Bertie’s Bowl….Sports Campus Ireland
- This topic has 103 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 24 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Panel 1, Group 1 – Stadium
1 Auer & Weber
2 Chaix & Morel
3 Dominique Perrault
4 Jean Nouvel
5 Paul Andreu / Murray O’Laoire
6 Richard RogersPanel 1, Group 2 – Arena / Multipurpose Halls
1 Burke-Kennedy Doyle
2 Bligh Voller Nield / BDP
3 Ellerbe Beckett
4 Von Gerkan Marg + Partners
5 HOK Sport
6 Michael Hopkins
7 Nicholas Grimshaw
8 Scott Tallon Walker
9 Valode & Pistre
10 Wilkinson EyrePanel 2, Group 3 – Tennis / Offices
1 Benson & Forsyth
2 Bucholz McEvoy
3 Derek Tynan
4 Grafton Architects
5 M V Cullinan
6 O’Donnell & Tuomey
7 Shay ClearyPanel 2, Group 4 – Velodrome
1 Caruso St John
2 de Paor Architects
3 Fagan Kelly Lysaght
4 Future Systems
5 Gordon Murray & Alan Dunlop
6 Sauerbruch HuttonPanel 2, Group 5 – Sports Science / Golf
1 de Blacam & Meagher
2 Hassett Ducatez
3 Henchion & Reuter
4 McCullough Mulvin
5 McGarry NiEanaigh
6 Paul Keoghsince architecture should be the catalist to positive change and with the social problems that we have that the opposers to this development are using as their main argument against believing that certain other issues should be the politicans priority why could this not be that catilist to social change and urban/suburban regenerationby by placing the ammenaties in the more underprivliged areas of DUBLIN (the capital and lets face it Iarnrod Eirean are nothing to shout about either)
Interesting article in todays IT where Frank McDonald tallks about how some architects think there is cronyism involved in the panel selection. His article carefully picks around saying this outright for legal reasons.
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/property/2001/0329/prop14.htmIt should be noted that there is limited planning permission for matches at Croke Park. Even if the GAA wanted, all matches couldn’t be played there. That was one of the agreements struck with locals over the redevelopment. And it’s also non-negotiable. Also, Lansdowne is a pitiable stadium – it clearly doesn’t have the capacity for really big games. Even the IRFU know this and have agreed to switch to Stadium Ireland. What might make more sense would be to redevelop Lansdowne Road into something of note. The IRFU will eventually dispose of it and the government should be the buyer. Stadium Ireland is an absolute necessity. The suggestion that it should move from Dublin is beyond laughable.
I fail to see why the suggestion of locating the stadium in a regional city is ‘beyond laughable’. Plenty of people (the rest of the country) travel to Dublin for matches.
There is no particularly compelling reason why Dubliners cannot travel to the 2nd or 3rd cities of the nation to do the same.There are however, compelling reasons to locate some facilities of national importance in cities other than the capital.
Developing strong second or third cities can help take developmental pressure off the capital and strengthen the economy etc. of the smaller cities.
Equally important, NOT putting EVERY national facility in the capital is far more equitable for the majority of the country – i.e. it’s a bit fairer.Plonking the stadium on the M50 is just going to add more traffic to an already very busy road and will just encourage more people to travel everywhere by car. Besides, national roads like the M50 are meant to be used as routes from A – D (i.e. not commuter traffic) and are not really meant to have actual destinations attached to them. That’s why there is always such a fuss about placing out-of-town centres like the ‘Liffey Valley’ adjacent to them.
The entire process of Sports Campus Ireland has not been a straightforward and logical procedure. Government want a design competition (amongst famous design stars and local design stars none of whom know the building types involved), but wants international consortia to compete to design, build, finance and operate. Word is leaked that 7 consortia are competing, but this is not really true. Since this is under EU procurement as a negotiated procedure anything goes as long as it is plausibly construable as fair. In other words, in the best Irish tradition of doing it our way, but explaining it to them as their way. No different than the architect panels – which were advertised as two panels, big and small, but named as five panels (2 big, 3 small) later changed to 3 panels (2 big, 1 small) when it was pointed out that some of the people listed for certain projects had never done anything at all that big and couldn’t now. In a small hilly country don’t go looking for a level playing field. Leave a comma or period out of your qualifications and you can be eliminated if need be. The consortia still don’t have their brief and terms of tender. No one involved seems to understand the magnitude of the projects they are putting forward.
Rory,
My thoughts have nothing to do with having a ‘parocial attitude’.
I have always lived in ‘the Greater Dublin Area’ – (to use the D.T.O.’s (Dublin Transport Office) term). That is, when i’m not living abroad.I have nothing against Dublin.
Still, if everyone agreed with each other – this would be a pretty boring discussion forum!
