Lansdowne Road Stadium

Why doesnt the Government become a shareholder in the new stadium and leave its running to the professional bodies. That way the ‘provate sector’ use their ‘expertise’ to profitably run the stadium and the State gets a longterm return on its investment.

Personally I think they should go ahead with Landsdowne Road. As least it already has a public transport link – although I think dear old CIE will need to consider an major upgrade to the DART station here – in tandem with the stadium redeveloment that is, not 15 year later.

Linking in with another thread…..that of LUAS. Surely the logical thing to consider would be for LUAS Line C – the one that is going from Abbey Street to Connolly and now on to the Point – to continue on over the river with one spur coming back up the south docklands area (maybe even a loop line to O’Connell Street) and another spur continuing on to Landsdowne Road via Ringsend. Too logical? Too much like forward planning?

Hooray! Logical choice ahoy… now if only the government can do the same for almost everything else

Is there already a design for this or is it using the original Bertie Bowl plans?

€118 million from the FAI and IRFU, that’s a great deal!!

No corporate sponsorship or selling seats corporately. Sure it’s only the taxpayers money.

The final bill will be double what is anticipated, as and when the fleecers move in.

Personally, I would have prefered Abbotstown.

There now will be the mother of all battles re: planning in Dublin 4. There is NO way they wil be able to accomodatre 65,000 there and they know it.

Watch this space………………………

The Millenium Stadium can accomodate 70,000 and is on a similar sized tight site in downtown Cardiff – why cant Lansdowne Niall?

See too that are are building a new Opera House in Cardiff…..puts Dublin and the bureaucratic thicks here in the ha’penny place. Shame on them all, the fools….robbers of the nation.

Why the Abbotstown preference Niall? I never understood why anyone would want the stadium out there.

Lansdowne is in my opinion a superior location over Abbotstown – I’d way prefer a stadium in walking distance to town and more importantly on a DART line over some field with no transport links at all.

I do see D4 residents in action group not taking this lying down though… sure if we’re spending all that free Taxpayers money why not just compulsory purchase order the lot of them – what a few €Bn here and there…

Whay do I prefer Stadium Ireland?

1) It won’t have the same planning objections or local vested snobs as Lansdowne

2) It has the space

3) It is a bold statement that our country/capital or its sporting click are not obssesed with Dublin 4 rugby. By that token, why not Cork?

and importantly

5) IT’S CHEAPER!!!!!!!

Yes, Lansdowne has the Dawrt, big deal, Abbotstown has Ashtown and other stations and the M50, but it’s not D4! Ever hear of buses?

The mother of all planning battles and hold-ups are now going to happen in D4 and it will cost an absolute fortune, which taxpayers not the IRFU or FAI are going to fork out for. In the meantime where do we play our matches cause it won’t be Croke Park.

Watch this space……………………………

All of the reasons given for Abbotstown are based on the ecconomic argument. Site being cheaper, also cheaper to get through planning etc. I personally think the argument is flawed and does not standup when total cost is considered.
There is tons of info available explaining why there is a trend away from out of town stadia. A lot of this is based on ecconomics and if anyone has seen Stadium Australia recently you will know just how bleak a new stadium can look 99% of the time.

But be that as it may, I wanted to know if anyone actually felt that the Abbotstown proposal would give the punter a better experience. Judged on this criteria Landsdown is streets ahead in my book but I wanted to know how in terms of use, a case could be made for Abbotstown. For example, in the US people have been known to throw parties in the parking lots on match day and people go there even without tickets. Or is there a unique and wonderful experience that will be provide by the architecture that could not be done on a tighter site?

On a more gloomy note – what’s stopping IRFU from developing he landsdown site as high yield apartments, pocketing the cash, and moving out to a free stadium in abottstown at taxpayers expense?

Build the National Stadium in Cork??? That sounds waaay to good an idea – what are the chances in this, the most centralised decentralised country. What would the D4ites say if they not only had to leave their backgarden – but Dublin itself to see a game?!?

The National Conf Center in the UK is in Birmingham – so why does our National Stadium necessarily have to be in Dublin (like everything else) – god knows Limerick or Cork CC would kill to have that kind of a project come their way.

Yes, d d Dallas, why not Cork!

From above
“On a more gloomy note – what’s stopping IRFU from developing he landsdown site as high yield apartments, pocketing the cash, and moving out to a free stadium in abottstown at taxpayers expense?”

– It would kill them to move from their cosy set-up in D4, and the drinking dens associated with it, much like RTE, who wouldn’t dream moving elsewhere and pocketing a fortune from selling their land at Montrose, clearing their debts and maybe making a half-decent drama or comedy and selling it for export. It would kill the IRFU to move out of D4, and they are only contributing a fraction of the cost

Great deal if you can get it and it’s the taxpayers who get screwed as usual.

BTW, the earliest this would be ready is 2008/2009. The Height would have to be significantly extended and an unholy row will brek out, so my guess will be 2012 and double the quoted price.

Na ….I bet it won’t be built at all…..we are useless in this country….simple as that…we slag off the Brits (and their arrogant and brash personalities), the Germans (and their cool, cold steely personalities) The Americans, the French…..ecetera ….ecetera…but it’s official ….Let’s say it loud and be proud ….’We are Irish and we are useless’…..(except we make good lackies for the servile plenitudes of other races abroad)
Our Taoiseach sums our nation up with his dithering stuttering nervousness…..the right man for the right job….don’t expect anything less of us folks……
Even however if it is built by some some miraculous miracle …I bet it will take years and years at some astronimical cost ….and I bet it will never ever be fully finished…… and I bet it will look cheap and mediocre…….such is the apathy and amatuerism of all here.

The height problem could be got round by sinking the stadium into ground. Coul;d be a drainage disaster but I think it’s been done elsewhere.

It has been done. The Stade de France is built like this to reduce the visual height. The new Wembly pitch will be 4 metres lower than the previous. Imagine this adds somwhat to the costs though

I think the Lansdowne Road is the correct choice.

It has to be in Dublin somewhere as its central, I can’t see Ulster rugby fans being to impressed if the stadium was in Cork. If it were built in any other central location like Athlone or Galway getting there by train is a problem.

Lansdowne’s greatest asset is its location. The atmosphere going to and from it is fantastic and it is what so many sporting tourists love about it. Walking from the centre of the city down to the ground is great the streets are alive something I couldn’t see happening out at Abbotstown.

All the money its going to cost could not recreate the Lansdowne atmosphere out at Abbotstown. It doesn’t matter what it costs its the right choice.

As someone who commutes to Lansdowne from Drogheda for games I don’t see Niall’s point on “D4 bashing” part of the charm of the game is the Lansdowne walk – i.e. the stroll (and its pubs) from the city centre – the fans love it (both Irish and International) and is part of the day out (both soccer and rugby). Niall – the FAI also wanted Lansdowne road so its not just an IRFU thing

Sitting in traffic just to experience the game and no more out at Abbotstown would be no fun at all. The right decision was made – ask any fan.

P.S. RTE does a great job given their limited budget. Look at TV3 – live from the glamourous environs of Ballymount Industrial estate and the poxy job that they do given the (unlimited) pockets of Granada and CanWest.

(Although refuses to broadcast matches in stereo because it costs too much, might change with licence fee increase though)

One of the great aspects about Landsdowne Rd is the great image it conveys internationally of Dublin, located slap bang in the centre of Victoriana, what a beautiful place it is.

Enough of the the D4 begrudgery. A nasty characteristic of this country. Its a stunning part of the city and conveys a great image to attending forgien fans and televisually from blimp cams, or in RTE’s case crane cams.

Utterly unrepresentative of the city as a whole of course but sure we’re entitled to some rose tinting.

no offence to cork but it is out of the way for everybody else in the country, even though i wouldn’t mind going down, it’s a great city. However i personally think it should be in the centre of the country and not in Dublin just because,well sure it has everything else and it’s convient for a select number of people. I don’t see the problem of having it near Athlone. Out in the country so there is ample parking. Athlone itself is one of the focal point of the government scheme to improve the country, Also i don’t accept that it’s hard to get to. From where. It’s on the main Dublin-Galway route. There is a bus from belfast and while i don’t know about the south of the country i’m sure it’s not that difficult. The problem is that if you don’t use publc transport or organise a coach then drinking a few pints will be gone. so what. Can we not enjoy a football match without drink and then go on the piss afterwards. personally i would use the public transport and go for a few pints. it means drink and for those who drive, parking is cheaper.

Lansdowne road, while a beautiful old stadium is not suitable , why not leave it intact as we in ireland seem to be protecting everything over 20 years old anyway, and keep it for club games, or smaller international games….just an idea…i liked the idea of changing it into apartments… prime land in d4…how much money would they make out of that!!!!!

Do you really believe that Athlone can handle 50,000 Celtic supporters, like Seville is doing at the moment. Or do you believe that any state or semi-state company can handle the thousands of people traveling to games. I am sorry but they can’t do that as it is. The stadium has to be in a major city – ie. Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick… I believe Landsdown is the ideal spot (which is pretty much proven over the years). Anyway you can’t just leave Landsdown in its current state for club games, its the oldest rugby stadium in the world and needs upgrading.

And by the way the ‘select’ number of people living in Dublin, were not selected by anyone. They choose to live there and represent quite a large proportion of the population. 😉

i don’t think that putting it in dublin would be logical for the rest of the population. as for a backwards view of it…well what’s backwards about wanting something away from a city that can’t cater for it’s own population let alone 65,000+ fans..
athlone is an example because it’s in the centre of the country..i would love it in galway because then i woludn’t have to travel and could drink myself senseless here afterwards but it’s not practical to have it in galway. the government is trying to promote the use of the country’s other cities and large towns… Athlone is growing..much i believe is because it’s becomming yet another commuter town for dublin. and the advent of a stadium would rapidly increase it’s capacity to cater for such crowds.i would suggest that you might take the blinker’s off for maybe a minute and think of the country as a whole instead of your little area.
yes lansdowne road does need improvement but really, is that a valid argument for suggesting that the new national stadium be located there????

Sorry Fin,
Got a bit carried away. Again I will say that the stadium needs to be in a major city. And I don’t understand your perspective. I would see Galway as being a much more practical venue than Athlone. It is equally as central as Dublin (geographically anyway) and is capable of providing transoprt, accomodation and enterainment for hoards of travelling fans, as well as offering plenty of tourist attractions for foreign visitors.

However I still believe landsdown is the prime location.

while having in the cities would of course be my first choice buying the land in a city would be unbelievable. i actually don’t know who owns lansdowne….hmmmm! but i’m thinking that aspect mainly. i do take your point on the transport. mind you all public transport in this country is rubbish so it’s going to be a problem. the reason i don’t take to the lansdowne theory is that it’s land is worth a fortune and if developed could provide a lot of money towards the building of a new one. it’s location and the journey to it is excellent but it wouldn’t capture my imagination like a brand new stadium in a new location would. i basically want a stadium built and in the shortest time possible. anywhere would do and i know you and most of the country would agree with me there. i am also in favour of the 80,000 .. why should we downgrade…it would pay for itself..our national teams are doing very well and so it would attract that size of a crowd…ahhhhh! good auld ireland….

OK look at a map of Ireland – where do all the rail lines lead to – Dublin. Where does the main roads in the country run to – Dublin. What is the capital of Ireland and has over 1/3 of its population – you’ve guessed it Dublin. My point is the infrastructure is just not there to support putting the stadium elsewhere in the country.

I suppose that as a rugby fan I have sentimental attachment to Lansdowne – but it really is a very handy place to get to. It takes 20 minutes to walk to from Stephen’s Green. As for building apartments etc on its site – does Dublin really need more souless apartments in D4 that you or I can never afford. No I don’t think so.

Do we need an 80,000 seat venue at Lansdowne – for maybe Ireland V England once every 2 years. But it’s no way near full now for Ireland V Italy (capacity 48,000) another 6 Nations games so I think 65,000 is enough (eircom park was only going to be 45,000 which the FAI were happy with). If you get the chance go to the Millenium Stadium in Cardiff and see what that is like (its practically in the middle of the city) and compare it with out of town stadia elsewhere.

Do you think the GAA would have built their stadium anywhere other than Croke park?

Build it and build it at Lansdowne!

sorry but you made no argument why it should be at lansdowne except that you like it!!!

and as for putting it in dublin because it is the only place with the infrastructure….that’s daft…. what about the 2/3 of the population????

all of our “infrastructure” is centred on transporting the population to and from the capital from other major centres around the country…

you saw the chaos last year when dublin supporters attempted to travel in huge numbers to semple stadium in thurles.

ha,ha… from what i can remember that is because they couldn’t find thurles..athlone is easier to find for you poor unfortunates….imagine having to travel more than a few miles to a match….my god!! the world would stop.

all i’m saying is that instead of crowding an already overcrowded and inadequate infrastructure in dublin because to be fair it’s not great either, somewhere outside might be an option. i have no idea where abbotstown is having not spent much time in dublin but from the talk it’s on the outskirts, that is the logical choice if, and it looks more than likely, we are forced to have it in dublin. i know the arguments of the great walk to lansdowne, and yes i have traveled to matches that way too, but so what…. that is not an intregal part…we need not plan a stadium around it… having the craic is not dependent on where you are but on what you make yourself…..

Because you’ll have great craic sitting in the M50 traffic jam?

welcome to going to a match from anywhere else other than dublin…however in my case it’s the n4/n7 traffic jam……..

what you all don’t see is that people have been doing this for years while you just get the bus in from whatever suburb you live in…and as soon as it becomes a bother for you to get to a match you complain…. wake up and smeel the roses lads…..everyone of these options are going to be greeted with the same problems…just get it built

The Athlone/A City argument is the exact same as Abbotstown/Lansdowne one. Realistically Bertie wouldn’t mind it in Abbottstown as the man has never spent a real day in his life in our fair capital – he knows nothing of what it’s really like trying to get around the place and what it feels like to spend 30 minutes travelling such a small distance. Sitting int he back of a tinted Merc while your driver speedas and the Gardai wave you on is hardly being down with your people.
If any minister actually had to experience transport as we do (instead of the pleasant stroll from Sandymount to Merrion Sq) then there would be a massive increase in spending in that area – and I think the Stadium would be built in Lansdowne.
I don’t think having craic is just what you make of it yourself – the location plays an enormous role. How many people go abroad to other cities for a weekend for a match? Locating it miles away from any airport or rail system would be madness and definitely stop people coming. some hassle just isn’t worth it.

As for building in Cork or Limerick… no minister would sanction that, as good an idea as that is (hello – national spatial strategy???) nearly every project ever built in this country has revolved around Dublin – we seem intent onstuffing all four million of us into one little pocket on the east coast.
If the Stadium did go South or West – would that not provide a motivation to actually develop and improve the transport links to these places??? Which would also bring secondary benefits. True one third of the country lives in Dublin – but two thirds do not.

yeah, but the other two thirds of the country dont live within 20 miles of each other……50% plus of the population live in leinster, building it outside of dublin is at least debateable, building it outside of leinster is just ridiculous.

50%…… don’t know where you got that stat.
i believe there is 1.5 m in the six counties and as a national stadium would cater for the whole isle then how would define 50% living in leinster… and just as a footnote..last time i checked westmeath was in leinster

This is an archtectural site and the point has just been made that your environment has no bearing on your state of mind….

….So what does an architect do?

fair point but all the arguments were about this “famous” walk from dublin centre to lansdowne…and the pubs encountered on the way…in the states people park in the car park and take out cans and drink there…fair enough they may have the weather sometimes but as an example it shows no matter what people are going to enjoy themselves as they are there primarily for the game

and d_d_ made a good point as regards the spacial strategy…limerick has shown albeit to a limited degree that it can cope with major matches with munster playing in thomond …
the idea of having down in one of the regional cities is gone but if it did then the investment in that particular city would be profound…. it’s infrastructure would have to be upgraded and then that in itself would bring more investment etc…. if the were serious about their “big idea” then they would think of locating it elsewhere but as i said it’s never going to happen.

how and ever, back to it’s position in dublin, on the outskirts would be preferable i would think to the rest of the country let alone the residents of lansdowne(apart from the publican’s) as we wouldn’t need to go into the centre of dublin at all…this would free up traffic- well a bit anyway- in the centre.

Here are my thoughts on using the American model of having stadiums away from the cities…

They have eight lanes of highway going to and from the venue, easily catering for the hoards of fans (Ireland still doesn’t have a completed motorway). They have numerous stadia like hockey, baseball, football, running tracks etc… all in the one area (whereas Ireland might get a watered down version of a second rate stadium designed for a second rate club team in England). Also the Americans remove the fans from built up areas due to the violent clashes during and after the games. Plus I don’t see how drinking ‘Lyndon Village’ in the car park before the game could be seen as a good thing. Anyway leaving behind the issues of travel and traffic and Americans knacker-drinking in car parks.

Lansdowne has a character that will be very difficult to surpass anywhere and I don’t believe this is entirely due to the pubs or drinking etc… I have been going to Lansdowne since I was a nipper (probably 10 or so). Some of it is to do with the layout of the stadium but it is mostly to do with the area and the way the crowd comes together through lanes and side streets and off the dart. Also, the impact on traffic is not horrendous due to the DART.

that’s true…and i have been going since about the same age too. has anyone projected what the 65,000 stadium would look like on lansdowne site?
and just cos i think it’s fun, why should we have 2 stadiums of large capacities in the city? seeing that we as tax payer’s are paying for both of them do we not have the right to say( and not the gaa council) what should be played in them…i know it’s totally off the topic but hey…
but speaking of the character of landsdowne… would this character not be lost in regards to the layout of the stadium if it’s taken down and rotated???
and where do we play international’s until the new one is built and in all honesty that could take years..i don’t relish going to england or for that matter scotland for our international games either in rugby or football. we would be the laughing stock of europe…going to a foreign country to play our “home” games…

Drinking in a car park is (a) illegal and (b) were you at Ireland V Argentina last year? It pissed like a monsoon for the entire game and people were delighted to get indoors to have a few whiskeys after the game. Why have 2 large stadia? Because one of them is a closed shop?

Isn’t it more civilised that we can walk to the game from the centre of our capital city?

Fin – the decision about what where to play in coming years is going to have to be made regardless of whether Lansdowne is out of action for rebuilding or not – UEFA very soon won’t be letting the soccer team use temporary seating, thus reducing the capacity of the ground and the FAIs gate revenue dramatically.

There is an argument for saying that the FAI should help either Bohs or Shels complete Dalymount or Tolka to arount 15 – 20,000 and use that for match as a (very) temporary measure while Lansdowne is redevelopped.

The Rugby team is different – but they could atlernate matches between Belfast, Limerick and possibly Cork.

Both of these measure would mean both the IRFU and the FAI would feel the pinch for a while – but if they leave the matter run and run it will come to a head at some point.

I personally think that redeveloping Lansdowne into a 65,000 stadium is the best option. The importance of the rail line cannot be overstated too, and there would be scope for redeveloping the station (to where the current West stand is) along with the stadium.

“Why have 2 large stadia? Because one of them is a closed shop?”
yes but why? we all paid for it. discrimination is against the law now as far as i am aware!

“Isn’t it more civilised that we can walk to the game from the centre of our capital city?”

i like this one!!! very good. how could you define that as more civilised? what is civilised? going en-masse to a sport where you want to give the other team a good trouncing.
sorry i couldn’t resist… i get your point about it but it still forces fans into the city centre there clogging it up more and then trying to find parking and not get ripped off( by the way your parking charges up there are crazy ). not able to drink because of the whole driving thing. and then fighting to get home through the traffic again. hmmmmm! sounds appealing.

if i lived up there i might have the same opinion as that but open your minds too the possibility that maybe this isn’t a great system. i do agree that the dart is brilliant to get to the matches. but isn’t there supposed to be a luas out to the bertie bowl??? as i said earlier i have no idea where abbotstown is so i don’t know if that is better i do think it’s not worse. it’s not going to be our choice anyway so basically it’s going to be to which politican owns the land.

do we all agree that we need a new stadium at least?

