Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:58 pm 
Online
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Nov 4, 2011
Posts: 6005
Location: SthDub
Guy on the last word tonight said initial price for the hospital in James site was 450m!!!!
He's built the Beacon hospital.

1m per bed seems to be the norm...so 750m should be the target


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 10:58 pm 
Online
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Nov 4, 2011
Posts: 6005
Location: SthDub
The ongoing increase in the cost of the Children's hospital is going to make it most expensive ever built anywhere in the world! Go team Ireland

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics ... -1.2986631
Quote:
And she [Tanaiste] compared the cost with other public infrastructure developments.
“Many of our major projects have had cost overruns. Take Terminal 2 at Dublin Airport. There was a lot of discussion about the site, about the building, about the cost. It’s now there, nobody is questioning it.”

I f-n despair at the logic and the carelessness with which public funds are treated.

And here's another beaut of a quote
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/zapp ... 78535.html
Quote:
“I would hope that if the costs are the most in the world, that we have in fact the best children’s hospital in the world,” Children's Minister Katherine Zappone reacted to the news.


I have to stop reading the papers, listening to the radio, watching TV, going on the net. It's bad for my blood pressure


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:06 am 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: Oct 29, 2007
Posts: 11761
Location: Multiverse
As someone who drives around town a lot with work, who in God's name decided to to locate it there ?

The hospital should be on the far side of the M50.
The LUAS should be extended out to it.

Every non-Dublin based parent shouldn't have to battle Dublin traffic every time they need to being their kid into the hospital (or just visit them).

The insane increase in costs should be enough for the project to be stopped.
But, of course, it wont.

This country sure knows how to blow money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:56 am 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jan 30, 2009
Posts: 2150
mr_anderson wrote:
As someone who drives around town a lot with work, who in God's name decided to to locate it there ?

The hospital should be on the far side of the M50.
The LUAS should be extended out to it.

Every non-Dublin based parent shouldn't have to battle Dublin traffic every time they need to being their kid into the hospital (or just visit them).

The insane increase in costs should be enough for the project to be stopped.
But, of course, it wont.

This country sure knows how to blow money.


Plus 1 billion.
No 2 billion. Yes. 2 billion sounds correct.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:23 am 
Offline
Real Estate Developer

Joined: Mar 17, 2008
Posts: 993
Most recent one I could find - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Eli ... y_Hospital
1677 beds including 256 bed childrens hospital
Built on an existing site
8 years from conception to opening
Cost : STG 842 million Even if you take STG at 1.30 that's €1.1Bn - a lot less than 1m per bed

We are a fucking mess run by the idiots that we elected - we can only blame ourselves.

PS - looking further down the article I see that the locals call it 'The Death Star' - Glasgow humour must be very like Dublin humour


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:11 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: May 12, 2012
Posts: 2109
mr_anderson wrote:
As someone who drives around town a lot with work, who in God's name decided to to locate it there ?

The hospital should be on the far side of the M50.
The LUAS should be extended out to it.


Because it makes medical sense to co-locate children's hospitals with adult ones.

Or so any doctor I have ever spoken to says.

It is also quite suitable for the half a million of us who live inside the M50:)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:12 pm 
Offline
Property Magnate

Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Posts: 695
So, eh....you know this new Children's Hospital that's being colocated with St. James's....? Do I want to know who owns that?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:29 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Oct 19, 2010
Posts: 2670
Location: Dublin SE
Evil_g wrote:
So, eh....you know this new Children's Hospital that's being colocated with St. James's....? Do I want to know who owns that?

That as far as I'm aware will have a completely separate and independent board. Ownership will be retained by the state.

