes but until that happens, it's just speculation on that front as to how LN would react, etc.

    As for the Opera House as a management facility, it is so very difficult to be a big player in this game. Most bands partner with agencies who are partnered with Live Nation, Aiken, etc and those have their preferred venues. COH punches above its weight but there's a few things in that, including the role of former CEO Mary Hickson who has close ties to the likes of the National, who have their ties to Bon Iver, etc. That is at least part of why those acts ended up here last year.

    They still do very well of their own accord but it is much more difficult being an independent venue in a second tier city than being a well connected one.

    Aiken is a valid call, though. My understanding is they primarily run festivals but also run Vicar St so there is form there at the very least?


  • Options
    #951
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    It's probably earlier in the thread but didn't something happen such that even though Live Nation were involved, they weren't consulted when the original plans were being drawn up and had only just seen them for the first time after, hence the redesign?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #952
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    You can't dismiss objections as simply "20th Century thinking". Provision needs to made for traffic and parking etc. I went to the Opera house for the panto over Christmas and the traffic before and after was chaotic. And the Opera House only has a fraction of the capacity of the Events Centre.

    Is it really a big deal if there is traffic congestion in the city centre when there are major events? Whether we like it or not, cities get congested when there is lots of activity. The alternative is simply to relocate these things to greenfield sites. Or build a massive car parking facilities everywhere. However we do need much improved public transportation.

    When it comes to city centres, you don't need to provide car parking for every single new use. The opera house has zero capital spaces - and rightly so. Opera lane has zero car parking spaces - and rightly so. City centre conference and events centres should not be providing dedicated car parking. In any case, there is plenty of car parking for the event centre for those who really want or need to drive. Between on street car parking and multi-storey car parking - there's plenty.

    Most people however would not expect to drive to the front door of a concert or to a conference.


  • Options
    #953
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    mire wrote: »
    Is it really a big deal if there is traffic congestion in the city centre when there are major events? Whether we like it or not, cities get congested when there is lots of activity. The alternative is simply to relocate these things to greenfield sites. Or build a massive car parking facilities everywhere. However we do need much improved public transportation.

    When it comes to city centres, you don't need to provide car parking for every single new use. The opera house has zero capital spaces - and rightly so. Opera lane has zero car parking spaces - and rightly so. City centre conference and events centres should not be providing dedicated car parking. In any case, there is plenty of car parking for the event centre for those who really want or need to drive. Between on street car parking and multi-storey car parking - there's plenty.

    Most people however would not expect to drive to the front door of a concert or to a conference.

    By provision I mean a traffic management plan etc like any new development must provide. You can't just throw up a development and ignore its impact on the area. Nobody suggested providing car spaces for every car - I think you misinterpreted the post.


  • Options
    #954
    Meursault
    Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Meursault


    BUNK1982 wrote: »
    Live Nation do seem to be the single point of failure but i wonder is there anyway to circumvent them?

    Clearly the Cork Events Centre isn't a priority for them - could the council do something like handing the running of it over to the Opera house or Live at the Marquee? Maybe ask the two to merge and provide a purpose built facility?

    I really like the location and I can't think of any other similar city centre plot. Most objections to the location centre around parking and traffic but that's 20th century thinking.

    The Opera House and the management behind the Marquee cannot bring the major live acts to Cork. Its as simple as that. If BAM and the govt could have come up with an alternative they would have shown Live Nation the door a long time ago. An event centre this size is not feasible without them.

    When it comes to apportioning blame, I still think BAM are most responsible. They designed the Event Centre, without consulting Live Nation, who will be bringing all the major artists to the event centre. When Live Nation saw the design they told BAM that it wasnt up to scratch. This is a major fcuk up by BAM.

    They have since re-designed the event centre - (it is now larger than the original design, and more flexible to accomodate all types of events, concerts, etc) - and the costs have increased, as a result. Which is why the whole thing ground to a halt.

    At this stage, i dont think anyone cares about the location, as long as it is built and it is fit for purpose.


  • Options
    #955
    j8wk2feszrnpao
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭j8wk2feszrnpao


    Meursault wrote: »
    When it comes to apportioning blame, I still think BAM are most responsible.
    I would put it on the city council. They should have a eye on every aspect of this issue to get it done correctly. Not excluding BAM and others, but the city council should be the center point for all of the parties involved.


  • Options
    #956
    Meursault
    Registered Users Posts: 459 ✭✭Meursault


    munstermagic11 wrote: »
    I would put it on the city council. They should have a eye on every aspect of this issue to get it done correctly. Not excluding BAM and others, but the city council should be the center point for all of the parties involved.

    They are part funding the project and are a major stakeholder, but ultimately BAM are responsible for designing a suitable event centre, building it, and ensuring it is within budget.

    In fairness to your point though, no one comes out of this looking well.


  • Options
    #957
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    By provision I mean a traffic management plan etc like any new development must provide. You can't just throw up a development and ignore its impact on the area. Nobody suggested providing car spaces for every car - I think you misinterpreted the post.

    OK, fair enough, i think i did then. Many people however were arguing that the south main street site should have been ruled out because of a lack of car parking and 'difficult access'.


  • Options
    #958
    BUNK1982
    Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭BUNK1982


    Meursault wrote: »
    They are part funding the project and are a major stakeholder, but ultimately BAM are responsible for designing a suitable event centre, building it, and ensuring it is within budget.

    In fairness to your point though, no one comes out of this looking well.

    Did not know that - so BAM went off and designed an event centre without consulting Live Nation?

    That's bizarre - the City Council do deserve serious flak, this project is so strategic to the development of Cork.


  • Options
    #959
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,271 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    mire wrote: »
    OK, fair enough, i think i did then. Many people however were arguing that the south main street site should have been ruled out because of a lack of car parking and 'difficult access'.

    It definitely needs a traffic plan plus transport plan. In Cork the last bus is at 11pm and has been that way for 50+ years. Not ideal for concerts in the event centre and that'll lead to more people opting to drive over taking bus etc. Of course this is assuming it's built.....


  • Options
    #960
    BUNK1982
    Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭BUNK1982


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    It definitely needs a traffic plan plus transport plan. In Cork the last bus is at 11pm and has been that way for 50+ years. Not ideal for concerts in the event centre and that'll lead to more people opting to drive over taking bus etc. Of course this is assuming it's built.....

    That is true that there needs to be proper planning to get people to and from the events- my view is that if you keep building to cater for car parking then you will only ever get more cars and traffic.

    South Main St. is slow most of the time so I don't think this development would have a big impact whereas if it was built next to the South Ring Road or over by the Idle Hour (O'Callaghan proposal) where traffic tends to flow then the impact would be much bigger.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #961
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    BUNK1982 wrote: »
    That is true that there needs to be proper planning to get people to and from the events- my view is that if you keep building to cater for car parking then you will only ever get more cars and traffic.

    Being realistic - what other way of transport do the spectators have and will have for foreseeable future?


Advertisement