OK, we take it as given that we need a second stadium, because whether or not we need it is a whole different argument.

Whether we like it or not, a very large section of the Irish rugby public lives very close to the current site. We may not like the way they talk, or dress, or the cars they drive – but they do live in D4, not Abbotstown!

Fans travelling from outside Dublin to matches get to see the city aswel and enjoy the craic around town. Instead of driving as far as the M50, seeing the match and then driving home again – lets face it, even if it were legal, the Irish wouldn’t drink in car parks. And the govt is not going to build/sanction loads of pubs in the middle of nowhere that will only be used 15 times a year.

The DART is a piece of infrastructure that a) already exists, and b) has a much greater capacity that either bus or tram. (but of course they don’t have to be mutually exclusive! – The Stade de France is accesible by RER (similar to the DART), metro and tram).

Everyone has seemed to forget to mention the atmosphere of the leadup to Landsdowne Road – theres notheing like it. Walking from town there is a road filled with people enjoying the atmosphere before the match. Every pub is cramped with people and its great to see the supporters mingling together before the big match. In my opinion it is this walk up to Lansdowne that really makes the day. No matter what match soccer or rugby theres always people in different jerseys together.

The stadium is being renovated to seat more SUPPORTERS and it is these supporters that go to these matches loyally and indeed want to have a good time. Matches in Landsdowne aren’t simply about winning or losing, they are about the atmosphere and having a good time – without this there wouldn’t be a need for a bigger stadium as there wouldn’t be enough supporters to fill it! So where would we be going if we set up anywhere else – especially Abbotstown? Lansdowne has it all.

And as for the D4 “snobs” rejecting the proposal of a new upgraded stadium – being from Ballsbridge myself and though I can see peoples point in rejections I honestly think the majority will approve of the NEW, MORE ADVANCED stadium – afterall what “snobs” could resist?!

😉

Originally posted by Danielle
Everyone has seemed to forget to mention the atmosphere of the leadup to Landsdowne Road – theres notheing like it. Walking from town there is a road filled with people enjoying the atmosphere before the match. Every pub is cramped with people and its great to see the supporters mingling together before the big match. In my opinion it is this walk up to Lansdowne that really makes the day. No matter what match soccer or rugby theres always people in different jerseys together.

that was mentioned.

Originally posted by Danielle
Matches in Landsdowne aren’t simply about winning or losing, they are about the atmosphere and having a good time

what absolute nonsense. why play sport at all if it’s not about winning. what contributes to having a good time is your team winning.

Originally posted by Danielle
without this there wouldn’t be a need for a bigger stadium as there wouldn’t be enough supporters to fill it! So where would we be going if we set up anywhere else – especially Abbotstown? Lansdowne has it all.

if we were winning every game we played then there would be the crowd. i would admit playing the likes of faroe islands and other such teams won’t pull the same amounts as france but i would suggest that when we play france croke park could be filled twice over with people wanting to see it. all this is abitrary as the decision was made ages ago.

http://www.irishrugby.ie/newspage/65026.html

Looks good too…..looks ”futuristic”….now go and build it and hump the neighbours.

A few more images ….http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34

Landsdowne rebuilding cost rises by €70m
From:ireland.com
Monday, 17th October, 2005

The cost of redeveloping Landowne Road will be just over €70 million more than estimated.
Minister for Sport John O’Donoghue today unveiled the final plans for the 50,000-seater stadium – to be used primarily by Ireland’s rugby and soccer teams.

But at €365 million, the cost of redevelopment is more than the €292 million originally envisaged. Philip Browne, chairman of the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company, said: “This is a very different stadium to the one which we looked at in our original feasibility study.”

Mr O’Donoghue said the arena would be a superb modern sports ground. “This is another major piece of sporting infrastructure in the city of Dublin which will be enjoyed by all Irish people.

“We can be proud of this imaginative and attractive design. It is a superb modern structure and one which I hope will come to be an icon for Irish rugby and soccer followers,” the Minister said.

The stadium will be made up of continuous curved stands enclosing all four sides of the ground. The south, east and west stands will have four tiers, with the bottom and top levels holding most spectators.

The north stand will sweep down to one low level of seating, allow plenty of sunlight onto the playing surface and minimising the impact on residents close to that end of the ground.

Mr Browne said: “We believe the team has taken on board many of the concerns and have addressed them without compromising their design. They have also built in a great deal more facilities than we originally had hoped for. This in turn has given us a wider range of funding opportunities.”

Some 10,000 seats will be set aside on the second tier for premium ticket holders while the third tier will cater for around 1,300 corporate visitors with hospitality facilities.

The ground will provide better disabled access, press facilities for up to 300 and improved player facilities for both home and away teams.

It is hoped work on the stadium will begin in early 2007 and that it could be ready to host major soccer and rugby games in 2009. The existing stadium will host matches during 2006.

But the residents’ association in the exclusive Dublin 4 area where the stadium is situated could be a major hurdle to securing permission for the building.

The stadium is being co-developed by the Irish Rugby Football Union and the Football Association of Ireland and grant-aided by the State.

If the planning process If the planning process stays on schedule, then the work is expected to begin in 2007 with completion by 2009. The international rugby and football teams may play at Croke Park during that time after the GAA scrapped its controversial Rule 42 in April.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/6533104?view=Eircomnet

I think it looks attractive

Looks nice, but what’s forcing the lower roof/smaller capacity stand where the north terrace is now? Is the site constrained behind the north terrace? (I sit in the upper west, near the north terrace end but you can’t really see ‘over’ it to see if there’s something stopping expansion there.

Looks great but I dont see it happening, not without a prolonged fight anyway. After all the residents of Landsdowne Road have deeper pockets then those on Jones’s Road.

@crestfield wrote:

Looks great but I dont see it happening, not without a prolonged fight anyway. After all the residents of Landsdowne Road have deeper pockets then those on Jones’s Road.

maybe so but…you cant help thinking that when then compare what is there presently to what is propsed even they will soften… well maybe a little bit!

i think it looks great. hopefully a nice quick 2 month decision 🙂

I like the design but it suffers from a very serious problem – there is practically no increase in capacity. It’s been impossible for general rugby fans to get tickets for any of the home internationals or the Autumn tour games for years (excluding the non-competition Autumn matches against minnow teams). For those outside of the inner circle with ties to high-up club blazers or without access to the corporate channels, the redevelopment means nothing in practical terms. I’d rather be able to get tickets to watch Ireland from a crappy stadium than be able to admire a nice new stadium on television.

This is such a serious flaw that I have very little enthusiasm for the new stadium despite actively following rugby since my childhood. An idea I had hoped would have been entertained was to preserve some terracing in the new stadium. Ok. it would have been out of bounds for soccer internationals but even 10m of terracing on front of all the seating would have, I estimate, have increased the capacity by about 10,000 for rugby internationals. This would also ensured that the special Lansdowne atmosphere created by the mass of standing supporters would be preserved and would have made Lansdowne unique among modern rugby stadia and would have given the IRFU the chance to offer some cheapish tickets.

So, it’s great news for the well connected who can get tickets – they’ll have more comfort watching the matches – but it does nothing to expand rugby’s appeal by allowing more of the public or general rugby support the chance to experience the top games. A missed opportunity.

how many proposed designs has that stadium gone through since plans were announced to do it up? i do like the one above.

I think the site is constrained by the DART line behind the North terrace.

The capacity is a concern, but IF Croke Park stays available, there’s little need for two large stadia in Dublin, so one 80K and one 50K might make some sense. If Croke Park is closed off again by the GAA once Lansdowne Rd. is finished, this makes less sense.

I just wonder how much it’ll ACTUALLY cost. Hard to believe the Millennium stadium in Cardiff (c. 80K capacity with a sliding roof) was built for under £170 million (sterling).

Why don’t they build the stadium outside of Dublin and the suburbs? These areas already have traffic problems, so why add to it? We all know that the nearby residents are going to complain, which I don’t mind as long as they have good reason to, which is going to raise the cost AGAIN. So they could save a lot of time and money if they build it somewhere else.

@murphaph wrote:

Looks nice, but what’s forcing the lower roof/smaller capacity stand where the north terrace is now? Is the site constrained behind the north terrace? (I sit in the upper west, near the north terrace end but you can’t really see ‘over’ it to see if there’s something stopping expansion there.

The IRFU are believed to own quite a number of the houses on the Lansdowne Road end of the ground – apparently they were buying the houses up until the time that property prices started to go mental. There are relatively few houses at that end of the ground (and therefore relatively few potential objectors), though quite a number at the Havelock Square/Vavasour Square end. Perhaps this is influencing the design of the stadium?

It will also be interesting to see just how they deal with the railway track – the level crossing, etc.

Building out-of-town stadia went out in the eighties. It’s a terrible idea as the pre/post match atmosphere is generally dire. Many people drive so cannot drink and just disappear after the game; even if you don’t drive there is little reason to hang around a carpark near a motorway. Even in the US – the land of the automobile – all the new baseball stadia are being built in “downtown” areas in recognition of the mistake that was made in seventies when the stadia moved out of the cities. No matter how many pubs, restaurants, etc. you build into the stadium complex, it could never compete with the hundreds of pubs, restaruants, shops, hotels, guesthouses within walking distance of Lansdowne Rd. It’s one great thing about Dublin that we have two stadia within walking distance of the centre. It’s what makes Dublin possibly the most popular destinations in Europe for rugby.

The capacity is a concern, but IF Croke Park stays available, there’s little need for two large stadia in Dublin, so one 80K and one 50K might make some sense. If Croke Park is closed off again by the GAA once Lansdowne Rd. is finished, this makes less sense.

It’s a nice idea but it just won’t happen. Even if the GAA were willing, I can’t see the IRFU handing over 50% of their revenue to allow an extra 25% watch the match. I can’t imagine the IRFU only using Lansdowne Rd for three rugby matches every two years (Italy on alternative years and a match against a minnow in the Autumn). For every other match there is huge demand for more tickets.

@jimg wrote:

It’s a nice idea but it just won’t happen. Even if the GAA were willing, I can’t see the IRFU handing over 50% of their revenue to allow an extra 25% watch the match. I can’t imagine the IRFU only using Lansdowne Rd for three rugby matches every two years (Italy on alternative years and a match against a minnow in the Autumn). For every other match there is huge demand for more tickets.

I think the capacity of Croker is about 84K, which would be an increase of 68% over Lansdowne. That probably would be worth upgrading for. However, it probably only makes sense if the GAA reciprocate and move matches with attendances less than 50K from Croke Park to Lansdowne.

An interesting idea – would the GAA want to play away though?
Saw the other week the Ladies final in Croke Park had but a scattering of people on the lower tiers – then again they wouldn’t want to host a final at least anywhere else which is understandable…

Just on a point mentioned on the Aer Lingus HQ thread by murphaph – what is to happen to the (surely this time ;)) fondly held tudor-syled house nestling in the corner of the ground? Yet another presumably protected house getting in the way. It’ll have to be swept away outright, but I wonder if there are plans to ‘keep’ it for use elsewhere?

Would it not be appropriate for the Wanderers pavillion to return to the clubs newish home on Merrion Rd?

A tough one to move given its finish

you know it really is a joke, here is something of national interest and importance and a few gobs$£”tes are probably going to hold it up for years. Who knows what thrilling and convinving arguaments and lies and hype they will create. How many millions are they going to cost the state (i,e you and me) so they can congratulate each other on causing pain misery and expense for others! and sure if their campaign fails sure atleast theyll have tried! im sure theyll be complaining about the huge increase in capacity! when in fact it will be down 5000 for rugby but up 17000 for soccer, but still overall not a huge increase! theyll say it will overpower the area, isnt appropriate, is to modern for the area, theyll probably want it built it in mock red brick and it should have a slate roof! And it will probably be half the hight of liberty hall ladies and gentlmen, liberty hall! That collosal skysraper in town everything else here gets compared to when its over two stories! Have got to say it looks damn impressive, im more than impressed. I just get so wound up here when i think of all the waste of time and money and self interest that holds projects up. Just read earlier Lidl said they were basicly fed up with the amount of appeals etc holding up and blocking their attempts at expansion. And who makes most of these complaints? the competitiors they shouldnt even be entertained! RGDATA objected to a Lidl being set up in a retail park saying it contravened planning regualtions, funny that one of their member supermarkets has a supermarket in a nearby retail park! bloody hypocrits! Its about time that this crap was done away with and the interest of the majority were served! anyway was just thinking theyll probably be organising protests etc to the new stadium all 10 or so residents, why doesnt anyone who cares for Irish sport go down and organise their own protest and outvoice those backward pr*£”s! Their probably salivating at the thought of their own importance now that they get the chance to scupper such a vital piece if infrastructure!

The redevelopment plan for Lansdowne Road Stadium envisages the creation of a modern stadium, which, on completion, will have an all seated capacity of 50,000.

The 50,000 compares with the existing Lansdowne Road Stadium which has an all seated capacity, as required for competitive Soccer, of 36,000 and a mixed standing and seated capacity of 49,000 for Rugby. All seating in the new stadium will be under cover of a roof; however, the roof will not extend over the pitch. The planning application will be lodged by Christmas 2005. A one-year period has been allocated for due process on the planning application, during which time detail design and procurement will progress. Construction proper, depending on planning, is scheduled to commence in the first quarter of 2007 and to finish in the second quarter of 2009. The existing stadium will be available for matches during 2006.

http://www.irish-architecture.com/news/2005/000205.html

RGDATA make my blood boil, arrrggghh…..just thinking about them……conspiring

Half of the ‘locals’ are people who will have moved into the area in the last decade, mostly into the apartment complexes near Ballsbridge. How anyone living there with an ounce of common sense can think that this beautiful piece of construction will detract from the area that currently has the world’s shittiest international football stadium. I hate going to Landsdowne now-the charm of the place wore off on me years ago-it’s old and decrepit.

@murphaph wrote:

RGDATA make my blood boil, arrrggghh…..just thinking about them……conspiring
I hate going to Landsdowne now-the charm of the place wore off on me years ago-it’s old and decrepit.

I hate the place too, as well as the RDS – old and decrepit , and the Point Depot – old and decrepit glorified warehouse.

While I think the design is really good, I believe the site is too small. The existing site should be sold and then they should buy the former Irish Glass site just 5 mins walk away. There you will have plenty of room to build a stadium far bigger than 50,000 which I would consider small seeing how popular tickets would be for Ireland games.
Also the stadium on the Irish Glass site wouldn’t be right on top of the locals unlike Lansdowne and there would be spaces for parking etc too.

there should have been some increase in capacity – even if it meant moving the stadium to another location (the docks, or the irish bottle plant site) – 65,000 would probably do it. It looks nice, but i’ll probably only ever see the outside of it.

the idea of having some terracing is an interesting one – schalke 04 in germany have a terraced section in their new ground which can be easily converted to seats when they play in european matches (where terracing is verboten). Given that LR is a joint rugbysoccer stadium maybe something similar could have been considered. There’s no ban on terracing for rugby matches, and it does add to the atmosphere – an opportunity missed by the IRFU there.

Interestingly one of the residents interviewed in the Times today makes the point that the new stadium will be like having Liberty Hall in her back garden. She pointed out that, with boundary changes, the stadium will be as little as 15m from her home.

I like the new stadium. Its a very clever design and very eyecatching. If I read right the ‘dip’ or undulating roof is a product of the desire among the architects to meet residents concerns about overshadowing. And the finished product willbe all the better and more distinctive for it. Frank McDonalds piece is quite informative. The picture on the front of the times doesnt sell it for a minute though….at least not to leafy D4 residents. But as one other woman pointed out the alternative to the stadium is residential development and observing the shenanigans at Jury’s that means high density high rise stuff. I think most people will be practical in the end although I think a 2 month planning process is a little too optimistic

The illustrations looks great.

How often are two games >50,000 taking place on the same day in Dublin?
Why are all large games not just played in Croke Park with some smaller GAA played in Lansdowne? Time to bury the hatchet and the childishness.

According to press reports in January 2004 smaller GAA matchs would be played at new Lansdowne as it was’nt econoical to hold certain matches at Croke Park. I don’t know if policy has changed now.
Sounds strange, but stadium economics are mad, just look at Leinsters decision to rent the RDS rather then use Lansdowne as it works out more profitible.

The idea of all large matchs being played at Croke Park maybe practical but from psycological problem of the IRFU and FAI having “borrow” the GAA ground for its big matchs.

Reading McDonald’s piece today reminded of how highly Croke Park is thought. of. I have never understood the admiration for this building. Sure enough it serves its purpose very well, but as regards contributing to the sky line or being astetically pleaseing on the outside I just see a load of concrete. Fine piece of strctural engineeing but can’t see the architure.

On the other hand I think the Lansdowne design looks very pleaseing.

I think the new Lansdowne Road proposal with its undulating curvy ”organic” like roof makes Croker look kinda dated.

After an intial positive reaction to the new proposed stadium i’m having some ‘aftershock’ of disappointment. The design lacks ambition. In order to pacify residents they’ve gone to the other extreme and produced in effect a three sided stadium. The north end will leak atmosphere from the stadium like a sieve. To an extent Croke Park has the same issue but at least there hill16 is of significant heigth and it is a terrace which mitigates against any loss of atmosphere.

There should also be a terrace in lansdowne for the rugby games. Swapping the present North terrace for a mickey mouse northern stand is a mistake.

Its unlikely the GAA will want to use this stadium – why would they pay the FAI/IRFU when they have an ample and superior stadium themselves. A half full croke park is better for the GAA than a full lansdowne they would have to pay for, At the same time the FAI/IRFU will constantly find themselves under pressure from supporters to use Croker for the big games.

Finally i can’t shake the conviction that Dublin doesn’t need two large expensive stadia. I am convinced that time would have been better spent coming to final agreement on the use of Croke Park by all three organisations. Thereby saving the tax payer millions and having increased access to all sports while also generating more revenue for the GAA (all of which is pumped into local communities).

I believe that Dublin needs 2 stadiums or even more (or why not develop a secondary multipurpose stadium outside Dublin) If Croke Park was solely used for all field games (Gaa Football, Hurling, Soccer, Rugby) it’s playing surface would greatly suffer. Also there are times too when major games in either of the 4 field sports clash. If ye look at Scotland which has about the same population as ourselves but yet only 2 field sports (Soccer, Rugby) it has an ample amount of decent stadia that are reasonably used. Glasgow has Celtic Park , Ibrox and Hampden Park and not forgetting Murrayfield in Edinburgh as well as Hibs and Hearts grounds

The Croke Park surface can handle the pressure – its been designed for it – the schedule this summer has been particularly punishing and there’s not a mark on the pitch. Going forward the GAA plan to have fewer matches in HQ and more in the provinces (due to lower attendances and not the surface) so its ability to hold more games would improve even further.

With all due respect to Scotland they don’t need all those stadia either, it has a population over 10 times that of Dublin, a soccer league that people actually go and watch and none of the stadia are of the quality of Croke Park or the proposed Lansdowne road (in fact many of them are falling down). Its not a good example and not one i’d follow.

….just to add the population of Scotland is about 5 million and is due to fall below that ….the population of the island of Ireland is 5.5 million and continuely growing. Lansdowne Road will be enthusiastically used when redeveloped just as the magnificant Croke Park is . It will not be a white elephent .