No religious institution will be involved (as far as I'm aware)

_________________
"Perfect is the enemy of the good"
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Jun 9, 2008
Posts: 7098
Discussion on the maternity hospital split to here viewtopic.php?f=54&t=66823

_________________
“Don't ask the barber if you need a haircut—and don’t ask an academic if what he does is relevant.” Nassim Nicholas Taleb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Posts: 8751
Location: London, innit
saw a lot of the usual goons banging on about the lack of sprinkler system in the new hospital - Prof John "Ego the size of Manhattan" Crown for example. As usual, it takes a while before someone with relevant knowledge contributes to the "public debate"

Quote:
Sir, – Further to “Children’s hospital board appeals requirement for sprinkler system” (News, October 22nd), hospitals have the most rigorous form of building fire safety, normally in the form of what is referred to as “progressive and horizontal evacuation”.

This is an international position with regard to buildings of this nature. This is because, in the event of a fire, it is not always appropriate to evacuate very sick people out of the building into any sort of weather.
Nor is it appropriate to have patients drenched, (whether in bed in a ward or on the operating table), under a sprinkler system just because someone had a sneaky cigarette or a toaster goes on fire.

The fire compartments that separate each area, never mind areas or rooms considered hazardous, are usually of at least one-hour fire resistance as a minimum, are in turn able to escape to safe zones also of a minimum of one-hour fire resistance, within strictly coded, certified, standardised distances. Hospital building management systems also know immediately exactly where a fire is taking place and can address the problem locally and very quickly without mass evacuation or sprinklers activated.

Evidence of the precedence for the requirement for sprinklers in operating theatre areas, in one of the most safe public building types, needs to be explained in detail to us all in his instance to substantiate any further cost to the project. – Yours, etc,

CATHERINE
O’KEEFFE PRUNTY,
Lecturer in Building
Technology,
School of Architecture,
Dublin Institute
of Technology, Dublin 1.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Childrens Hospital Refused Planning
PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:38 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Mar 14, 2013
Posts: 1925
slasher wrote:
saw a lot of the usual goons banging on about the lack of sprinkler system in the new hospital - Prof John "Ego the size of Manhattan" Crown for example. As usual, it takes a while before someone with relevant knowledge contributes to the "public debate"

Quote:
Sir, – Further to “Children’s hospital board appeals requirement for sprinkler system” (News, October 22nd), hospitals have the most rigorous form of building fire safety, normally in the form of what is referred to as “progressive and horizontal evacuation”.

This is an international position with regard to buildings of this nature. This is because, in the event of a fire, it is not always appropriate to evacuate very sick people out of the building into any sort of weather.
Nor is it appropriate to have patients drenched, (whether in bed in a ward or on the operating table), under a sprinkler system just because someone had a sneaky cigarette or a toaster goes on fire.

The fire compartments that separate each area, never mind areas or rooms considered hazardous, are usually of at least one-hour fire resistance as a minimum, are in turn able to escape to safe zones also of a minimum of one-hour fire resistance, within strictly coded, certified, standardised distances. Hospital building management systems also know immediately exactly where a fire is taking place and can address the problem locally and very quickly without mass evacuation or sprinklers activated.

Evidence of the precedence for the requirement for sprinklers in operating theatre areas, in one of the most safe public building types, needs to be explained in detail to us all in his instance to substantiate any further cost to the project. – Yours, etc,

CATHERINE
O’KEEFFE PRUNTY,
Lecturer in Building
Technology,
School of Architecture,
Dublin Institute
of Technology, Dublin 1.


There are a few holes in what she is saying
For one not many sneaky cigarettes or toasters on operating theaters
Surely fire alarms would be heat and smoke detection ?
Zonal sprinklers would only come on in the areas affected thereby saving the remainder of the hospital and reducing the need to evacuate the remainder of the hospital

The costs are crazy not because of the fire suppression system it due to the stupid curves probably doubling the cost, GCCC contracts, HSE and too many other cooks.
Great ormonde street building 120 bed hospital for 190 m sterling

http://www.constructionenquirer.com/201 ... t-phase-4/

_________________
An increase in the number of paupers does not broaden the market. M. Kalecki


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Clank, wii4miinow and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  

Click for Latest Posts LATEST POSTS Click for Forum List FORUMS   

Follow, Retweet @dailypinster

  

Pyramid Built, Is Better Built!