The big stadium must be in Dublin, the capitol city if the IRFU will host 6 nations matches in it. Rome is not the center of rugby in Italy, but when Italian rugby wanted to build a national rugby stadium in Bologna, they were told such matches must be played in the capitol. For the stadium to be viable it should have as many events as possible – FAI, IRFU, and others. Of course it will work best for very big events and not very well for smaller crowds just like Stade de France.
Yes fantastic, just what Ireland needs and I emphasise the word “Ireland”, not Dublin. How can it be justifed locating this development in Dublin yet again. It already has Croke Park, Home of Irish Gaelic Games, which is been redeveloped at much cost into a 80,000 all seater stadium, Landsdowne Road, Home of Irish Rugby, a large capacity stadium which will without doubt be redeveloped in the near future, Dalymount Park which I believe is been redeveloped and Tolka Park a small yet reasonably well seated stadium, the latter two been average sports stadia but still much better than any stadium you will find anywhere else throughout Ireland. And now in the same city “another” 80,000 all seater stadium to be home to Irish Athletics and Irish Soccer, a 50 metre pool, home to Irish Swimming and also a “smaller” 15,000 all seater arena, much more than any other part of Ireland has, oh and I almost forgot, a Veladrome?, easy to get confused as there cannot be another city of this size in the world, Capital or not, with this amount of venues. People in Ireland really need to realise that Dublin by world standards is a “small” city. Here in Wales when they decided to redevelop the Arms Park into a 72,500 all seater stadium which would be home to both the Welsh Rugby and Soccer Associations they had to knock down the much loved Olympic sized swimming pool. They decided that the peplacement should be built in Swansea, Wales second city along with the announcement that the new Welsh Rugby Academy would be developed in Newport, Wales third city. They stated the reason for these different locations was “It would be unfair to locate all of these within one city espically Cardiff as it already had the newly redeveloped Arms Park and was the home to the Welsh Assembly”. This is nothing special or different it is called “common sense”, looking after the Country of Wales not just its capital, been fair, not forcing people outside of Cardiff to have to commute whenever they want to attend eg; a sporting events, people from Cardiff also have to commute to other parts of Wales. It makes for a much more interesting and diverse country when you have a few “Modern and well developed” cities. Remember people in Cork, Limerick, Galway and everywhere else throughout Ireland “all” pay the same taxes, thus they should get treated equally. How would the people of Dublin feel if they saw all there taxes been spent on new developments in let’s say Limerick City, and Dublin was left crumbling, I should expect they would not be very happy at all. Well this is excatley what is happening to the rest if Ireland. How can anyone justify this espically when the economy is doing so well. The word Capital does not mean “the right to have everything”. It would also be of benefit to Dublin, not just the rest of Ireland if a programme of Decentralisation was begun. Take a look at New Zealand for example. Population is just under three and a half million, smaller than the Republics, it’s largest city is Auckland with a population of approx one million. It’s second city is Wellington also the capital which has a population of approx 800,000 and Christchurch it’s third city which has a population of approx 500,000. When the national sport of Rugby is played they travel throughout the country bringing the sport “to the people”. They are able to do this by developing modern stadia in all the main population centres. Ireland really neesds to wake up to this problem quick for the benefit of the country as a whole. Let’s begin with the construction of a new capital and a new form of Federal Government.
I think Jackie Healy Rae TD may have a say in having it all or some of it moved down to the Bog of Allen or somewhere thus aiding ‘de Wests awake’. You’re right we have far too much in Dublin….which is why they are considering moving the Dail down there too. That way the politicians will not have to travel very far to their place of work.
One thing you can be certain of: the Irish politicians will do what they want. What goes on behind the scenes is the bigger part of the action – and much more interesting than what hits the papers.
During the early part of the peace process successes a few years back there was talk of an Irish Olympic training centre spanning the border. Now there is the national coaching & training centre in Cork. Why does Bertie want all of the other goodies in Dublin?
National stadium is a strange concept that exists only in a few places. Most countries don’t have national stadia, they have important stadia in population centers (markets). You have to be a fairly socialist society (the way Ireland was just a few years ago?) to think of a national stadium in the first place – like France. Centralized control and all of that. It would be reasonable to see market based stadia in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Belfast.
Besides, the Irish are such good Europeans that someday Ireland will be a state and not a State anyway right? What happens to the national stadium then? The US doesn’t have a national stadium and neither do any of the states. Markets have stadia.
Croke is designed to accommodate a running track with removeable seating in one end. The problem with Croke is planning permission limits the number of events. Also transport access is awful. It could handle all of the major events which will ever happen in Ireland…if the GAA want to change.
Then all that is needed is a good 40,000 seat football stadium for that Premier League team that the FAI won’t let into the country. This is what the Dublin market wants. This has to be in the biggest city.
Let’s try to not let this discussion descend into an inane argument of Dublin vs. ‘The Country’.
I have just come back from a weeklong study tour in The Netherlands. That country was a very good example, among other things, of NOT – “putting all your eggs in one basketâ€.
All the cities had obviously received a lot of development in the past and all of them were still busily building away, it seemed as if the whole country was having its own boom time.