…..and Celtic Park, Ibrox, Murrayfield or Hampden Park are not falling down.

It will certainly be used and will make an operating profit; my own feeling is that they missed an excellent opportunity to turn the stadium 90 degrees onto the back pitches and sink it down by 30-50 metres into the ground as was done on a grand scale at the San Siro in Milan.

I wonder will Landsdowne be the one bypassed in the future for the major games if the GAA drop their ban on selected foreign codes?

@Thomond Park wrote:

sink it down by 30-50 metres into the ground as was done on a grand scale at the San Siro in Milan.

Turning it into a double-size olympic swimming pool by default? 🙂
Very high water table in the area- possibly prohibitively costly.

i’m sure it’ll be used alright – but most of the time its being used Croke park will lie empty. nobody has managed to convince me that this is not a massive waste of taxpayers and sporting organisations money!

I got Scotland’s population wrong – i always thought it was 15 million! Anyway not only do we have Croke Park but also Pairc Ui Coaimhe, Semple Stadium, Thomond, Gaalic stadium etc etc – these are good big grounds too, the match of all but the very best in Scotland. Would there be any point in cardiff building two millennium domes?

@ctesiphon wrote:

Very high water table in the area- possibly prohibitively costly.

The general area has flooded twice in the last 20 years once in 1985 and the last time in 2002; on both occaisions Landsdowne Road was unaffected; although conversely it might get some action for the residents in the area who have had temporary private swimming pools. 😉

Wales is a different case to Ireland. There would be no point in building 2 Millennium Stadia in Cardiff, especially with the new Wembley Stadium due for completion next year. The Cardiff Stadium will be used less and it is in debt too. Wales has only a small population and 2 major field sports, not 4 like us. The English tax payer would not fork out this money.

if Croker can handle all the games while Lansdowne is being rebuilt then it clearly is deeemd capable of handling all whether or not Lansdowne is rebuilt. Surely this is self evident. The reason we are talking about building a second stadium is not because Croke park can’t host all the games required.

It’s a case of Croker having to handle the games while Lansdowne is being redeveloped, else they’ll be played abroad. The GAA are kindly giving the FAI and the IRFU a dig out in other words, else the games and revenue goes to Britain, which would be ludicrous. Also the locals in the Croke Park area would object to so many games and events. There is somewhat a cap on the amount of games and concerts that can be played there!

@dodger wrote:

if Croker can handle all the games while Lansdowne is being rebuilt then it clearly is deeemd capable of handling all whether or not Lansdowne is rebuilt. Surely this is self evident. The reason we are talking about building a second stadium is not because Croke park can’t host all the games required.

Look get over the fact that “shock horror” Dublin can handle two national stadia. There is enough business to keep them both going at the moment, what’s going to change when the new Lansdowne is built.

I hate this 1980s attitude of this country some times, oh dont build the IFSC it’ll be a white elephant, don’t build the luas it’ll be a white elephant, don’t build the Spire it doesn’t do anything – dig yourself out of your provincial arses and look to the future folks …

If we can keep to intelligent conversation for a second i can think of 100 better things this country could spend 300 million on than a non needed second stadium in Dublin. Health, Transport, Schools.

Personally i supported Luas, i supported Croke Park, i still defend the spire but i am entitled to the view that the redevelopment of Lansdowne road is a waste of tax payers money – not because it will be a white elephant but because is it not needed and nothing you have said that convinced me in the slightest that it is.

I finally can’t agree that using phrases like ‘taking head out of provincial arses ‘is well said – actually its fairly base.

Ah, I bet ye’ll be saying ”I supported Lansdowne Road” when it’s built …….will ye go on outta that Dodger.
Sure our Government is rolling in millions of euro, bout time they wasted some of it on sport as well as unused electronic voting boxes, etc…..
If ye thought that the population of Scotland was 15 million people, I think ye should get back to the school books and do a bit more researching and learning. Ye’ll see reason then.

Sure our Government is rolling in millions of euro, bout time they wasted some of it on sport as well as unused electronic voting boxes, etc…..

so we’re in agreement then.

The north stand will indeed leak atmosphere. It could have been a cauldron for foreign teams to come to, but not now. It’ll be far less intimidating to foreign teams with a missing end, and it is essentially missing. The interior renderings looking north clearly show this. Why can’t we just have one thing done properly in this country. Surely the houses on Havelock Square could have been CPO’ed.

I like the ‘podium’ area that will be built over the exiting DART line, but I wonder how access will be facilitated to this ‘mezzanine’ from say, Landsdowne road-it’ll be at quite a height from street level if the road is to be lowered under the railway where the LC is now.

All I can say about having 2 stadia in Dublin is that I’m glad it’s not going to be turned into apartments like Glenmalure Park-Rovers never recovered from that.

I agree about the loss of the cauldron atmosphere it would appear that the capacity at the North end will actually be lower than at present. Unfortunately the Houses at Havelock Square are PROTECTED STRUCTURES so a CPO being cleared would be unlikely. :rolleyes:

Re Rovers: My analysis is worse not only have they never recovered they appear to be sliding still further into the abyss. 😮

That site in Tallaght gets smaller with each ‘rescue package’ 😡

Bare-faced bribery could be the answer to the problem of the low North stand (and the chances of the stadium being built)

Two 50 year tickets to every house in Havelock Square. These tickets to be for seats chosen by the residents and available for every event (matches and concerts). Sellable. Bequeathable.

That might amount to about 100-200 seats for every event. But worth a lot to the residents. Of course there was a time when such an offer might have been worth more than the houses themselves. Not now, of course, but still a tempting offer.

Unfortunately it is their Southern light and would take 200-350k off the value of each house

I’d say that the Havelock Square part of the ground in question is deliberately slightly reduced in the image so as to take the harm out of it and not frighten the residents. I’d say when it’s built it won’t be so low as in the image. Besides this end of the ground will always be available for further enlargement should the residents die/move off in years to come. There will always be the potential to enlarge the capacity of the ground. They can’t say that now either else the residents will be really up in arms.

I must say im slightly dissapointed aswell with the scaling down of the northern end of the stadium, it’ll definately give it a disproportionate look, a small “bus shelter” surrounded by 3 large stands stands, its interesting to note that the original design envisaged 2 three tiered stands on the east and west sides of the ground and 2 single tiered stands behind either goal, however these stands would have been larger than what is currently proposed for the north stand, this design is almost identical to the dragao stadium in oporto and the city of manchester stadium, the oldest example o this type of stadium is the ullevi in goteborg in sweden, i think they basically pioneered it

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/sweden/vastra_gotaland/goteborg_nye_ullevi.shtml

The Dragao
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/portugal/porto/porto_dragao.shtml

City of Manchester stadium
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_west/manchester_city_stadium.shtml

Landsdowne is just a variation on these designs. Its actually a real pity that we dont have any properly enclosed stadium in this country, its a real pity that hill 16 couldnt have been finished to the same standard as the cusack, hogan and the canal end, it gives the stadium an unfinished look. Whatever about the houses at the havelock sq end of landsdowne, the houses behind hill 16 have no architectural merit whatsoever, am i right in saying they would basically be 1950s council houses?, i know the railway is a big constraint but if this was the new wembley stadium or the nou camp it would definately be re-aligned, we’re only talking about a short section of it anyway, it could even be put underground, it would actually improve the area as a whole, not that this would ever happen in Ireland!

Perhaps when all is said and done the capacity might be a bit inadequate especially for rugby games, maybe 60,000 plus might have been better but then again the cost might have been prohibitive and also the site is probably too restricted, In all fairness its an attractive design and at last we’ll have a modern national stadium to be proud of!

The North Terrace is where the more hardcore support have always congregated and at present is where Eircom League clubs(i.e.REAL Irish football afficionados) recieve their paltry allocation from the FAI.A cauldron or intimidating atmosphere is a thing of the past in the present premiership/bastool football climate. If the FAI had any cop that would be the area reserved for the real partisan fans with ultra type Italian displays.Then you might see a proper atmosphere in that stadium.Hope it does get built, any argument for football being played in Croke park is pointless.It’s totally unsuitable to holding large international fixtures.The pitch is too big and Hill16 would be deserted due to UEFA /FIFA regsI think it would be even more devoid of atmosphere than the present Landsdowne

Landsdowne is practically falling tp peices. Compring Landsdowne to other, for example, 6 Nations Stadiums, it’s the worst of the lot, and a bit of an embarrassment, especially when we have Croke Park lying idle. Bring it on is what i say!

[Quote:its a real pity that hill 16 couldnt have been finished to the same standard as the cusack, hogan and the canal end, it gives the stadium an unfinished look.]

I’m disappointed with the new Hill 16 too….it just looks ill fitting. I think the architects made a bit of a dog’s bollocks of it really. I was at a few of the Dubs matches this year and sitting high up in both the Cusack and Hogan stands I could take a good look at it. Considering the constraints with the railwayline etc…but firstly, there is a gaping hole either side of the terrace where it does’nt connect with the Hogan and Cusack stands. I think these should have been filled in. Secondly, the terrace appears lob-sided with the electronic screen, the bunker and the flag ploes placed where the old Nally Stand was. (Whats the bunker for in any way?) I think a bit of symmetry should have been applied and the screen, etc placed way up in line behind the goal. This might have given a better flow to the terrace. Thirdly, the little piece of terrace stuck in the corner beside the bunker and electronic screen just looks rediculous. I think the disjointed Hill 16 takes from the rest of the stadium. For 20 odd million euro it could have been visually better.

I can’t believe it cost 20m that sounds like a price from Abbotstown and not HQ

Landsdowne is practically falling tp peices. Compring Landsdowne to other, for example, 6 Nations Stadiums, it’s the worst of the lot, and a bit of an embarrassment, especially when we have Croke Park lying idle. Bring it on is what i say!

Unlike yourself and it seems most of the Irish public, politicians, commentators, etc. I have no real problem with the current state of Lansdowne. Sure, it’s not modern or cool, and if you’re the type who’d be too embarrassed to be seen driving a 12 year old cheap Ford, for example, then I suppose it might discomfort you worrying what the neighbours think. The entire east stand and terracing are absolutely fine – great views from everywhere in the east stand and great cauldren like atmosphere on the east terrace. There are a (very small) number of blind spots in the west stand but 99.9% of the seats have great views. The north and south terraces are o.k. too as far as terracing goes.

Like I said before, I’d rather be able to get a ticket for the big rugby internationals and watch the game in an old-fashioned stadium, than watch the game on telly knowing that the well-connected (via the blazer or corporate channels) are able to watch the match in more comfort. So for me (a person who has been attending matches in Lansdown since I was a child), the only real problem with it is capacity. Besides safety, everything else is secondary and I’ve been to some of the superb modern stadia like the Millenium in Cardiff.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually really like the proposed design but the reality is that without an increase in capacity, for me, this is essentially a very expensive vanity project.

@Thomond Park wrote:

I can’t believe it cost 20m that sounds like a price from Abbotstown and not HQ

Read it here yerself….http://www.gaa.ie/page/croke_park.html (under the heading Hill 16)

jimg…I was at the Celtic Cup final earlier this year at Lansdowne Road and I understand the sentimantality about the place but in reality I just thought the place was a right kip….It was an embarrasment too, my foreign mates could’nt get over it either. They scoffed at the place. The family silver in this instance really lets us down. My firm had it’s Xmas party in the clubhous 2 years ago and my jasus, what a total dive. Cream smoke stained ceilings, manky smelly carpets. The decking outside was rotting where it never got a coat of preservative. Surely standards in the country have come on. We are no longer materially poor or poor of mind.

I would’nt say either that the new proposal will be limited to just 50,000 full stop. I’d say there will be the opportunity to increase the capacity somewhat. It’s still at the planning stage and they don’t want to frighten the residenets by saying that it will hold 70,000 or whatever. Each step at a time.

GregF, I guess it’s a matter of priorities. I couldn’t care less if foreigners “scoff” or go ooh-ah. I couldn’t care less whether it’s a good place for office christmas parties. I have no particular sentimental attachement to the place either; the east stand (my favourite bit) is relatively new. I just want to be able to get tickets to watch international rugby matches.

The single biggest and most obvious flaw with the Lansdowne FOR IRISH RUGBY SUPPORTERS is simply not being addressed by this re-development.

Also, I think you’re sadly mistake with the hope that they’ll be able to sneak an extra 20k seats into the place. The planning system doesn’t work that way.

But would that be deep enough for International dive competitions?

or at least the CONTINUITY IRISH RUGBY SUPPORTERS

ha ha,…….na, they disbanded after the last 6 nations disaster.

Or were they not banished to their clubhouses after the clubs starting selling the tickets as corporate packages for 500 quid a pop

If you want tickets join a club (one of the ones that doesn’t sell them to a corporate) and you’ll get tickets most of the time – if not go to some of the pubs and ask does anyone have a spare ticket. Anyone (genuine fan) with a spare will usually sell it face value. I’ve got tickets like that on plenty of occasions and never payed over face for them.

But can you imagine Ireland V Scotland, Wales and Italy in the 6 nations in Croke park – the place will look half deserted – I think 50K is an OK size for Lansdowne

exactly, at least when the GAA swapped their crumbling patchwork of a stadium for new shiny plastic seats at a cost of several hundred million they also actually added 20,000 to the capacity.

I’ve said it before – this stadium is so constrained by its location and perceived threats posed by residents to be very unambitious.

Finally when you spend 300- 400 million on a astadium and don’t increase capacity it can only mean one thing – higher ticket prices.

Heres a good link to check out folks…..http://www.worldstadiums.com

Check out the stadia in Ireland and the UK. Note the capacity of each stadium too.
Currently Croke Park is the largest by holding more people out of all the stadia in Ireland and the UK.
Sadly, the new Wembley will take the honour when it opens next year.

@GregF wrote:

Sadly, the new Wembley will take the honour when it opens next year.

Does the fact that a stadium is the biggest in this part of Europe really important?

Whilst Croke park has an impressive capacity is it not a combination of the design and the unique games that it showcases not its strongest selling points. The all time World Cup attendance record is held by a Stadium in Montevideo from a final in the 1930’s when over 140,000 people crammed into a stadium which would today have a seated capacity of 50-60,000; scale is hardly everything me thinks.

It is a sad reality that the IRFU and fai are forced to build an inferior venue; but in my opinion an inferior venue in a Central location is vastly superior to a second Croke Park outside the M50 to my mind. Croke Park is almost unique in that one gets the Edge City Stadium and the inner City location to provide atmosphere for the City as well as attendees.

Landsdowne is the correct call and I really hope that the planners will be in a position to grant permission without too many modifications.

@Thomond Park wrote:

The all time World Cup attendance record is held by a Stadium in Montevideo from a final in the 1930’s when over 140,000 people crammed into a stadium which would today have a seated capacity of 50-60,000]
[Pedantry]To my knowledge, the largest attendance at a world cup finals match was at the deciding match of the 1950 world cup between Uruguay and Brazil. This was at the Maracanã stadium in Rio. It had been built for the world cup – 10,000 people were involved in its construction! When finished, the capacity was 43,000 higher than that of the previous record holder, Glasgow’s Hampden Park. The official attendance at the final was 174,000 although some sources put the real attendance at up to about 220,000.[/pedantry]

Landsdowne is the correct call and I really hope that the planners will be in a position to grant permission without too many modifications.

I agree. It is a pity that they couldn’t have turned the pitch around and made the capacity a bit bigger, but the two clubs have a lease on the back pitch which they were unwilling to give up. There was also a report done several years ago which concluded that the only circumstances in which the Irish soccer team would need an 80,000 capacity ground would be for a competitive qualifying match against England. Whether this is still true, and what the situation is with demand for big rugby matches, I do not know. The ratio of corporate seats to total capacity is also comparable to that of the new Wembley (about 19,000 out of 90,000)

The north stand would also seem like a suitable place to dedicate for away fans for a big soccer international against any of our neighbours.

@Seamus O’G wrote:

[Pedantry]

Discussing facts gleaned from the back of a beer mat can never be considered pedantic 😀

I totally agree on the lost opportunity of turning the pitch 90 degrees as the gain of a significant potential set aside on the northern side could I thought have been used as a buffer zone to protect both the height of the overall design and the houses on Havelock Square.

Personally I think its a great design even if some people refer to the north end as a bus shelter. It will defintely soak away all the atmosphere but its better than nothing I suppose.

There are lots of plus points if you can forget about the bus shelter. Its a orginal design which matches this nation in that we are european but different to the rest of the bland continental stadia. Thank god its not like the sometimes darn ugly anglo saxon stadia.

Its great that we put it smack bang in the middle of the city. It will be a wise decision in future years. The north’s stadium plans in the Maze are nothing short of a diaster. There will be absolutely no atmosphere whatsoever.

i think the design is great and 50,000 is a good number of people to have in a ground. if all goes well this will translate really well into reality. i doubt if the envelope will be pushed by attemting to ammend the application if it appears likely to pass by increasing capacity to 60 or 75g. i’ll be grateful to see irish soccer and rugby get a great home and the continued use of the oldest rugby ground in the world assured (apparently anyway) so if it takes until 2009 so be it…lets just hope it gets built!!!

hypotetically.. say the IRFU bought all those house that are complaining about the sunlight not getting in , could they extend the stadium around to cover all four sides ?

Nice design…as the poll says wrll make a good counterpoint to the angular Croke Pk.

True, it will make a superb contrast to Croker. 2 great stadia in the city centre.

Maybe not as good as Munich’s Allianz Arena but still lightyears ahead of any other stadium ever built in this country. 🙂

Personally I prefer Croker

Developers insist plans for Lansdowne still on target
Archiseek / Ireland / News / 2006 / June 8
The Irish Times

The €365 million redevelopment of Lansdowne Road as a 50,000 seat stadium is still “completely on schedule”, with construction expected to start early next year, the chairman of the company behind the initiative has claimed. Despite the fact that Dublin City Council planners earlier this year requested detailed information on 43 points relating to the proposed development, Philip Browne of the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company claimed the request was “very much the norm” for a project of its size. Mr Browne was speaking after it was confirmed that the development company had lodged its response to the additional information sought by the council.

F.I. seems to be the norm in all projects these days regardless of size; which is not a bad thing

Yes,
however given that this will more than likely go to AnBP the whole point of the FI will diminish and serve to lengthen the planning process as ultimately the Board will make their own call/revisions.

Some writers in the Irish Times are unashamed in their copy and pasting of press releases received via e-mail; I would hope that this is caused more by time pressures than someof the interpretation one occaisionally reads.

from the times:

Lansdowne stadium gets planning permission
Last updated: 31-07-06, 19:37

The redevelopment of Lansdowne Road into a 50,000 all-seater stadium was given a further green light today after the project was granted planning permission by Dublin City Council.

Work on the €365 million project, funded by the IRFU, the FAI and the Government, is scheduled to start in January of next year with the stadium due to be completed within 27 months.

Welcoming today’s announcement, Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism John O’Donoghue said: “I see this as an important milestone in the realisation of this exciting project which is progressing very much on schedule.

“I join with the IRFU and FAI in looking forward to a bright future in a great new sports stadium. This is a good day for Irish sport. “

Earlier this year, Dublin City Council had requested further information on 43 points while an impasse between the IRFU and Wanderers, one of the tenant clubs at the venue, had cast doubt of the timetable of the redevelopment.

However, the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company have repeatedly stressed the project remains on schedule.

Rugby and soccer internationals will be hosted at Croke Park next year with France set to face Ireland in the Six Nations on Sunday, February 11th.

good news. residents will obviously appeal, anyone reckon abp will overturn, any precedents ?

a metro stop should be near by like they’re planning to do in croke park. if this is included in the plans there will be less appeals to go through.

