Thursday 20 September 2007

Cairns Post: doing what it orta

I blogged a few weeks back about the atrocity that this Council calls City Place, and what they have delivered to us.

While I don't need to repeat my views posted previously, the Cairns Post is doing what it should do, and has been pursuing this subject with a passion. I'm impressed with Mark and his team for following this debacle along it's torid path.

They, like you and I, are looking for answers, as to how and why we ended up with something that is barely practical and almost certainly not at all suited for the purpose of an entertainment facility.
Questions need to be answered as to why it differed so dramatically from what was presented and approved by Council, months earlier. The public had zilch involvement in this project, as I guess the embarrassment level is rather high on the radar. Did your Councillor show you what they were reviewing before making a decision?

The latest makeover of the stage area, is nearly $2 mill. This is on top of the atrocious paving laid 4 years ago, and various other surrounding components. It's predicted to be close to $4 million.
One of the more approachable city councillors, Fran Lindsay has called it "gross".
Every resident needs to ask what this monster cost you, the ratepayer. Then you'll have nearly 4 million reasons why you'll boot this Council out in 190 days time.


Anonymous said...

Perhaps you should ask the architect how come the final design differed so much from initial drawings as approved by Council.

His name is Mark Buttrose.

Anonymous said...

City Place is a dysfunctional lemon no matter what is there. Its a relic, time to move on and send in the dozer to reopen & revive Lake St.

Anonymous said...

Des seems to know a lot about the council doings, or misdoings. Maybe the council should have forced the issue to build this structure as per approved design. If it couldnt be built as it was approved for what ever reason, then the council should have approved a new design, or another archatect. I remember when I built a house down south, I gave the builder the plans, when the house was finished and he wanted his payment, he hadnt built it as I wanted it. He had decided that his personal influence on the design made it look better. Then to top it off, his painter painted the house a burnt/hot pink. I refused to pay the builder and painter until it had be built and painted as per the plans. At their expense. If I was the council, and had to fork out $1.8million on somethiing that looked nothing like what was approved, I just wouldnt have paid for it. Until they had built it correctly. Unless of course, there is more to it than the council wants the people to know.