Each city pretty much had their own focus: Amsterdam – Finance, culture & tourism. Rotterdam – Shipping and Business. The Hague – Seat of Government. Utrecht – Bit of history, lots of Shopping?! (It did include the countries important EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).
Each city was vibrant and included many attractive and/or interesting parts with great transport facilities. You could also be forgiven for been unsure which city was meant to be the actual capital – if you had to choose between Amsterdam, The Hague, and Rotterdam.
The point being, giving each city some special functions seemed to work well and, indicates that decentralisation can result in having more than just one interesting and busy city.
Two other comments. I was almost brought to tears when a senior civil servant working for public transport in Amsterdam said they were unhappy with public transport provision in their city. This was because “ We only have three boring, grey products to offer people – buses, the trams and the metroâ€!!!
He never mentioned the fact that Amsterdam has also made fantastic provisions for the bicycle, there are good roads accessing just about everywhere, and never minding the fact that both suburban electric rail and high speed rail services frequently enter the city. They also have largish ‘trams’ that can run on suburban lines like a metro or, on-street like a tram – the ‘Sneltram’! They also wanted to have specialised bus services for elderly people, hotel/shopping/airport shuttle buses etc.I also visited the AJAX STADUIM and the area around it. It was highly impressive in terms of architecture, transport access, urban design, and ‘mixed uses’. I’ll say in what ways tomorrow.
The only flaw – apparently they have had to replace the pitch 25 TIMES since about 1997 because of the problems of not enough natural light access to the pitch (the stadium has a roof that can be slid open or shut). Interestingly, the new ‘Millennium Stadium’ in Cardiff City also has a retractable roof and has had problems with light getting to the pitch and, as far as I know has already had to replace it once.The whole Ajax stadium site & situation seemed very commendable.
Proposed architect panels for stadium criticised
By Frank McDonald, Environment Editor
The procedures being used to select architects for the national stadium and sports campus at Abbotstown, Co Dublin, have been described as “very incongruous” by the chief executive of the Dublin International Sports Council.
Mr Jonathan Irwin was particularly critical of the decision by Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd (CSID) to select panels of architects for the elements of the £500 million project when most of the prospective bidders for the contract already had their own.
“Each and every one of the consortiums who have progressed to outline bid stage have retained their own architects, all of whom have international reputations and have designed international sports stadiums around the world”, Mr Irwin told The Irish Times.
“Why on earth would any of these bidders now want to employ a second firm of architects, many of whom have no experience of stadium design and, indeed, how are they expected to even assess the merits of these firms, many of whom they will be totally unfamiliar with?”
Altogether, 13 firms of architects, mainly international, were selected for two sub-panels to design the stadium and multipurpose arena, while a further 19, mainly Irish, were chosen for another panel to design the remaining facilities on the 500acre site.
The selections, made by a jury assembled by the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland, led to a row within the architectural profession after it was revealed that 34 Irish firms had been excluded. Several of them have sought explanations from CSID.
“The whole process is degenerating into a shambles, which is of particular concern given the level of investment involved,” said one of these architects, who did not wish to be identified.
The Office of Public Works, which recently resigned as project manager after differences with CSID, said it had also pointed out that the six consortiums in the contest “would themselves, of necessity, already have architectural expertise as part of their bid”.
As a result, the OPW advised that there was “potential for confusion and conflict” in selecting panels of architects. However, after CSID decided to proceed with the selection, “in the interest of ensuring architectural excellence” the OPW agreed to be represented on the jury.
“We emphasised that CSID should make it clear to bidders that there would be no obligation whatsoever on any bidder to commission any of the architectural practices selected on the three panels and that bidders were free to contract whomever they wished.”
The OPW said it should also be made clear to the six consortiums bidding to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the stadium and other facilities that they “would not be discriminated against if they used practices other than those on the CSID panels”.
It is understood that this was made clear in the bid documentation issued last week by CSID to the rival groups, which include several major British and European consortiums. The bids are due to be submitted by May 31st, after which a final decision will be made.
A spokesperson for CSID yesterday defended its decision to set up the panels even though none of the prospective developers could be compelled to choose architects from the approved lists.
Some weeks ago, CSID wrote to the various consortiums urging them to consider selecting architects from its panels. “More than half of the bidders have chosen from the panels and it’s working extremely well.”Is is clear to everyone now that the CSID are either experiencially or logically challenged? Same old favorites running the show – and will in the Liberties too. Is Templebar such a huge success? Will it be in 10 years? Knowing what you’re doing is different than doing what Bertie tells ya.
The consortia have had their bid documents for a week. Now we will see if anyone wants to play with these rules.
So the GAA and Croke Park are in financial trouble?
Why not give them 300 million, take the stadium and be finished with the whole thing! And open a railway station beside it.
Just a quick note re. use of Croke Park as an athletics stadium. Can’t be done – a running track won’t fit around a GAA pitch (137m x 82m). Has to be a soccer stadium.
Siobh
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