Pauline Palmer, local resident:

“This development will take away from my skyline. Everyone here will be affected by this”

The only people who could be affected by this are the small number of houses on the Southern Side of Landsdowne Road east of the rail line given the height of both the exosting East and West Stands. If I were a resident on Landsdowne Road I would be delighted to see the demise of the back of the existing West stand and if I were in Havelock Square I would be reassured by the lengths the IRFU have taken to keep the height down at that point.

Hooray! This is great news that it got the go ahead. No doubt there will be many appeals. They shouldn’t heed them but go ahead and build the damn thing. Croker was built and rightly so too despite the objections from the locals who are mainly working class. In the this instance, a bunch of middle class objectors shouldn’t be given any preferential treatment. If anything the new Landowne redevelopment will add value to their property. Fuck ’em, the country needs the stadium.

The alternative is the Bertie Bowl

go figure

@Boyler wrote:

a metro stop should be near by like they’re planning to do in croke park. if this is included in the plans there will be less appeals to go through.

there is a metro stop there already .

@a boyle wrote:

there is a metro stop there already .

I though you two might be the same person….:D The for and against side of the arguement. Its happened here before!

I would be surprised if ABP stopped this. Its a major piece of cultural infrastructure and the precedent has already been set of a stadium in a residential area. Did DCC attach any notable conditions. I must look up the planning file.

Good news!

:d

was watching the news(god bless rte.ie !!)
the bleeding heart story of some woman on o’connell gardens get almost two minutes of airtime

is it possible to ‘sink’ the stadium a little?
i noticed during the world cup (cant remember where) the stadium was huge inside but wasn’t too imposing from the outside shots

think that was the stade de france paul … although could be wrong, kind of looks like it from the picture anyway …

@paul h wrote:

is it possible to ‘sink’ the stadium a little?
i noticed during the world cup (cant remember where) the stadium was huge inside but wasn’t too imposing from the outside shots

no it would be phenomenally expensive.

the berlin stadium is almost fully sunk in the ground as it is built in a natural hollow. (or at least hitler made a hollow appear) either way it is tremendously expensive first to move the earth and secondly the stadium can simply be pushed en mass 40/50 odd feet into the ground, it would have to be redesigned.

I think the residents need to be very carfull that they don’t get exactly what they wish for …

This stadium will be substantially quieter than the current one as the arching roof will bounce the noise straight up into the sky . As the roof is curved light will bounce off it into peoples gardens , reducing the over shadowing.

A different design that satisfied their height objections would most probably disapoint in other unforseen ways.

Permission end July
Appeals end August
3-6 months in ABP – Feb
They could play the 6 nations in lansdowne after all.

More than 30 appeals have been lodged against the planned €350million redevlopment of Lansdowne Road.
Locals in leafy Ballsbridge area of Dublins southside are fiercely oppossed to the plans and have vowed to fight it all the way.
An Bord Pleanala confirmed it had received 33 objections by 5pm Monday, the closing date of the appeals.
At least 10 campaigners also requested an oral hearing be held in relation to the planning application, which could delay the project indefinitely. An objection has been lodged by Dr. Anne Twomey from Lansdowne Lane for example, which now sits in the shadow of the stadiums west stand. She insists it will double the height.
Residents in the Lansdowne area object to the new stands which rise to 48.5m, much higher that the Croke Park stands, which reas 35m.
Inspectors will now be appointed to compile a new report on the project, scheduled to be ready in December.

Woo hoo! ……is that all only 30 appeals.

I will gladly swap my home in Ballyfermot with anyone living in the Lansdowne Road area if they feel rather peeved about the new stadium proposal.

@The Denouncer wrote:

At least 10 campaigners also requested an oral hearing be held in relation to the planning application, which could delay the project indefinitely. Inspectors will now be appointed to compile a new report on the project, .

An Oral Hearing will delay the project ‘indefinitely’?

Who do they get to write this crap? Average duration of Oral Hearings is 1 to 3 days. Say a week in a very complex case.

A bit short of ‘indefinitely’ surely?

It has been announced that the new stadium will hold a major soccer match.The UEFA Cup final will be held in Dublin in 2010. A good incentive too, to get the thing built all the more quicker.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0928/lansdowne.html?rss

Thats fantastic news with the uefa cup final

I think its worth pointing out that UEFA chief exec Lars- Christer Olssen said that it would
probably be only the uefa cup final as opposed to the (more prestigious and financially rewarding) champions
leauge final due to the 50 000 capacity of the new stadium.

@paul h wrote:

Thats fantastic news with the uefa cup final

I think its worth pointing out that UEFA chief exec Lars- Christer Olssen said that it would
probably be only the uefa cup final as opposed to the (more prestigious and financially rewarding) champions
leauge final due to the 50 000 capacity of the new stadium.

Exactly, it should be fandabadozy when our European brothers and sisters descend on our Fair City to see the match. After the Special olympics and the Ryder Cup, I believe that our country can host any sport competition given it. The decision also helps our cause for a Celtic Euro 2012 bid with our Scottish friends and allies and the Rugby World Cup in the middle of the next decade, and, I like to think, the 2020 World Cup.(I live in hope)

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

Exactly, it should be fandabadozy when our European brothers and sisters descend on our Fair City to see the match. After the Special olympics and the Ryder Cup, I believe that our country can host any sport competition given it. The decision also helps our cause for a Celtic Euro 2012 bid with our Scottish friends and allies and the Rugby World Cup in the middle of the next decade, and, I like to think, the 2020 World Cup.(I live in hope)

I also think it would be excellent to host a UEFA cup final or a European Cup final.

But, Cathal, it is necessary to try and keep some kind of perspective. I’ve been working over here in Germany for the last few months, and it was undoubtedly a huge task in this country of 80 million or so. There is no way that anybody in Ireland should ever let the thought of hosting the world cup even cross their minds. The idea of Ireland hosting the World Cup is impossibly absurd, and you should cease to entertain it immediately.:)

The European Championships is absolutely as high as we could ever aim for, and then only as a junior partner with Scotland. From an organisational aspect, I think this might require construction of a suitable stadium in an Irish city other than Dublin. For example, even as only the host of one group, in a joint bid with Scotland, the current facilities available in Dublin would require the staging of the final group games at the same time in the same city, something which has yet to be attempted by any country. However, there does remain the possibility that matches in any particular group could take place in both countries, so that obstacle might be surmountable in the event of no other stadium being built outside of Dublin.

i was on the dart past lansdowne today and i cant believe thats our national stadium one of the stands only looks about 3 storeys high, there should be someway for the goverment to bypass certain planning laws for things like this they do it often enough with the roads and as for people opposing this redevelopment do they have some love of ugly imposing concrete dumps?despite being bigger the new stadium might actually be less imposing on them,definatly less depressing!

@Cathal Dunne wrote:

Exactly, it should be fandabadozy when our European brothers and sisters descend on our Fair City to see the match. After the Special olympics and the Ryder Cup, I believe that our country can host any sport competition given it. The decision also helps our cause for a Celtic Euro 2012 bid with our Scottish friends and allies and the Rugby World Cup in the middle of the next decade, and, I like to think, the 2020 World Cup.(I live in hope)

Maybe a joint european champ with scotland.
Maybe even a small part in the world cup, together with mayve two countries of the UK.
But what other sporting event could we even think od outside of football???
We had the Ryder cup, as we deserved it too as the K club is a top course. But what other international events could we cater for. Golf, a shared football championship.
Can you think of anything else we could hope to hold, outside of Darts or Poker.

@Bren88 wrote:

Maybe a joint european champ with scotland.
Maybe even a small part in the world cup, together with mayve two countries of the UK.
But what other sporting event could we even think od outside of football???
We had the Ryder cup, as we deserved it too as the K club is a top course. But what other international events could we cater for. Golf, a shared football championship.
Can you think of anything else we could hope to hold, outside of Darts or Poker.

Blow Football perhaps!
I don’t think the Scots will be in any rush to get into bed with the Irish for any future sporting bids after the last debacle!

I heard the ‘debacle’ at the time wasn’t solely due to the lack of stadia in Ireland, but problems in Scotland aswell.

@The Denouncer wrote:

I heard the ‘debacle’ at the time wasn’t solely due to the lack of stadia in Ireland, but problems in Scotland aswell.

It’s very possible that that was the case, particularly as far as UEFA were concerned. As far as I recall, the joint bid proposed the use of 3 stadia in Glasgow (Celtic, Rangers and Hampden), 2 in Edinburgh, 2 in Dublin and a possible other stadium in, I think, Dundee. So the tournament would have been taking place in just four cities.

The winning bid, Switzerland and Austria, has the tournament taking place in 8 cities (4 in each country). The nordic bid would, as far as I remember, have had a similar arrangement (give or take, two cities in each of the four countries involved).

From a security aspect, the Swiss/Austrian deal may be a much easier arrangement to handle, and there are also matters relating to overuse of particular pitches to be considered. For example, it probably wouldn’t have been possible to police two matches in Glasgow on the same day, so this means that pitches in the other cities would have to be used. As there were so few other cities involved, those pitches would probably be used more frequently than would be common in other tournaments.

In addition, the European Championship is generally considered to be a more difficult competition to progress in than the World Cup,, as there are almost no no-hopers present. A much higher percentage of the teams present are capable of actually winning the competition than would be the case at the World Cup. As a result, there are more likely to be more situations (on a percentage basis) where the teams that progress from the group phase are in doubt until the last minute of their last group matches (which take place simultaneously).

As an illustration, England score a last minute goal against Ireland in Croke Park to go to the quarter finals, at Ireland’s expense, while at the same time (in the same group) Serbia hold out for a 0-0 draw at Lansdowne Road to put Croatia out of the tournament.

How do you police the city after that?

sure a Uefa Cup Final is the best we could possibly expect. It’s not often any final is held outside the superpower territories of Spain, Italy, Germany, UK, France, Holland. e.g. Only 3 of the 14 Champions League Finals have been held anywhere else.. the likes of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Ireland, nearly any of the old Eastern Bloc, even Denmark and Belgium, rarely host major finals (though the venue of this years UEFA final escapes me) 01 was dortmund, 03 was seville. i’m open to correction on this one, but it’s the impression i get… and i don’t need reminding of Istanbul. But the Pool won in Wembley, Paris Rome twice in the 70s and 80’s… that’s 5 by the way, manu/arse/chelski fans. 5.

as for a tournament, i agree with seamus… you need about 8 stadiums of c35,000+ to host one and ourselves and Scotland won’t ever have that in a desirable geographical spread. Organising bodies like Uefa and FIFA like to see their tournaments bringing benefits across the host territories thereby ensuring the support of locals. For example a tournament in Ireland would not get any support from Mayo or Kerrry coz the matches would be in Dublin, plus tournament fatigue in Dublin may see the least glamorous ties ignored if they’re 2 days after a Germany-Holland cracker. You only have to look at Japan to see how importnat the local input is. The same principle was applied to the Special Olympics Host Town scheme, which made it a completely national event…

Lansdowne Road redevelopment hearing to begin

11 December 2006 09:44
A hearing by An Bord Pleanála on the proposed redevelopment of the Lansdowne Road stadium will begin today.

Local residents have objected to the plan for the erection of a new stadium at a cost of more than €300m.

The oral hearing gets under way at the Gresham Hotel in central Dublin at 10am and is expected to run for a week.

The redevelopment plan submitted by the soccer and rugby representative bodies would create a 50,000 all-seater stadium.

Currently, Irish international soccer games have a capacity of 36,000.

While both the FAI and IRFU will contribute to the financing, nearly €200m is to come from the Government.

While the plan was passed by Dublin City Council, this decision has now been appealed to An Bord Pleanála.

Among concerns are the stadium height, the demolition of a house on Shelbourne Road, flooding consequences and loss of part of the Dodder walkway.

Final nail in the Bertie Bowl?

Among concerns are the stadium height, the demolition of a house on Shelbourne Road, flooding consequences and loss of part of the Dodder walkway. The height bit is valid, demolition of the house who cares, flooding consequences, this sounds like scare mongoring and trying to come up with all the objections they can, the river is very controlled and when they are spending several hundred million euro on the stadium im sure sorting out whatever issues with flooding will be no problem, and the loss of part of the dodder walk way, the dodder has miles of walkway, its probably a miniscule piece they are taking.

the thing about the height is a bit misleading. The reason it’s so high is because the north stand is so low, as low as it is now, to accomodate residents.
Parking was a major talking point today (I was there, but I ain’t sayin why) as was flooding, even though the hearing began with a letter from the OPW stating that flooding would not occur. The development of conferencing and restaurant non-event day facilities was a major issue as is the lack of a limit on the number of events… fair enough i reckon. The demolition of no. 70 Shelbourne road is a vaild objection, as I’m sure many archiseekers will agree. There are a number of spurious objections, my favourite was one bloke who said it should be in Abbotstown, where there’s no traffic problem (yeh, the same abbotstown on the M50)

Most of the appeals were very well constructed and delivered very well. It will be granted imo but the conditions will be way more far-reaching, as far as maybe reducing capacity, height, a curb on certain uses and a definite limit on the number of events.

btw George Redmond attended most of todays proceedings. Must have been lookin for tickets, or breakin into the old council offices across the road

“When we moved into our €1,000,000 house a few years ago we failed to notice the dilapidated stadium in the vicinity. Now it is being refurbished I say NOT IN MY BACK YARD!”

@The Denouncer wrote:

“When we moved into our €1,000,000 house a few years ago we failed to notice the dilapidated stadium in the vicinity. Now it is being refurbished I say NOT IN MY BACK YARD!”

obviously you’re joking. If you’re not, more fool you and my heart bleeds for you

The demolition the protected structure is regrettable, even more so if the stadium becomes some sort of watered down play space. Let’s face it, the new stadium is shoehorned in there and it’s too small as it is. If it doesn’t remain at it’s (pathetic) current capicity, it has to go elsewhere.

Originally posted by wearnicehats
obviously you’re joking. If you’re not, more fool you and my heart bleeds for you

Elsewhere in this topic I suggested it be moved and increased to 90,000 seater or so. I still think it should be moved. But I don’t think it will happen. The one good thing it has going for it is its location in relation to the DART station. I do believe there are NIMBYs galore around here (I work down the road from it). I don’t believe that is a foolish claim. You’d be well advised to stop your heart bleeding there, might be painful in the long run.

Totally disagree there is no requirement for two 87,000 plus seat stadiums in Dublin; Irish rugby is on a high right now and still only two games produce annual capacity crunches namely 2 of the six nations and Croke Park can be used for the French or England games.

The FAI are in a tailspin and beyond a few attractive games a year capacity beyond 56,000 is unecessary and the GAA being business people know how to lever a decent premium.

Lets face it the national sports are Gaelic football and Hurling anf Croke Park is HQ where the key events are to be held; for other events such as FAI and Ireland v Italy or Munster v Leinster 56,000 is ample capacity but critically all events are held in the City Centre where the City fully benefits from the tourist spend.

Everytime I think of the Bertie Bowl I think of that ridiculous 1990’s proposal to have Joe Kinnear’s Wimbledon build a stadium in Clondalkin and have the fans bused in for UK Premiership matches via the M50 on Day trips. Wimbledon got their dream they moved to Milton Keynes and were renamed the MK Dons.

@alonso wrote:

the thing about the height is a bit misleading. The reason it’s so high is because the north stand is so low, as low as it is now, to accomodate residents.

It’s not just high relative to the existing stadium, it’s high relative to other similar stadiums. It’s about 13m higher than Croke Park, and just a little shorter than Liberty Hall. The reason for the height is that the new stadium will have lots of extra floor space devoted to corporate boxes, restaurants and meeting facilities which aren’t in the current stadium.

Parking was a major talking point today (I was there, but I ain’t sayin why) as was flooding, even though the hearing began with a letter from the OPW stating that flooding would not occur. The development of conferencing and restaurant non-event day facilities was a major issue as is the lack of a limit on the number of events… fair enough i reckon. The demolition of no. 70 Shelbourne road is a vaild objection, as I’m sure many archiseekers will agree. There are a number of spurious objections, my favourite was one bloke who said it should be in Abbotstown, where there’s no traffic problem (yeh, the same abbotstown on the M50)

There was a lot of nonsense talked about parking all right, one appellant asking that loads of car parking spaces be provided. If I were a resident nearby the last thing I would be looking for is parking spaces for the stadium, which would only lead to a massive increase in traffic on match days. Some appellants are taking the view that it should be moved out of the city, but I think most people are saying they don’t object in principle to the stadium being redeveloped on site.

@stira wrote:

Among concerns are the stadium height, the demolition of a house on Shelbourne Road, flooding consequences and loss of part of the Dodder walkway. The height bit is valid, demolition of the house who cares, flooding consequences, this sounds like scare mongoring and trying to come up with all the objections they can, the river is very controlled and when they are spending several hundred million euro on the stadium im sure sorting out whatever issues with flooding will be no problem, and the loss of part of the dodder walk way, the dodder has miles of walkway, its probably a miniscule piece they are taking.

A lot of people in the area still can’t get insurance against flooding because of the major flood events in 2002, so I don’t see how you can say “the river is very controlled”. The plans for the stadium don’t include any specifics on flood defences.

Originally posted by PVC King
Totally disagree there is no requirement for two 87,000 plus seat stadiums in Dublin; Irish rugby is on a high right now and still only two games produce annual capacity crunches namely 2 of the six nations and Croke Park can be used for the French or England games.

The FAI are in a tailspin and beyond a few attractive games a year capacity beyond 56,000 is unecessary and the GAA being business people know how to lever a decent premium.

I think a single stadium that is shared among IRFU and FAI should have at least a 70,000 capacity – we will see how full Croke Park will be when the 6 Nations comes round. We will also see how many attend the soccer games in Croke Park next year. Also a higher capacity stadium would make it an attractive prospect as a venue to stage International tournaments.

@The Denouncer wrote:

Elsewhere in this topic I suggested it be moved and increased to 90,000 seater or so. I still think it should be moved. But I don’t think it will happen. The one good thing it has going for it is its location in relation to the DART station. I do believe there are NIMBYs galore around here (I work down the road from it). I don’t believe that is a foolish claim. You’d be well advised to stop your heart bleeding there, might be painful in the long run.

I merely said that if you weren’t joking you were an idiot for buying a house “a few years ago” without noticing the stadium and knowing it is to redeveloped – pretty straightforward really.. Either way, you’d be living in ballsbridge so stop complaining. sorry – I should have realised you were joking when you said it only cost 1 million. You made no mention of the size of the stadium – that was me. Perhaps there isn’t a need for 2 87,000 seater stadia but I see little point in building a stadium that’s effectively smaller than the one that’s there now

sorry – by smaller I mean that – and Murrayfield is a good example – when you redevelop a ground with terraces you need a 20-40% increase in capacity to generate the same atmosphere

“It’s not just high relative to the existing stadium, it’s high relative to other similar stadiums. It’s about 13m higher than Croke Park, and just a little shorter than Liberty Hall. The reason for the height is that the new stadium will have lots of extra floor space devoted to corporate boxes, restaurants and meeting facilities which aren’t in the current stadium.”

the reason it’s so high is also due to the shape which was necessary for the northern end. I’m also sick of hearing the Liberty Hall comparison. As we all know, it’s irrelevant given the proposals around the city. It’s just a hackneyed cliche.

I agree that the other uses should not be part of it. They do take up a lot of space, but if they were removed it wouldn’t make that much difference to the height. restaurants and conference facilities are within the super-structure of the main stands which are defined by their capacity. What it does show is that the current stadium is underutilised. These facilities are in all modern stadiums, but they may not be necessary here. After all the HQ’s of the FAI and IRFU will be at Abbotstown and they should use these facilities rather than Lansdowne Road

“A lot of people in the area still can’t get insurance against flooding because of the major flood events in 2002, so I don’t see how you can say “the river is very controlled”. The plans for the stadium don’t include any specifics on flood defences.”

it is not the duty of the applicant to undertake flood control for the Ringsend/Sandymount area. The proposed development will not cause extra flooding, therefore this issue is a red herring. It’s up to the City Council to sort this issue out, and so far they’ve been utterly negligent, as far as i can tell.

Corporate boxes bring in the cash, as do restaurant facilities. And rugby, especially in the capital doesn’t attract the most…. “down to earth” crowd. Boxes and eating facilities there will rake in the dosh and are v necessay, I’d imagine.
I had a good chuckle recently when reading in the Irish Times that the residents’ associations (that dreaded title) are invoking the European Convention on Human Rights. These people…. The ladies who lunch should stay in the restaurant..

yeh I overheard them getting very excited about producing human rights documentation that would help their case. They’re already talking about judicial review so the Bord has to ensure that due process is done and seen to be done. I’m not aware of any possible contravention of EIA legislation, or the substance of any such claims, if they exist, in regard to the applcation and DCC decision. It’s very flawed technically but legally all seems above board. It’s not like this applcation appeared out of thin air…

@alonso wrote:

the reason it’s so high is also due to the shape which was necessary for the northern end. I’m also sick of hearing the Liberty Hall comparison. As we all know, it’s irrelevant given the proposals around the city. It’s just a hackneyed cliche.

That’s the applicant’s case, and it may well be valid. In fact thay have submitted that the height is purely a function of trying to provide the optimum viewing angle for each spectator. I’m sceptical of this claim, however, as comparisons with other modern stadiums don’t show similar height profiles. It’s also rather convenient that the extra height allows them to fit in lots of other uses which are not currently part of the stadium complex.

I mention Liberty Hall only for scale – 48m doesn’t mean much to most people, “slightly shorter than Liberty Hall” is more meaningful. However it should be pointed out that the highest point of the stadium is the leading edge of the roof over the pitch, which will not be visible from most vantage points. The perceived height in most cases will be between 35-40m I think, which is still taller than Croke Park. I don’t really have a problem with the height myself, in fact I think it will be a very impressive building, but there’s no doubt that residents nearby have a lot of cause to complain, because of the loss of sunlight and daylight. The applicants admit that the sunlight and daylight available to many houses after construction will be well below the guideline levels, but they’re arguing that there are special circumstances.

I agree that the other uses should not be part of it. They do take up a lot of space, but if they were removed it wouldn’t make that much difference to the height. restaurants and conference facilities are within the super-structure of the main stands which are defined by their capacity. What it does show is that the current stadium is underutilised. These facilities are in all modern stadiums, but they may not be necessary here. After all the HQ’s of the FAI and IRFU will be at Abbotstown and they should use these facilities rather than Lansdowne Road

The applicant was trying to say yesterday that these uses all exist on the site at present, because there’s a small Paddy Power betting kiosk, they already hold meetings in the existing boxes, and they provide hospitality in tents on the back pitch. They also said that the idea that the stadium would be used as a conference centre is “one of those myths that has sprung up somehow”. But I don’t see how you can interpret the applicant’s own figures for use of the stadium on non-match days in any other way.

it is not the duty of the applicant to undertake flood control for the Ringsend/Sandymount area. The proposed development will not cause extra flooding, therefore this issue is a red herring. It’s up to the City Council to sort this issue out, and so far they’ve been utterly negligent, as far as i can tell.

Actually as far as I know the City Council’s policy, based on guidance from the DoE, is to get developers to provide flood protection works as part of the development. Here’s a Sunday Times article on the issue. The works needed to implement the recommendations of the Dublin Coastal Flooding Study go way beyond the City Council’s financial resources. The only way they can achieve flood protection is through big grants from the OPW or contributions from developers.

You have to wonder if half of these NIMBYs are GAA plants sent in there to wreck the “other codes” stadium. Look what is happening out in Tallaght with the GAA mullahs trying to destroy Shamrock Rovers by placing endless injunctions on their stadium. It’s like something from the Ban years – absolutely sickening. You cannot put anything beyond some elements within the “broken glass speaders” of the GAA. Huge numbers of that organisation are still in a War of Independence mode.

I somehow don’t think that the protestors of Dublin 4 are your general GAA demographic.

As for Tallaght the GAA are correct – why should taxpayers money go into a stadium that excludes our national games. Shamrock Rovers have conspired to ruin themselves and there’s no point in blaming the GAA for it.

In relation to the Bertie Bowl, Lansdowne Road and even the proposed Long Kesh stadium the GAA have always been extremely supportive so save us the anti GAA rant.

@dodger wrote:

why should taxpayers money go into a stadium that excludes our national games.

Was there any taxpayers’ money involved in Croke Park? Or has the government ever provided financial support to the GAA? And I don’t just mean that question narrowly to be interpreted as handouts for building/infrastructure work.

***

I haven’t been following this case closely, so perhaps this question has been answered already. If so, apologies. Anyway- will there be any public access along the (Lansdowne) bank of the Dodder after the stadium is built? Or will the redevelopment fully close this off?
I ask because I’m opposed to the closing of any non-motorised routes around the city, whether footpaths, off-road cycle routes etc, as they force non-motorised traffic (including walkers etc) to use the motorised transport network. Best practice abroad in urban design (and theoretical best practice in Ireland…:rolleyes: ) advocates providing a choice of routes and maximising permeability in order to give real choice to people regarding their modes, routes, etc. I fear that the closure of this route – if true – would be another nail in the coffin of sustainable transport in this city. A small nail, to be sure, but a nail nevertheless.

There is no precedent for a local authority financing or part financing to the extent SDCC is for the building of a sports stadium for one code.

Anyway this is getting off topic. Just felt i had to challenge Panda’s offensive comments.

@dodger wrote:

There is no precedent for a local authority financing or part financing to the extent SDCC is for the building of a sports stadium for one code.

But there are plenty of precedents for central government doing same. Does the fact that it’s a local authority rather than central government really make that big a difference? The only difference I can think of is that in the case of the local authority much of the money will have derived from commercial rates and development contributions rather than “the taxpayer” as you say above.

Shamrock Rovers are the most successful club in LoI history and if the people via SDCC have to pay for their housing, so be it. The death of the domestic game would be a damning indictment on our society. I’d rather see them get my money than the FAI, GAA or IRFU. Dodger, do thomas davis need this ground? If the answer is yes, then how come this need only arose after SDCC said they’d take the ground in charge. Having a LoI club in Tallaght will be absolutely brilliant for the kids out there, if it’s done correctly. The local GAA are just engaging in their age-old tradition of complete paranoia and insecurity …”oooh i’m scared the bold boys and their garrison game are comin to town…” nonsense

for a very lively debate on this issue see here:
http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?t=15575

btw Cute Panda’s post wasn’t merely offensive. It was also ill-informed, naive and ignorant as well.It’s the type of commentary that does nothing to further the objective of sport and sporting organisations in this country

Thanks for that.
‘Shocking’, though? I wouldn’t have thought so. Good planning? Yes.
Or maybe that’s why you think it’s so shocking.:)

@publicrealm wrote:

It is proposed to widen the existing public footpath, carry out additional landscaping (with native trees for better bat foraging habitat) install roosting boxes, provide public lighting of the entire Dodder Walk etc etc.

Shocking.

Was a bit surprised myself as there was no chance that the IRFU were going scupper this project by neglicting to spend a small sum of money on enhancing the dodder walk.

Personally I have always used the other side of the Dodder when passing this way and would like to see the City Council invest some money in building a priority cycle route from the East Link down Thorncastle Street and down the Dodder to Ballsbridge as it is a most convenient route back towards much of the south suburbs.

Does anyone know what the time scale is after this week when the oral hearing finishes? How long do An Bord Pleanala take to come to a decision generally?

@ctesiphon wrote:

Was there any taxpayers’ money involved in Croke Park? Or has the government ever provided financial support to the GAA? And I don’t just mean that question narrowly to be interpreted as handouts for building/infrastructure work..

Key distinction between Shamrock Rovers stadium issue in Tallaght and any other GAA stadium (or Lansdowne Road) is that the stadium in Tallaght is 100% owned by the state and Shamrock Rovers will be the tenant. The completion of the development will be 100% funded by the state (incl SDCC) and will specifically exclude Gaelic games. The question is whether the state should build ‘municipal stadiums’ that specifically exclude Gaelic games.

On the other hand Lansdowne Road will be redeveloped and exclude Gaelic games but that is a privately owned stadium. It will also be in receive of state funding.

All GAA stadiums are privately owned and often (as in case of other sports) are offered a capital grant subsidy – e,g. Croke Park redevelopment was subsidised by taxpayer to tune of €107m or 41% of total cost (€260m total cost).

Lansdowne Road redevelopment will receive a subsidy of €191m or 52%. This is a private stadium owned by the stadium company (FAI plus IRFU).

All sporting bodies also receive funding to promote participation in games by employment of sports/games promotion officers usually at a county/regional level.

I would personally query the value for money of expending €365m on a stadium that will only cater for 50k spectators (if granted PP as sought) when compared with €260m on Croke Park which has a capacity of 82k. Even when inflation is taken into account.

It there is a highly restrictive planning permission from An BP, say capacity restriction of 45k, it would really be questionable whether it would be worth that kind of investment by the 3 parties (Govt, FAI, IRFU).

When is the expected close of the oral hearing?

@NeilA wrote:

Does anyone know what the time scale is after this week when the oral hearing finishes? How long do An Bord Pleanala take to come to a decision generally?

They’re supposed to decide within 18 weeks of an appeal but they can take as long as they want, but I’d expect an outcome in early spring

I live in the Croke Park area whereby the vicinity is swarming with people in the Summer. which will change next year; as it will be swarming with people year long …I hate the way supporters piss in the doorways on my street.

I’ve bought my tickets for the Dubs playing under the new floodlights at night in Feburary. Lookin’ forward to it!

Croke Park Ltd. were very inclusive of the residents when they were planning and developing. They even signed a contract with the CPARA (Croke Park area Resdients Alliance) which detailed their commitments to cleansing, policing, parking and crowd control. All good stuff. (Bertie Ahern signed it)

Croke Park Ltd are no longer speaking to CPARA. The contract expired. They will not re-sign it and will not negotiate. Cpara were looking for the kind of relationship that the Arsenal Stadium provides the local community with. http://www.islington.gov.uk/Leisure/arsenal/LiaisonCommittee/ Croke Park Ltd. are having none of it.

Croke Park Ltd. has no obligation to talk to the community representative body. This is inappropriate as their revenue generation activities (games) cause the the residents major inconvenience. But as a business they know that CPARA want them to spend some of their profit limiting the detrimental impacts on the community.

The Landsdowne residents would be wise to demand long term contracts, with an obligation to renew & re-sign before the planning is permitted.

From what I understand the GAA worked very closely with local residents until these conditions expired and one must feel sympathy for the residents given the number of games held in Croke Park which are virtually on every wekend from May through October many of them double and even triple headers vis a vis Landsdowne Road where there are possibly 5 large games and 5 medium sized games over the course of the year.

An Bord have defered their decision due to the complexity of the issues

Board defers verdict on Lansdowne project
From:ireland.com
Friday, 23rd February, 2007

An Bord Pleanála has deferred its decision on the plan to redevelop Lansdowne Road as a 50,000-seater stadium until March 22nd because of the complexity of issues raised by appellants.

Dublin City Council’s decision last August to approve the €350 million project was appealed to the board by more than 30 residents groups and individuals in the Ballsbridge area, close to the existing rugby grounds.

Their objections centred on the height and design of the stadium, inclusion of conference facilities, demolition of two houses, impact of construction work, additional traffic and a claimed fall in property values.

These issues were discussed at an oral hearing last December, and it had been anticipated the board would make its ruling by today, following receipt of the report and recommendations of the presiding planning inspector. But in a letter issued this week to all parties, including the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company (LRSDC), which is spearheading the largely Government-funded scheme, An Bord Pleanála said it needed more time.

Expressing regret over this delay, its letter referred to the continuing high volume in the intake of appeals. “In view of the delay involved in bringing this case to determination, priority consideration is being given to the case,” it added.

“Most cases are decided within a short period of their being formally considered for the first time at board level,” the letter explained. “A target date of before 22nd March, 2007, has now been set . . .”

The most controversial issue is the height of the proposed stadium which, at 48.5m (160ft), would make it 15m taller than Croke Park. Objectors claim this is due to the conference facilities.

It would be open to An Bord Pleanála to reduce the height, even though this would almost inevitably mean a reduction in the capacity of the stadium, or to order the omission of conference facilities.

The LRSDC was hoping to start preparatory work on the new stadium very shortly, and had indicated the Dart line would have to be closed for the Easter weekend to facilitate demolition of the west stand.

However, it is clear this ambitious timetable will have to be revised because of the delay in determining the planning appeals. The target date of completing the project by the end of 2009 may also be missed.

22.iii.07

An Bord Pleanála has deferred its decision on the plan to redevelop Lansdowne Road as a 50,000-seater stadium until March 22nd because of the complexity of issues raised by appellants.

That’s today’s date, right?

Any news?

@ctesiphon wrote:

22.iii.07

That’s today’s date, right?

Any news?

Yup. Today’s the day.

The Teddy Bears await the menu.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/

*refresh*

…

*refresh*

…

*refresh*

…

🙂

Must have been put in the post

Watch this space: Case No 218917

Tick tick tick…

It’s GO GO GO.

Lansdowne Road revamp gets go ahead
Thursday, 22 March 2007 18:36
The redevelopment of Lansdowne Road has been given the green light after An Bord Pleanála rejected appeals against plans to revamp the stadium.

The permission is subject to 23 conditions but the developers were granted almost exactly what both the FAI and IRFU would have hoped for.

There is no reduction in the proposed 50,000 all seater capacity or any restriction on any number of sporting events.

The Bord said three concerts could take place at the venue – the same number as allowed at Croke Park.

The inspector of the public hearing into the development had recommended against granting planning permission. However, the Bord decided not to take this recommendation due to the historical use of the land.

I’m sure more detail will follow

PVC King..
The inspector of the public hearing into the development had recommended against granting planning permission. However, the Bord decided not to take this recommendation due to the historical use of the land. (Quote)

Notwithstanding the fact that I too welcome the decision, I am alarmed at the frequency that “The Board” overturn their own Inspectors.
The Planning & Development Act 2000 states that the Board shall consist of at least 7 members and that more can be added if the workload warrants.
😮 We now have the Board of ABP split into 3 x 3 member boardlets that decide on the future of this Country.
How many out there would like to face a Court with only 3 jury members?

Great Stuff. To be honest I was taken aback by the vitriolic nature of the opposition to what is a use that was established long before the residents were even twinkles in the eyes of the D4 massive of yore. Maybe they can still tear down the West Stand over Easter. But remember one thing. This will be THE development in the city over the next decade. It will dwarf everything else. Already we can forget the Point tower, now this mornings old news. Feck the Port tunnel, the interconnector, IKEA. This arena will drag Irish sport into the 21st century (until 11 clowns get on the grass of course) and will glow like a beacon over Ballsbridge…

Jaysus just saw that the Inspector recommended refusal!!! WTF?? What was he thinking? Sometimes i believe that there’s some sort of arrangement between the Inspectors and the Bord, whereby the Inspector knows the decision, especially on high profile politically sensitive developments like this, and then writes what he likes, as some sort of sop to the appelants

@ctesiphon wrote:

[url]
*refresh*
*refresh
*refresh
🙂

This decision really will refresh Irish Sport in general and Rugby in particular. With a venue of this size Leinster will hopefully be able to grow their crowd to make 5 – 10 profitable gates a season. Looking beyond the planning decision on this the ground needs to earn its corn and in comparison to concerts matches are far less disruptive due to their short duration.

In planning terms this is a great result for the wider city given that the only other option on the table was an edge city alternative at an unagreed scale. This was in my opinion the only real opportunity for a new stadium that was actually ever going to happen.

I feel a certain sympathy for the locals as they obviously put a lot of effort into their submissions. If the considerations were purely local you may have taken a different view of the scale of the venue. However the Bord obviously took a view in the context of the needs of the City and Country for a national stadium.

Any chance of Munster lending us your front 8 to get the stadium into the black?

@alonso wrote:

Maybe they can still tear down the West Stand over Easter.
…
This arena will drag Irish sport into the 21st century (until 11 clowns get on the grass of course)

11? Is that five forwards and six backs? Oh hang on, you meant the other game…]Jaysus just saw that the Inspector recommended refusal!!! WTF?? What was he thinking? Sometimes i believe that there’s some sort of arrangement between the Inspectors and the Bord, whereby the Inspector knows the decision, especially on high profile politically sensitive developments like this, and then writes what he likes, as some sort of sop to the appelants[/QUOTE]
I’m a believer in the Board, but as time goes on I wonder more whether this isn’t ridiculously naive. I’d like not to think so, but the whole Inspector-Board dichotomy is getting harder to ignore. I should have put a few quid on this outcome. (What say ye on Ikea?:rolleyes: )

PS PVCKing- will Leinster play in Lansdowne? The always entertaining Ryle Nugent refers to Donnybrook as ‘The Home of Leinster Rugby’- will it not always be so? I mean, if this decision has taught us nothing else, it’s that Irish rugby is motivated above all else by sentimental nostalgia.

I know it’s probably an issue surrounding site-footprint and permissable heights, but I really have a prob with the 50,000 capacity. Perhaps that’s fine for soccer internationals against lower-grade opponents (if there’s anyone left that’s lower-grade than us at the mo’) but for 6 nations rugby and autumn internationals it would appear that we’re building a stadium that’s half the size of what the public require.

@ctesiphon wrote:

PS PVCKing- will Leinster play in Lansdowne? The always entertaining Ryle Nugent refers to Donnybrook as ‘The Home of Leinster Rugby’- will it not always be so? I mean, if this decision has taught us nothing else, it’s that Irish rugby is motivated above all else by sentimental nostalgia.

I think Leinster will be playing most of their bigger home games in the RDS, capacity ca. 15-20,000, when it is redeveloped. At least until Donnybrook is redeveloped to a capacity of about 11-12,000.

I’m not sure I like the idea of incorporating that strip of land along the Dodder into the new development. I’m surprised that no alternative could be found to doing this.

Great that it got the go ahead!

ah ctesiphon, the cheek. well I’m off to Croker for the big game today so 11 clowns is certainly on today’s menu. I am beginning to question the Bord / Inspector relationship. I must do some research some time, but if there’s any correlation between this contradictory outcome and the politically sensitive nature of the development, then something stinks. I 100% predict the exact same outcome for IKEA. I have no doubt in my mind whatsoever

They were originally hoping to bring down the west stand over the Easter bank holiday weekend, but the delay pervented this. Apparently they’ll be on site in 2 months. I don’t believe leave for a judicial review will be granted in this case either. And that’ll be that then. Another piece of our sporting legacy gone. In a decade the list will be Milltown, Lansdowne, Old Croker, Dalymount, possibly Tolka, and every golf course within 8 miles of O’Connell Street

just wathing the England U21 game at the new wembley….mother of God, that’s some place. There’s an awful lot of sporting history being made in 07. Rugby and Soccer at Croker, the mauling of England, the Cricket team in the world’s elite, wembley, and the falling of The Old Lady of Ballsbridge (battleaxe maybe?)

blimp, I disagree that there’s a bigger demand for rugby tickets than soccer. I don’t think there’s been a single competitive game that hasn’t sold out since 1986. And it’s the most played sport in Ireland (yes, even more than GAA)

Seamus, what’s goin on with the RDS? And the Dodder wlak is being expanded and upgraded as part of this so I wouldn’t see that as too big an issue tbh

I would agree that having the board ignore the inspector’s reccommendation is slightly worrying even if I agree with the outcome. However, from what I read in the newspaper, the Inspector’s recommendation to refuse permission was made solely on the basis of their opinion that the Irish Bottle site would be a more suitable location. I don’t have any particular knowledge of this aspect of the planning system but this seems extremely odd; surely the inspector’s remit was to concentrate purely on the proposal being evaluated?

In what way was the Ringsend site deemed “more suitable”? Did the inspector compile a report comparing the two sites in terms of commercial viability, ease of access, strategic development, etc.? In what way is the inspector qualified to pick an alternative “suitable” site for the proposed structure? If the inspector was able to recommend the Irish Bottle site, presumably the inspector must have evaluated it first. Did they also evaluate other locations like Abbotstown or a midlands site for example? If not, where did the choice of Ringsend come from?

To be blunt, it sounds like the inspector failed completely to conduct the appeal properly and, assuming the newspaper reports are correct, the board were correct in ignoring such an oddball and unprofessional recommedation from the inspector.

@alonso wrote:

I don’t believe leave for a judicial review will be granted in this case either. And that’ll be that then. Another piece of our sporting legacy gone. In a decade the list will be Milltown, Lansdowne, Old Croker, Dalymount, possibly Tolka, and every golf course within 8 miles of O’Connell Street

You’r joking?? Or are you seriously suggesting that the demolition of the existing Lansdowne Road Stadium is regrettable?

It may be part of our sporting legacy but then the Dublin slums were part of our architectural legacy.

The current structure has all the charm of a knacker’s yard and the proposed replacement is aesthetically and architecturally amazing (in my view).

It may or may not be too big for the site but it can hardly be worse (for our sporting heritage) than the existing yoke?

I don’t think that’s what alonso was suggesting at all, publicrealm. See his post (#112) above. I understood it more as marking the passing of one of the game’s great characters. Aah the memories, alonso, eh?

jimg-
afaik there was an assessment done by the development team of various other sites, including Ringsend. But I’m always suspicious of these things when they’re undertaken by the proponents of a development. An EIS also has a section on ‘Examination of Alternatives’, but this is more to do with finding the most appropriate use for a given site, to if I remember correctly. And again I suspect that this is often a rubber-stamping exercise for a decision made in advance. If the parameters are set correctly, the result will emerge in your favour.

But it’s an interesting point you raise- that any application should be decided solely on its own merit. And based on the planning context for the area, the decision was probably theright one. FWIW, I’d have preferred to see it in Ringsend or the Docklands, with this site developed for housing &c., but I (grudgingly;) ) accept the decision. I think you’re being a bit harsh on the inspector, though. I can see how such a conclusion could be legitimately reached based on the evidence before him- in essence, if the analysis of alternative sites was part of the submission, then he was entitled to consider it. (I should check the Board’s www for more info, really.)

One other thing that caught my eye was the mention that the Board’s decision was based partly on the inclusion of the redevelopment of the stadium in the NDP. But didn’t the NDP only kick in in January of this year? And the oral hearing was before christmas? I understood that a case had to be determined in the context of the legislation, policy and regulations as they were at the time of its submission. (If I’m wrong, I’d appreciate correction.) And I don’t think it was in the previous NDP. So if you were looking for an indication of the desires of the government, you wouldn’t have to look very far.

It’s not in the same league as that office building on the Dodder bridge in Donnybrook obviously (wasn’t legislation on extending the life of PP written [allegedly?] specifically for that building?), but it certainly gave me pause for thought.

Or have I just been spending too much time on conspiracy theory websites?

@ctesiphon wrote:

I think you’re being a bit harsh on the inspector, though. I can see how such a conclusion could be legitimately reached based on the evidence before him- in essence, if the analysis of alternative sites was part of the submission, then he was entitled to consider it.

Ok fair enough. I didn’t consider that an evaluation of the alternatives might have been part of the submission. The newspaper article almost gave the impression that the inpsector went off on a solo run and that the Ringsend site was a personal preference.

Still seems a very odd ‘though that a submission like this has to include alternatives; as you say, you’d have to be suspicious. Couldn’t the LRSDC have simply included three “alternatives”, like for example: bulldozing Trinity and locating it there, building it in the middle of the Burren or building it in a huge glass dome under the Irish sea? :confused: What’s the point?

A glass dome under the sea? Now you’re talking.

Just tried the ABP site for the documents-

Case has been decided, details will not be available before 27-Mar-2007

So insight will have to wait until then.

no no public realm, i was just being nostalgic. All those grounds are/were decrepit and dated.But to compare Lansdowne road to a knacker’s yard is extremely unfair…. I mean I’ve seen old clips of Steptoe and Son, and you wouldn’t want that poor horse Hercules (thanks Google) to have to stand in the North Terrace on a November evening watching that sh1te we saw yesterday would you??

I must say I was surprised at the Inspector’s reasoning. Although an examination of alterntives forms part of the EIS, it’s technically impossible to use this to conclude that one of them is better, because the information will obviously not be there to base your decision on. The EIS will always claim that the proposed development is the best alternative.

There was a huge amount of work over the years on the location of stadiums in Dublin. Alternatives included Eircom Park at Fortunestown, Bertie Bowl at Abbotstown, a site in Neilstown, just Croker alone, Lansdowne, North Docks, and IGB. It fell heavily to Lansdowne but Bertie pushed on with his lunacy of a scheme.

jimg, just in response to your question on alternatives: They have to be feasible and not just frivolous or unrealistic. Although like in retail planning, it can be skewed and usually is. But in this case, I seem to recall, it was a fairly standard job in this regard.

Also on the Inspector’s overall conduct in the appeal, I doubt if he was anything less than thorough and professional. However, as suggested earlier, his reasoning was outside the remit of the planning process. It’s akin to refusing an extension coz it would work better on the house next door. It’s a nonsense and a sop to the locals. I look forward to reading his explanation for this. I believe he acted outisde his remit. I could be wrong but think about it; You own land, you apply for planning. it fulfils all legal and policy requirements. And you get refused because another site, which doesn’t fulfil any of the legal and policy requirements such as zoning and ownership, is more suitable for your development? That’s what he was saying.

I cant help but feel slightly underwhelmed now that the Landsdowne redevelopment is officially going ahead (barring any legal action of course!) We should be celebrating the fact that we’re finally getting an essential part of any nations sporting infastructure,i.e. a national stadium! However I just feel that this project is seriously flawed!

I must say I really like the design, very sleek and elegant, unfortunately its ruined by the ridiculous single tiered section, it really does look like a bus shelter in comparison to the other 3 stands! I would also have serious reservations the capacity, essentially it is only increasing by a thousand, even if it will be all seater! It might be enough for soccer, it might even be too much after yesterdays shambolic display but i cant see it being enough for rugby! You must also remember that there will be around 10,000 corporate seats which will significantly reduce the number of tickets available to “ordinary fans”

I really feel this is a missed opportunity, 65,000 would’ve been a much safer capacity, this would’ve been possible if the IRFU had managed to secure the back pitch. What in fact is the situation with the back pitch?, who are the owners, Landsdowne rfc?

i thought the stadium was being turned to utilise the back pitch tuborg ?
i agree about capacity, 65k would have been more appropriate, not sure if it was possible on this site though …

It was always the intention to keep the back pitch, Peter (not sure who owns it, Tuborg). The new orientation will be the same as the old. Had they turned it 90 degrees, the capacity could have been higher. Perhaps closer to the 65,000 suggested, or possibly more. But as you say, it probably wasn’t possible on this site (with this orientation), which makes me wonder if it might have been possible at another site…

As it is, it accommodates 35,000 fewer than Croke Park and is 15 metres higher. The explanation I got for this recently? It’s because the site is very tight. Indeed…

One other thing- the Tribune reported today that there might be trouble ahead over the demolition of the West Stand. Apparently Irish Rail hasn’t yet agreed to the required line closures. Did you mean Easter 2007 or Easter 2008, alonso? 😉

I’m sure the granting of a box would get the replacment buses from Sandymount to Barrow Street rolling anytime they want!!!!

I think the fact that Landsdowne RFC control the backpitch which gives them very lucrative bar recipts and nowhere to go put paid to the rotation. In an ideal world the stadium would have rotated and been sunk like an San Siro.

With this stadium now a reality I don’t see the need for a revamped Donnybrookas surely it is too small for competive games such as juicy ERC or a Munster match but is like an SCT mid week schools semi at Landsdown I.e. A loser financially. I say leave Donnybrook for Schools and until or if ever the Magniers league takes off properly with atteractive gates transferred to HQ.

the stadium is shifting slightly clockwise to bring it away from the rail line. The reason for the funny shape and height, and also why the back pitch isn’t being used is capacity. If they were to rotate it 90 degrees, the long sideline stands on the north side would be tiny due to the proximity of houses, so they’d lose more capacity. Sinking the pitch requires more space as well. This is also the reason for the discrepancy in height vs Croker. However Lansdowne is gonna be about 3 times lower at the north terrace than Croker is. A point not amenable to the begrudgers and the media

as for the rail closures, I wouldn’t be too mindful of these types of press reports. If you were to believe all the sunday papers over the years, we’d have a city where people were killed by trams every day, the port tunnel would be on fire while also under water and every time a motorway opens the traffic would improve!! This is such a huge political development at such a sensitive time, that I reckon many many heretofore impossibilities will suddenly arrive in Fianna Fails “A Lot Done” inbox from their overstretched “more to do” tray

As with all developments, greenfield sites are always easier to build on, but location is what it’s all about and you can’t beat Lansdowne. Even Croker’s environs aren’t a patch on Ballsbridge

What’s The point?
One of your correspondents ask why the Inspector seemed to suggest another site rather than Lansdowne Road.
I don’t believe An Bord Pleanala should ever refuse an application because “there is a better site” for a national facility as you are now definitely into the realm of politics. In this case the Government had already indicated that they were prepared to put money into Lansdowne Road, nothwithstanding some of their earlier preferences for Abbottstown. These debates (on the relative merits of a stadium location) should be set aside once a commitment is given. Unless of course there is a case for a bigger stadium which is not dependent on Government money for day to day financing!
😀

@alonso wrote:

the stadium is shifting slightly clockwise to bring it away from the rail line. The reason for the funny shape and height, and also why the back pitch isn’t being used is capacity. If they were to rotate it 90 degrees, the long sideline stands on the north side would be tiny due to the proximity of houses, so they’d lose more capacity. Sinking the pitch requires more space as well.

This is such a huge political development at such a sensitive time, that I reckon many many heretofore impossibilities will suddenly arrive in Fianna Fails “A Lot Done” inbox from their overstretched “more to do” tray

If Bertie didn’t go off on his Abbotstown disaster this Stadium could have been built by now. €100m plus wouldn’t have been wasted on a now abandoned flight of fancy.

I am having problems understanding how there isn’t space for a rotation given that a rugby pitch is 100m long and 50m wide. I know the North terrace is tight but surely a 50m gain would address the deficet?

€100 million??

http://www.rte.ie/news/2001/0521/stadium.html

It suggests that moving the State Laboratories from the site at Abbotstown will cost almost £200m

The design costs of any project usually come in at roughly 10%, not to mention the costs of the company behind the project and endless press releases and ancilary costs. In fact I think €100m is on the low side.

@PVC King wrote:

If Bertie didn’t go off on his Abbotstown disaster this Stadium could have been built by now. €100m plus wouldn’t have been wasted on a now abandoned flight of fancy.

I am having problems understanding how there isn’t space for a rotation given that a rugby pitch is 100m long and 50m wide. I know the North terrace is tight but surely a 50m gain would address the deficet?

I thought that sports stadia / pitches etc had to be aligned on an east – west axis ?

AFAIK that those figures included the sale/purchase (from one department to another) of the land at abbotstown and the building of the lovely new state labs complex in backweston between Lucan and Celbridge. The media did report it… but as a tiny afterthought in their rush to have a headline. Sorry if off topic. Oops beaten to it by PVC King!

@ctesiphon wrote:

It was always the intention to keep the back pitch, Peter (not sure who owns it, Tuborg). The new orientation will be the same as the old. Had they turned it 90 degrees, the capacity could have been higher. Perhaps closer to the 65,000 suggested, or possibly more. But as you say, it probably wasn’t possible on this site (with this orientation), which makes me wonder if it might have been possible at another site…

Actually, they originally produced a plan for a 65,000 seater stadium incorporating the back pitch, but decided against it. The IRFU owns the back pitch and Lansdowne have a tenancy agreement that runs out in a few years’ time. The IRFU made the claim that this is an “unbreakable” agreement, but I don’t think anybody really buys that.

Heard breaking news on radio that Wanderers FC are issuing an injunction to fight this development, they have a clubhouse on the grounds

They just want more tickets & a corporate suite (they have one of the tudor style pavillions adjoining the west stand) – Boo to Wanderers I say for holding things up

@Rory W wrote:

They just want more tickets & a corporate suite (they have one of the tudor style pavillions adjoining the west stand) – Boo to Wanderers I say for holding things up

How utterly shameless.

The word treason springs to mind.:mad:

I read last week that Wanderers settled this with the IRFU before taking a pasting by Bruff on Saturday

Decision expected on Lansdowne land
From ireland.com06:24Monday, 30th April, 2007
Dublin City Council will decide today whether to give the developers of the 50,000-seater Lansdowne Road stadium a half-acre strip of land essential for the construction of the stadium.

An extraordinary meeting of the council’s south east area committee has been called today under pressure from the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company (LRSDC) which needs an urgent decision on the land to allow building to get under way.

LRSDC requires the closure of the Dart for two weekends to allow for demolition and construction work. Under an agreement reached with Iarnród Éireann these closures can only take place on two bank holiday weekends when the service is at its least busy.

LRSDC had initially targeted the St Patrick’s Day and Easter weekends for the work, but was not granted planning permission for the stadium in time. Bord Pleanála finally granted permission on March 22nd last.

The proposal to transfer the land, which is a section of the River Dodder walkway, to LRSDC must be agreed by the councillors from the southeast area and then ratified by the full council.

The proposal was put before the south east area committee at its last monthly meeting on April 2nd, however they decided to defer the decision to their next meeting on May 14th, because LRSDC had not negotiated a compensation package for residents living nearest the stadium.

The deferral would have meant that the decision could not be ratified by the full council until its meeting on June 7th, causing LRSDC to miss the May and June bank holidays, and making the August and October weekends the earliest possible opportunities for the construction work

Decision time for DCC do they back the locals a couple of weeks before a general election or secure the viability of the leisure component of the local rates base?

@PVC King wrote:

I read last week that Wanderers settled this with the IRFU before taking a pasting by Bruff on Saturday

Decision time for DCC do they back the locals a couple of weeks before a general election or secure the viability of the leisure component of the local rates base?

Shame on you PVC King – the Honorable (and Upstanding) Members will not be concerned with such matters as votes or rates (heavens – the greasy till?) and will, I am certain, confine their considerations to matters of proper planning and sustainable development.

Amazing the way the word sustainable is trotted out by all and sundry in an election year.

Rugby ground residents reject cash offer
From The Irish IndependentTuesday, 1st May, 2007null

DUBLIN 4 residents affected by the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road stadium have been offered €75,000 each in compensation for loss of light to their homes.

But the offer has been rejected by Dublin City councillors who have sought an increased package as part of a deal to allow the developers use a half-acre strip of land in the massive €365m redevelopment project.

Yesterday a special meeting of the council’s south-east area committee decided to defer a recommendation that the land at the River Dodder walkway be handed over to the stadium’s redevelopers, pending an improved compensation package.

Some 21 householders living in O’Connell Gardens and near the Dodder walkway will be eligible for the package, which has been deemed too low at €75,000 per household.

“We’re not satisfied on the rate of progress, and will meet again on Friday morning,” council committee member Cllr Dermot Lacey (Labour) said yesterday.

“The bottom line is we’re not satisfied with the amount of compensation being paid. It’s not an acceptable offer as people will have a ring of steel behind their homes.

“We’re not looking to screw the system, but the average house will fall in price by 20pc.

“They (residents) presently have blue skies behind them, but will have a 150-foot high wall when the stadium is redeveloped.”

It is planned to transform Lansdowne Road into a 50,000-seater state-of-the-art soccer and rugby stadium which should be open for competitive matches in 2010.

Decision

But the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company (LRSDC) needs a decision from the council if it will hand over a half-acre strip of land at the Dodder Walkway needed for construction of the stadium.

The proposal to transfer the land must be agreed by the southeast area committee and then ratified by the full council.

A full council meeting takes place next Tuesday, and the stadium developers hope that a positive decision will be made. But councillors also want additional information on what security measures will be put in place to secure homes along the Dodder Walkway, and the effects that construction works will have on the structure of some houses. City management has recommended that councillors hand over the land in exchange for river improvement works which are expected to cost €1.5m.

Now they have become valuers as well 😮

Green light for Lansdowne Road development
Wednesday, 9 May 2007 07:36
The Lansdowne Road stadium redevelopment can now go ahead following a €2.4million compensation deal for local residents.

Dublin City Council gave the go ahead yesterday evening following the compensation deal negotiated by local councillors.

As part of the agreement, the Lansdowne Road Development Company has also agreed to spend €1.5m to improve the Dodder Walk.

Fourteen households whose homes will back directly onto the new stadium wall will receive €120,000 each. And 45 other residents will get sums varying from €10,000 to €32,500.

Dublin City Council had to agree to donate half an acre of land before work could begin, requiring DART closures over two Bank Holiday weekends.

The Bertie Bowl is no more :p

I normally find planned engineering works a pain but these will be worth it!!!!

Thats good news. Will they ever just get on with building the thing. However, I wouldn’t say the Bertie Bowl was totally dead. There is some sort of a sports campus scheme planned for the Abbotstown site, and a stadium is part of the proposal, but a scaled down version. The FAI plan to move it’s HQ out here. With the Olympics planned for London in 2012, we expect to cash in on it, ie training facilities etc… An opportunity not to be missed.
( I bet too that the Abbotstown stadium will be of an adequate size, once the new Lansdowne Road stadium is up and running.)

The London Olympics

A fiasco if ever there was one; will it cost £3.4bn or £9bn they just don’t know and despite it being scaled down again and again the costs just keep heading north. It should have gone to Paris the French are usually happy to underwrite such lunacy.

What is the estimate of likely income from the pre-olympic training? six figures? Low sevens?

@GregF wrote:

Thats good news. Will they ever just get on with building the thing. However, I wouldn’t say the Bertie Bowl was totally dead. There is some sort of a sports campus scheme planned for the Abbotstown site, and a stadium is part of the proposal, but a scaled down version. The FAI plan to move it’s HQ out here. With the Olympics planned for London in 2012, we expect to cash in on it, ie training facilities etc… An opportunity not to be missed.
( I bet too that the Abbotstown stadium will be of an adequate size, once the new Lansdowne Road stadium is up and running.)

They have started! 😀 😀 😀 😀

ah the memories…

So great to see that the decrepit old kip is gone from the earth.

I’ll genuinely miss it. For all its decrepitness (or perhaps because of it) it was a great little stadium. It’s like knocking a tatty old Georgian to put up a shiny glass ‘n’ metal cuboid in its place. Sure it’ll be cleaner and tidier, but it’s so dull in comparison.

Having said that, cracking video of the West Stand coming down can be found here 🙂

Great film..It’s like as if it was eaten away by insects.

However pity about the demolishion job done on O’Driscoll. French cynicism I detect in light of the World Cup.

Our Brian is made of stern stuff and it would take a bit more than that to dispose of him!!

Role on September!

just wondering how is Landsdowne progressing? … I am doing some research into the new US super embassy in Baghdad and I noticed that the embassy and landsdowne share the same project management – Berger Devine Yaeger…hopefully this is not a bad omen!

Foundations look like they are almost complete as first levels of brick / shape can now be seen

@alonso wrote:

Sinking the pitch requires more space as well.

Alonso, Were the technical difficulties in sinking the pitch, say 6m, into the ground really insurmountable?

You seem very well informed on this topic.

It’s a pity that was the case. Sinking the pitch would have been great way to increase capacity with all the height restrictions on north side of site.

@The Willinator wrote:

Alonso, Were the technical difficulties in sinking the pitch, say 6m, into the ground really insurmountable?

You seem very well informed on this topic.

It’s a pity that was the case. Sinking the pitch would have been great way to increase capacity with all the height restrictions on north side of site.

I don’t know Will, and it;s been well over a year since I last looked at it. If you check DCC’s website the EIS should be there. Even the non-technical summary should give an explanation. There’s only so much sinking that can be done to an existing ground as the more you go down the more you shrink the playing surface, unless you go for a Giants stadium look where a wall surrounds the pitch before the stadium starts but this negates the whole point of doing it in the first place.

@alonso wrote:

I don’t know Will, and it;s been well over a year since I last looked at it. If you check DCC’s website the EIS should be there. Even the non-technical summary should give an explanation.

1) Developer doesn’t want to sink it.
2) Developer commissions an EIS as part of the application.
3) EIS says that there will be ‘technical difficulties’ sinking the pitch.
4) ctesiphon professes himself shocked – shocked! – by the fact that an EIS tells a developer what he wants to hear.

yeh exactly, but I had a nice lunch and felt uncynical at the time of writing. It’s the same methodology used to assess the use of the back pitch I’m sure.

Anyway i wanted it to get through so I’m happy with it the EIS 🙂

@alonso wrote:

I had a nice lunch and felt uncynical at the time of writing.

You’re not going soft on us are you, alonso? Back to gruel and water for you!

@alonso wrote:

Anyway i wanted it to get through so I’m happy with it the EIS 🙂

And I wanted it not to get through, so I’m picking holes in the process. Are we quits? 😉

@ctesiphon wrote:

And I wanted it not to get through, so I’m picking holes in the process. Are we quits? 😉

Ah I guess, but having been to Croker for a few games, I’m dying for the lads to get back home. The pubs of Ballybough just aren’t the same…

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=74

pictures of the construction. seems to be progressing well

Given the day that’s in it (another Irish free tournament begins while the eggchasers are beaten down under) I did the unprecedented thing and took the bike out at the weekend and headed round the corner to get a few pics of the work in progress down Dodder Way. They coulda been better but it’s tough enough to get an angle – perhaps a more climbing taller type local archiseeker might have another go as it develops:

From the Dodder Walk

looming over the now famous O’Connell Gardens

The West Stand from Havelock Square

Down Lansdowne Lane

The podium and public area over the DART with the tiers of the West Stand behind

Just HOW close is that to the road? The South Stand onto Lansdowne Road

The East Stand rising up

Thanks for he pics! Seems to be coming along nicely. There are plenty of pics on the website aswell

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34&NCID=68

The images of the exterior still make it look like an ugly brute; no wonder the residents were upset. Even the aerial progress shots demonstrate just how cramped the site is.

@johnglas wrote:

The images of the exterior still make it look like an ugly brute; no wonder the residents were upset. Even the aerial progress shots demonstrate just how cramped the site is.

Jeesh, give it a chance, they’re only building it for god’s sake, steel and concrete.

Of course, but they’re punting an image of it that makes it look like an ugly brute,etc. Maybe that’s just the ‘warrant design’ and there’s a swan in there somewhere. We’ll see.

@darkman wrote:

Thanks for he pics! Seems to be coming along nicely. There are plenty of pics on the website aswell

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34&NCID=68

nice images there. i do like the look of the finished product. 🙂

I hadn’t seen this view before…

Whats with the big dent in the curve, It looks like someone whalloped a giant football off the side of the stadium.
Looks like Scotts just copied http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Football_Stadium

the north and south stands are constrained by the adjoining residnces, particularly the North

i thought one end was much lower then another the pics doesn’t make it look so.

Going by the stadium on the Dart the other day i noticed they have built what looks like a mock up of the cladding. Its fixed to a steel structure on the left off the train tracks heading in towards the city. From what i could make out the cladding just looked like large glass louvres but it was half covered and the train passed it quite quickly so i didnt get a good look. In reality it didnt seem as reflective or shiny as its depicted in the 3d images.
Has anyone else seen this or been able to get a better look at it?

@lostexpectation wrote:

i thought one end was much lower then another the pics doesn’t make it look so.

look at the interior shots of the Havelock square end – one tier only

@shed wrote:

Going by the stadium on the Dart the other day i noticed they have built what looks like a mock up of the cladding. Its fixed to a steel structure on the left off the train tracks heading in towards the city. From what i could make out the cladding just looked like large glass louvres but it was half covered and the train passed it quite quickly so i didnt get a good look. In reality it didnt seem as reflective or shiny as its depicted in the 3d images.
Has anyone else seen this or been able to get a better look at it?

I haven’t seen the mock up, but I think it’s supposed to resemble the transparent ‘scales’ on the curved outer skin of the Allianz Arena in Munich. http://www.allianz-arena.de/en/fakten/ The translucent skin on the Allianz is illuminated internally by, either red or blue, lighting depending on which of the resident clubs. Bayern, or Munich 1860, are playing.

The Allianz stadium was designed, in 2001, by Herzog & de Meuron (like everything else in Munich), and the renders of the new Lansdowne always looked like a straight copy to me. I imagine the correct term is ‘influenced by’.

Biggest visual difference would be that the Lansdowne skin appeared shinier, as you say. Then there’s the issue that Lansdowne is located in the city, as opposed to out in the back of beyond (which is good), but is dented on one side, as observed by keating, (which is bad).

Apart obviously from the scaly skin, the allianze Arena is the most completely scaleless building I’ve ever seen. There are no visual clues until you get up close and then it manages to be both, hugely impressive and surprisingly intimate, at the same time. It’s a real pity that, in emulating the Allianz Arena, Lansdowne will be compromised by the drop in scale at the Havelock Square end, The shallower dip at the Lansdowne Road end probably doesn’t diminish the unity of the design too much.

I suppose a person’s conservation credentials would be revoked if they were to suggest that one side of Havelock Square (and a bit of O’Connell Gardens) should be sacrificed to facilitate the completion of the circuit of the stadium, on design grounds alone! with the happy consequence of getting the stadium capacity up a bit, towards the 60,000 level of demand! no chance of that happening?

@gunter wrote:

The translucent skin on the Allianz is illuminated internally by, either red or blue, lighting depending on which of the resident clubs. Bayern, or Munich 1860, are playing.

I believe it can also be illuminated in white – for occasions when the German national team are playing in the stadium.

I think that the new lansdowne road stadium looks fantastic……but…….It just doesnt seem to fit or look right where its going to be…….If it was thought out properly you would think that the national stadium of Ireland would be located in the centre of ireland

@Shane M wrote:

I think that the new lansdowne road stadium looks fantastic……but…….It just doesnt seem to fit or look right where its going to be…….If it was thought out properly you would think that the national stadium of Ireland would be located in the centre of ireland

rather than within walking distance of the focus of the national transport network and the heart of the only large population centre on the island?

Dublin is the centre of Ireland!:)

And most surely, D4 is the centre of Dublin.

I’m reminded of that scene in The Commitments: “the irish are the blacks of europe, and dubliners are the blacks of ireland, and northsiders are the blacks of Dublin – so say it now and say it loud – I’m black and I’m proud!” 😎

@Shane M wrote:

I think that the new lansdowne road stadium looks fantastic……but…….It just doesnt seem to fit or look right where its going to be…….If it was thought out properly you would think that the national stadium of Ireland would be located in the centre of ireland

Yes, Athlone would have been the logical choice for the stadium. This is outrageous planning, etc.

@massamann wrote:

And most surely, D4 is the centre of Dublin.

I’m reminded of that scene in The Commitments: “the irish are the blacks of europe, and dubliners are the blacks of ireland, and northsiders are the blacks of Dublin – so say it now and say it loud – I’m black and I’m proud!” 😎

Lansdowne is within spitting distance of the Cradle of Irish Football, Ringsend. Perfect location, historically.

Athlone! gimme a break!

Dublin is the most accessible location, all roads and rail lead there. how do you get to Athlone from Donegal or Waterford of Dundalk or Belfast or Derry…?

Also, largest population centre

It’s a no-brainer, surely

SD, I presumed Jem was being sarcastic in the first post. Was I wrong?

No.

At least, I hope not.

Moving the Dail to Athlone, however…

A few recent pics (good ol bank holidays ;)) It’s really beginning to take shape and I wasn’t the only tourist in the area

Wide shot from Ringsend Road Bridge

Ringsend Dodder

O’Connell Gardens

Irony Havelock Square Style

More Havelock Square

When you walk the area you really get a sense of the scale, especially at O’Connell Gardens where it looms over the back gardens. The Dodder Walk to the rear of the East stand is now closed for construction so no photos were possible from here. Coming home to look at the above is a bit of a let down, First hand experience is essential

While the merits of this development are open to debate and many still regard the IGB as a better site, as the inspector did, this is still one of the biggest construction projects in the State and one of the few to have the Wow factor – it really is a grand project and one which despite the arguments has managed to take an historic site and reuse it as it has been done for longer than any other stadium on the planet – ie rugby. And as a soccer fan i’ll be greatly greatly relieved to go here again instead of Croker.

Stay tuned for the Christmas update!

Any updates on the stadium? Found this image.
[ATTACH]8249[/ATTACH]

Its well adanced, about halfway i reckon.

More images on:

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34&NCID=68

probably the most frequently updated construction site for any major project in this country, fair play to the LRSDC.

this thread has a few relatively recent pics from yours truly
https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?p=84159#post84159

they’re currently lifting the frames for the upper tiers into place so it’s really really taking shape in the last few weeks and now looks like a stadium rather than any random site. The best view, and the one that nearly ends with me cycling into the Dodder every shagging morning and evening, is from Ringsend Bridge across down the river. Great stuff

Good article on the engineering of the roof

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=453&storycode=3122100&c=2

Thanks for posting PTB, interesting stuff.

Looks as if the renders are infact more accurate than notional 🙂 I wondered if we might get a crude interpretation.

Although I would have preferred to see the stadium turned to allow for increased capacity, the design is certainly unique, and yes ok, dictated to a large degree by its environment, but the resulting seamless wall / roof structure if executed as well as described will hopefully leave us with a new icon for Dublin …

… and the magic of the walk from town to landsdowne will live on 😉

World class stadium and great design!! Pity that the capacity of the stadium is just 50,000, would of liking to see 60,000 capacity at the stadium. I know height was an issue but if they positioned the stadium to a more central location of site they would be able for 60,000 capacity. One side of stadium very low but if it was positioned centrally away from houses or turn 90 degrees it would reach 60,000+ capacity. Still like the plan, i know they need a bit of open space at the site Ah well:p

I’m hopeful that the interior tier layout of the stadium will look more like the impressive estadio da luz in Lisbon rather then the over rated Emirates (Two designs this stadium will be based on).By this i mean that the tiers will be stepper as in the estadio da luz and that the corners of the third tier will not drop to low as with the Emirates.

[ATTACH]8253[/ATTACH]
(estadio da luz):cool:

[ATTACH]8255[/ATTACH]
(emirates)

It’s too small, the end with 6 to 10 rows of seats look horrendous. The Irish Rugby team pull 70000 – 80000 at every game now, New Lansdowne Road Stadium is a complete waste. The Estadio da luz in Lisbon and the Emirates stadiums referenced above are vastly superior.

Surely there is scope to complete the stadium properly at a later date. They (IRFU + FAI) could buy up those properties at the Havelock Square/single tiered end bit by bit over time.

I bet that is their intentions, and this part of the stadium will be developed to a height like the rest.

Will probably bring the capacity up to 65,000 then. ( or even 70,000)

Check this out , the rendered stadium looks superb in the footage. I hope it will look as good when finished.

http://www.faivantageclub.com/virtual-tour.htm

Cheers for posting Greg. Seems to imply a mirrored finish ! I’d prefer semi-translucent panels myself, obvious potential for lighting to completely change the colour of the exterior.

I’m not crazy about severity of dip at the havelock square end, perhaps this can be re-worked in future but given the ‘seamless’ nature of the wall roof/structure, it won’t be easy to achieve and it appears no provision has been made, could be wrong though.

It will however lend itself to a brilliant camera-lift angle from the havelock square end; where the stadium wall curves forward to become the roof & a packed stadium comes in to view 😉

Ah, the beautiful game! Even the stadium is beautiful! (cf. Cabaret)

@johnglas wrote:

Ah, the beautiful game! Even the stadium is beautiful! (cf. Cabaret)

But where are the wirgens?

Developer have added a live webcam of the site on its website!!! link http://www.sisk.ie/sisk/sisk/www/default.asp?magpage=25&id=565&sector_id=9&wid=2 Also added recent pic of progress from lrdsc website

Anyone got any new images of the stadium? The lansdowne redevelopment website has not been updated with any new pics since October.

i’ll take a camera to it in due course… my photos are on another thread

this page on

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=1944&highlight=lansdowne+road&page=7

But this thread keeps being resurrected.. boo

Cheers alonso!

Some new pictures from today:

O’Connell Gardens

Havelock Square

Shelbourne Road

Havelock Square again:

Lansdowne Lane

Podium over the Railway Line

From Lansdowne Road itself

From Newbridge Avenue

Closer up

A reminder of the owner/tenant arrangement of the past, not sure if this is to remain

Cool Photo’s.

The stadium is coming along great!

It’s now looking good! The CAD renders made it look as though the outer cladding was going to obscure much of the detail (which I didn’t think worked at all), but these pictures show much more articulation, with a definite horizontal banding to complement the verticality of the stands. Am I right?
Saw it from the vicinity of Grand Canal Dock in early Dec – it was looming impressively over Ballsbridge.

dammit i was just driving camera-less over Grand Canal Street Bridge southbound and the view from here is pretty spectacular, as is the view from Ringsend Bridge…

I shall return around Easter with some more pics, unless some dramatic development onsite occurs and i will head back over sooner.

Congratulations to Lansdowne Road on getting to host the UEFA Europa League Cup Final in 2011.

Well Done!

As posted on another thread I can 99% confirm that many of the seats at the very back of the upper tier will have restricted views of the far side of the pitch. This comes as a big disappointed & seems like a pathetic mistake to have taken place

If true, that’s very sad – no excuse for the architects but a balls up.

some wider shots of the new place

From the bridge on Grand Canal St

Ringsend Bridge

Towering over Bath Avenue

There’s a joke about better quality on the wings in here somewhere – (this guy was massive and very very loud)

Some photos snapped in the sunshine yesterday.

wow it looks like some kind of Lebbeus Woods metastructure…..hmm if only the could leave it unfinished 🙂

Great photos Alonso and Paddy.
Shame the place only holds 50,000.
If it’s a battle trying to get tickets for an 82,200 capacity stadium a few miles away, whats it going to be like getting to a match here ?

Why does the new Lansdowne Road (Aviva) have such a small capacity given it’s similar footprint to Croke Park ?

capital d has bit on the stadium

watch in rte swanky new player
http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1046365

@Global Citizen wrote:

Why does the new Lansdowne Road (Aviva) have such a small capacity given it’s similar footprint to Croke Park ?

The answer is well documented in this thread. Croke Park has a considerably larger footprint with far less constraints.

I must say i think that the initial design was far superior. i really liked the glass shell… It was a signature feature.

it’s a real pity that it was changed imo, it just looks functional, dull and boring now.

@ofjames wrote:

I must say i think that the initial design was far superior. i really liked the glass shell… It was a signature feature.

it’s a real pity that it was changed imo, it just looks functional, dull and boring now.

I’m confused, which one do you think they are building? Because they are building the top one of the two pics you posted.

@CraigFay wrote:

I’m confused, which one do you think they are building? Because they are building the top one of the two pics you posted.

i am confused as well, I had been trying to reconcile what was actually being built to the first picture and cant, looks much closer to the design below.

can someone confirm what is happening?:confused:

@aj wrote:

can someone confirm what is happening?

This ! not sure what ofjames is on about, in fairness it can’t be described as dull and boring as stadiums go.

But is it that? Unlike ofjames, I didn’t like the glass shell (aka ‘the blob’) and I think the current design is definitely a compromise – and none the worse for that.

@Peter Fitz wrote:

This ! not sure what ofjames is on about, in fairness it can’t be described as dull and boring as stadiums go.

No I think you are mistaken, If you check the photo’s on the LRSDC website you will see that the stadium that is actually being built corresponds to the model depicted in the second image in my post and not the initial model you have shown above (the one with the glass shell)

@ofjames wrote:

No I think you are mistaken, If you check the photo’s on the LRSDC website you will see that the stadium that is actually being built corresponds to the model depicted in the second image in my post and not the initial model you have shown above (the one with the glass shell)

All of the CG images on LRSDC & Aviva Stadium websites show the glass one, as did the FAI TV advertisement. I think that small picture is an older version of the stadium. I’m positive that picture is a render of the old version.

This is what’s being built, they just haven’t put up the glass yet.

All you have to do is look at the size of each end. That older render has 2 tall sides, 2 short. the new one Has 2 tall, 1 medium, 1 small. Just like the ocnstructions pics.

CraigFay: you’re making a good case, but I’m still convinced that the ‘glass’ cover will go above and be separate from the side cladding, meaning the render you showed will not be accurate. (In my opinion, this new articulation will be an improvement and a move away from ‘blobby’ architecture.)

Apparently the translucent skin will be “polycarbonate” – from the construction images it’s hard to see how a secondary structure to hold it proud of the glazed facade could work – surely structural struts would have to be sticking out well beyond the glazing by this stage. I’d also worry that it could end up looking very busy – the renders always show the translucent skin miraculously hovering with very little structure shown. The reality is bound to be less elegant.

Will be interesting to see how it turns out! Looking very impressive already. I do think it’s a crying shame that there will be so few people accommodated at the northern end – from the renders it only looks like about 10 rows of seats. I hope it doesnt cause the atmospherr e to suffer too much but its bound to have an effect.

just re the ‘Capital D’ profile thing … the guy from STW was making a virtue of the fact that the curvilinear design will allow as many as possible a view of the pitch from the half way line or thereabouts – generally considered the best spot to view any match from. I’d like to think that he wouldn’t be making such a deal of it if previous claims that the overarching canopy would disrupt a view of the entire pitch from those seated up in the gods were true.

Indeed, that 2nd smaller image of the stadium that Ofjames is on about is the original proposal which was modified to the sexier glass shell proposal as shown above in the superb renders. I hope the finished structure will look just like it.

I’m still with BTH – there’s no structure to support a ‘floating’ canopy, so it will have to be confined more or less within the outer edge shown in the last of CraigFay’s pics. Either way, it’s quite a statement.

Here are some images of the stadium from various locations today.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39454894@N02/

Wow, you can see from the shots that it’s taking on that sexy shape.

Here’s some more from their site….

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=111

@CraigFay wrote:

All you have to do is look at the size of each end. That older render has 2 tall sides, 2 short. the new one Has 2 tall, 1 medium, 1 small. Just like the ocnstructions pics.

What’s that big white cuboid thing in the middle of the stadium? It looks like a massive tent.

It’s a shelter for various onsite works.

@johnglas wrote:

I’m still with BTH – there’s no structure to support a ‘floating’ canopy, so it will have to be confined more or less within the outer edge shown in the last of CraigFay’s pics. Either way, it’s quite a statement.

the support structure for the Polycarbonate skin can be seen in this picture.
5 ribs extend from the roof out around the glass that has already been fitted. These ribs will continue around the whole structure to create the blob shape.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39454894@N02/3630808642/sizes/l

And there was me thinking that the stadium had escaped that awful fate… And the point of making it blobby is…? What the rationale is for making something coherent and legible into something incoherent and illegible escapes me – architecture in crisis in more ways than one.

@Goofy wrote:

the support structure for the Polycarbonate skin can be seen in this picture.
5 ribs extend from the roof out around the glass that has already been fitted. These ribs will continue around the whole structure to create the blob shape.

Here’s the start of the skin going up (from their own site).

Sections of the roof are going on now.

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=113

what do people think about the lower northern end? Would it ever be possible for it to be expanded to match the southern end? This would probably add 10,000 seats to the stadium. If the houses to the immediate north were bought out would they have to be demolished to make room or is there enough space within the site to build upwards?

Sorry about all the questions but I think in the coming years there will be many questions asked about the capacity of Lansdowne Road as it is too small for 6nations rugby in my opinion

@niall murphy wrote:

what do people think about the lower northern end? Would it ever be possible for it to be expanded to match the southern end? This would probably add 10,000 seats to the stadium. If the houses to the immediate north were bought out would they have to be demolished to make room or is there enough space within the site to build upwards?

Sorry about all the questions but I think in the coming years there will be many questions asked about the capacity of Lansdowne Road as it is too small for 6nations rugby in my opinion

I agree especially if the success of Irish rugby continues.

I think its ridiculious to move Irish rugby to a smaller stadium when we have seen time and again that they are very capable of filling Croke park. I’m sure in the future it will have to be addressed, but as always in this country we never build for the future, and its going to be a costly mistake!

these latest photo’s (last 2 of the selection) seem to confirm that the roof is going to interfere terribly with the view of anyone sitting on the top tier. what a bunch of retards that they couldnt do better than this. really annoys me. i’ve sat in the quadrants at old trafford several times and from that experience i can testify that having half your view dominated by corrugated plastic and metal beams is just a pain in the arse.

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=116#

The big irony is this: The stadium at Abbotstown was costed at 350 million (iirc).
That was shot down due to politics (Mary Harney and Pat Rabbite I’m looking at you)
This stadium is costing approx 300 million.
Maybe the solution will be in 10 years when the Aviva contract runs out and Croke Pk can be used for big games.

@marmajam wrote:

The big irony is this: The stadium at Abbotstown was costed at 350 million (iirc).

The Abbotstown idea was daft. Nobody thinks green-field, car accessible, out-of-town stadia are a good idea these days; even the Americans realised this 10 years or more ago. Except Bertie of course, who I guess being a socialist wanted to leave a 70s Eastern block style monument to himself.

Eastern block is a very sadly neglected genre who’s day will surely come again

I agree ofjames, looks like folk on the top tier will be watching games through the roof supports.
True too, Old Traffords big roof stand is bloody awful, when looking down the only view of a tiny subbuteo pitch below dominated by the big sloping roof overhead is really bad design.

@jimg wrote:

The Abbotstown idea was daft. Nobody thinks green-field, car accessible, out-of-town stadia are a good idea these days; even the Americans realised this 10 years or more ago. Except Bertie of course, who I guess being a socialist wanted to leave a 70s Eastern block style monument to himself.

What about the Metro West going by there. Sorry but Abbotstown is a better site than Lansdowne. But better than either was the Irish Glass site, and god only knows why they didn’t choose there.

I hate the Abbotstown question – its over get used to it.

The simple question is can you walk to Abbotstown from the city centre?

The answer is no

Debate snipped…

jaysus abbotstown better than Lansdowne? Where the fuck do you start on that statement… fucking hell., A field in nowheresville vs a stadium within walking distance of town surrounded by ancillary uses and on a DART station…hmmm where should we put it

But yes IGB may have been better than either

I think the Landsdowne site was perfect – apart from the insistence of the rugby club to keep their training pitch beside it. Its removal would have allowed the reorientation of the stadium to the optimum and given some wriggling room with reagard the residents on Havelock sqaure.

There’s a lot of history there.

this is starting to come together eh? though I’m still not convinced by the roof structure…..it’s looks like it will indeed not offer a complete unobstructed view of play http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=116

Yeah thats the best illustration of the roof problems yet. It looks pretty poor now to be honest. Very bad mistake.

The external cladding looks good however.

Cladding really looking great, only hoping its not a sleek exterior at the expense of the interior … some nice contrasts in the shots below.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/turgidson/sets/72157600540378750/

@Starch wrote:

though I’m still not convinced by the roof structure…..it’s looks like it will indeed not offer a complete unobstructed view of play

I think you may be right Starch, those nosebleed seats will just about have a full view of the pitch judging by those photos, it would be like watching a match with your hood pulled down just above your eyes, only you can’t push this one back up out of the way!

In general though the stadium is starting to look really exciting. The structure and cladding system are intriguing, especially the semi-open cladding around the back of the stands.

The earlier renders from inside the stadium show a much more subtle, flowing roof structure, than more recent renders/the built reality. Shame they felt they had to gloss over that aspect.

Yep –

This

to this 😮

@Peter Fitz wrote:

Yep –

This

to this 😮

Unfortunately it’s going to be ugly as sin internally. The roof structure just looks so over-engineered…

Plus the ten or so rows of seats Havelock Square end just looks ridiculous… I still don’t know what the designers were thinking. Within the height of the roof structure thats going at this end they could surely have fit a more impressive terrace or bank of seating…

@BTH wrote:

The roof structure just looks so over-engineered…

I think if you compare the two renders the problem appears to be that the first version wasn’t engineered at all! :p
The whole steel frame just floats under the roof canopy.
The new structural solution is similar to the one employed at Thomond Park (sorry), with the two large steel spans tied onto bell-like support pillars at either end.
Perhaps someone could find out if the the same company won the steel frame contract for both stadia?

And why did they remove the tricolor from the second render? Is that not going to happen now? 🙁
Maybe it is to appease our Northern brethren.

yeh and yer one on the left in the 1st pic is wearin a Gah jersey at a Rugby game… I mean like WTF were they thinkin. I woulda refused it for that alone 😉

new pics of the outside…looks great…inside maybe meh….

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=119

@foremanjoe wrote:

I think if you compare the two renders the problem appears to be that the first version wasn’t engineered at all! :p

I think they just chickened out on engineering something amazing. It can be done. (I’m sure it was money related but still…)

Looks so inelegant now. 😡

It does indeed

The gigantic trusses really do seem to dominate the space internally (or at least, they seem like a very obvious piece of functional engineering that the designers would prefer was invisible, as opposed to the Thomond Park ones which are elegantly included as part of the expression of the roof). The fact that they weren’t in the initial renders means you can’t help but think that the engineering aspect of it is more just retroactively solving the problem of how to keep that roof up as opposed to something that was considered aesthetically at the outset. I know the ‘scooping down’ at the Havelock Square end looks a bit silly internally but I like the effect it gives to the overall shape of the stadium, makes it more distinctive than a pure ‘bowl’ would have been.

I can see a future ‘Viz Top Tip’ emerging from this redesign:

Can’t get tickets for Ireland’s 2014 World Cup qualifiers ? Stick your telly in the greenhouse or a bus shelter for that authentic Landsdowne Road vibe.

@reddy wrote:

I think they just chickened out on engineering something amazing. It can be done. (I’m sure it was money related but still…)

Looks so inelegant now. 😡

Agreed reddy.
I think anyone watching the recent World Athletics Championships and comparing the slick roof on the Olympic Stadium with this blunt example would have to feel a little agrieved that more care was not put into it.

Again the comparison with Thomond is telling in the position of the truss in relation to the roof, in Thomond the truss sits above the roof and gives the stadium its strong outward expression. Unfortunately in Lansdowne the truss lurks suspiciously under the roof and makes no positive aesthetic contribution to the stadium.

Tis a pity.

here is the proposed 2016 olympic stadium in tokyo, which will be built if they win the bid contest.

not a very detailed picture, but wouldn’t it be amazing if they could build it with an elegant engineering solution.

puts our attempt at a national stadium in the shade

http://www.tokyo2016.or.jp/en/plan/venue/

Well the Irish sure know how to take themselves down. A fantastic, world-class stadium to anyone’s eyes – yet all anyone here can do is run it down because a few % of seats might have a roofing pole running 5 metres above your head – and for some reason this makes the entire project, the phenomenal transformation, moot.

I was at the Shelbourne races last night where there is a wonderful view of the pearl-like grounds in the distance, glittering in the sunset – and we all agreed how fabulous it looked and was a credit to the nation.

Pity none of you are able to recognise this…

The structure is crude at best, the cladding is a very thin veneer to hide all the unrefined guts, dressing muton as lamb, and the overall form comes from a late 90s/ early 00s Dutch trendy new architecture hand book when blobs were the future….. but somehow I like it.

@pippin101 wrote:

Well the Irish sure know how to take themselves down. A fantastic, world-class stadium to anyone’s eyes – yet all anyone here can do is run it down because a few % of seats might have a roofing pole running 5 metres above your head – and for some reason this makes the entire project, the phenomenal transformation, moot.

I was at the Shelbourne races last night where there is a wonderful view of the pearl-like grounds in the distance, glittering in the sunset – and we all agreed how fabulous it looked and was a credit to the nation.

Pity none of you are able to recognise this…

Yeah yeah , the Irish are always begrudging etc etc. we’ve heard that before a million times on this site whenever somethin is criticised.

The fact is its ridiculous that with the amount of time, skill and above all money invested in this project that every seat doesn’t have a perfect view. No excuses.

Its a massive improvement and an achievement to get it built at all expecially on the same site.

Still doesn’t excuse the feck up of the structure.

@pippin101 wrote:

Well the Irish sure know how to take themselves down.

True enough pippin, there is an unhealthy amount of nay-saying on this site. You’re quite fortunate that no-one has launched a personal attack on you yet for being an idiot or blind. (You’re obviously not)

In fairness there have been plenty of positive comments on this particular thread, and the poll shows that the vast majority of people are optimistic about the project, so hopefully the flaws of the stadium can be smoothed out a bit before completion.

I have to say the vista from Ringsend was the one that I was really looking forward to as this project was developing, and I still haven’t seen it yet, so I’m really excited by your comment.

It’s pretty impressive visually from the outside. Who cares if 2.5% of the total pitch view is obscured from 1% of the seats…………the main problem is that its capacity is more than 25,000 seats short of what is currently needed (never mind what will be required in the future). Makes the stadium pretty useless, bar using for 2nd rate rugby/football matches. Gigantic waste of money and unbelievably shortsighted building a stadium that is already 10 years outdated (capacity wise) by the start of its construction!

Bring back the Bertie bowl and Eircom Park! (and sell Lansdowne Road 5yrs ago when it was still worth a small fortune!)

@reddy wrote:

Yeah yeah , the Irish are always begrudging etc etc. we’ve heard that before a million times on this site whenever somethin is criticised.

The fact is its ridiculous that with the amount of time, skill and above all money invested in this project that every seat doesn’t have a perfect view. No excuses.

Its a massive improvement and an achievement to get it built at all expecially on the same site.

Still doesn’t excuse the feck up of the structure.

it’s actually not uncommon for stadia to have more seats when they open than they’re “supposed” to have. You’ll find that additional seats are squeezed in wherever they can be in an as-built scenario. I think you’ll find that the seats described as having a restricted view are outside the original seating plan.

Not having been back, since just after they started demolition, I’m really looking forward to seeing what it looks like. I’m sure that from a “visitors” point of view it will be a million times better than that old relic that I used to go to!

@foremanjoe wrote:

True enough pippin, there is an unhealthy amount of nay-saying on this site.

Seriously, you honestly don’t get anything like it on American or British or Australian forums. Even boards.ie has the same thing.

Healthy irish skepticism doesn’t have to always turn into relentless cynicism. Japan hasn’t even built that stadium and already we’re bemoaning it’s superiority?

Aviva > Wembley, how about talking about that?

@Yixian wrote:

Seriously, you honestly don’t get anything like it on American or British or Australian forums. Even boards.ie has the same thing.

Healthy irish skepticism doesn’t have to always turn into relentless cynicism. Japan hasn’t even built that stadium and already we’re bemoaning it’s superiority?

Aviva > Wembley, how about talking about that?

This is rubbish. There’s a healthy dose of criticism not cynicism on the site.

Analysis and criticism are massively important – by far the best learning tools available to us.

Over the years of the boom we became accustomed to any old shite being thrown up across our towns and cities. Someone has to demand a higher standard.

Why should we accept a watered down version of Lansdowne just because its an improvement on the original?

Like I said its a great job overall but it deserves criticism for its shortcomings and that criticism shouldn’t be discouraged.

And would people please stop trotting out this Irish moaners thing.

@Dec56 wrote:

It’s pretty impressive visually from the outside. Who cares if 2.5% of the total pitch view is obscured from 1% of the seats…………

I’d care if I ended up in one of those seats. Tickets for Six Nations fixtures are expensive enough without being denied a view of the line outs on the other side of the pitch.:mad:

It’s a great feeling of surprise approaching Lansdowne Road (from the Grand Canal Street end) as ye go over the canal bridge and there before ye is this brilliant Sci-Fi alien type creature/structure with it’s undulating curves on the skyline in the distance. It looks great. A wonderful addition and landmark for Dublin city and the country.

@reddy wrote:

This is rubbish. There’s a healthy dose of criticism not cynicism on the site.

I agree that there is a large amount of criticism evident on these fora, unfortunately the majority of that criticism is projected towards individual contributors, with the cynicism being reserved for the architecture.

Architecture is such a subjective field that even in real world situations it is impossible have a conclusive debate on the worth of a building. Add anonymity and subtract physical interaction and most debates spiral into pointless mud-slinging contests. If one was to judge the architecture profession by the squabbles evident on this site, a positive impression would be a very improbable outcome.

(This isn’t directed at you reddy, it’s just a generalisation.)

But of course…

nice day for a cycle so a few more pics:

See the top tier seats relative to the skeletal structure?

Excellent pictures, Alonso.

(I was down having a look at it this morning as well and I can vouch that those photos are as fresh as can be:) – it’s really come on a lot since I last saw it in the flesh).

It’s interesting to see how the access points at the Lansdowne Road end are really coming together. But I’m not sure what all that work is on the Lansdowne Village side of the river is about. Are there some plans to have an extra bridge at that point? I can’t recall.

(As an aside, I hope all that extra material in the river doesn’t cause flood problems if there is a combination of heavy rain and a high tide any time soon).

Some more new ground-level shots inside the stadium posted up in the last couple of days:
http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=121

Am very interested in the pedestrian ingress/egress arrangements. I’ve seen the model but I’d love to see precisely how people will interface with the DART station. I hope we’ll have completely eliminated having fans walking across the tracks.

@pippin101 wrote:

Am very interested in the pedestrian ingress/egress arrangements. I’ve seen the model but I’d love to see precisely how people will interface with the DART station. I hope we’ll have completely eliminated having fans walking across the tracks.

The railway gates will close before and after events – blocking Lansdowne Road to allow freeflow to Dart.

A new Station Forecourt will allow loading/unloading of Dart and all patrons passing along Lansdowne Road will use a new underpass.

There was an AAI site visit to Lansdowne over the weekend and my mates said that in the upper parts of the stands the far side of the pitch is obscured by the hanging trusses. So much for perfect sightlines

I was there, have to say, from my position, it was only obscured if you were standing up. Though, while technically not obscured, I will say that the truss has a huge presence, and fills the rest of your field of view. It seems to be vastly over-structured for the purposes. The truss hangs down in front of you, and what’s worse, cranks in the most awful places, where a curved or at least more faceted profile would have been better. The bird’s nest stadium, ignoring aesthetics +scale, is essentially the same form, but seems to have a much more elegant structural solution (if you look closely, in the midst of all the random diagonals, there is actually a very simple repeating structural configuration) However Landsdown seems to be based on a modified version of Thomond Park, which worked there to architectural effect, moving the trusses above the roofline, and using the arched form effectively, in Landsdown it seems to be a more haphazard collection of bits. Also I really cannot understand, apart from aesthetic effect, what the louvered cladding actually does, it certainly didn’t provide any shelter from the wind when standing on the top tier.

Can’t be much worse than Stamford Bridge.

This was the view I got when I went to a match there, in a season ticket seat as well.

@spoil_sport wrote:

I was there, have to say, from my position, it was only obscured if you were standing up. Though, while technically not obscured, I will say that the truss has a huge presence, and fills the rest of your field of view. It seems to be vastly over-structured for the purposes. The truss hangs down in front of you, and what’s worse, cranks in the most awful places, where a curved or at least more faceted profile would have been better. The bird’s nest stadium, ignoring aesthetics +scale, is essentially the same form, but seems to have a much more elegant structural solution (if you look closely, in the midst of all the random diagonals, there is actually a very simple repeating structural configuration) However Landsdown seems to be based on a modified version of Thomond Park, which worked there to architectural effect, moving the trusses above the roofline, and using the arched form effectively, in Landsdown it seems to be a more haphazard collection of bits. Also I really cannot understand, apart from aesthetic effect, what the louvered cladding actually does, it certainly didn’t provide any shelter from the wind when standing on the top tier.

you’ll get a better view on telly. then you only have the match to slag – it is the match you’re going for right?

@Blisterman wrote:

Can’t be much worse than Stamford Bridge.

This was the view I got when I went to a match there, in a season ticket seat as well.

there’s a similar view behind the posts on the first tier of croke park

“you’ll get a better view on telly. then you only have the match to slag – it is the match you’re going for right?”

You got me… I probably wouldn’t even bother to watch on the telly….

@Blisterman wrote:

Can’t be much worse than Stamford Bridge.

This was the view I got when I went to a match there, in a season ticket seat as well.

That’s actually incredible…. what the hell is that all about?

Anyway the best place to watch soccer is Tallaght…..

That view at Stamford Bridge is appallling!

@wearnicehats wrote:

there’s a similar view behind the posts on the first tier of croke park

I would love to see a photo to back that ridiculous statement up.

@Bluetonic wrote:

I would love to see a photo to back that ridiculous statement up.

buy a ticket and take one yourself? I am quite tall though

@wearnicehats wrote:

buy a ticket and take one yourself? I am quite tall though

You also must be blind and/or a liar. NONE of the pitch is blocked from the lower back row.

@Bluetonic wrote:

You also must be blind and/or a liar. NONE of the pitch is blocked from the lower back row.

I may have been blind drunk. or maybe the upper black bit was my eyes closing – it was a GAA match.

@Blisterman wrote:

Can’t be much worse than Stamford Bridge.

This was the view I got when I went to a match there, in a season ticket seat as well.

I can confirm that the view is the almost the same in the season tickets position on the side of the pitch too. You can just about see the far touchline

Oh God; it’s bad enough to be bored by football everywhere else, we now have an extended ‘discussion’ about whether or not you can see the pitch if you stand up, or go on tiptoe, or lean sideways, or stand on somebody’s shoulder….
However, unlike the beautiful game, Gaelic is just a lot of country boys who can’t keep their socks up running madly all over the pitch, knocking lumps out of one another… Never saw the attraction, myself.

@johnglas wrote:

Oh God; it’s bad enough to be bored by football everywhere else, we now have an extended ‘discussion’ about whether or not you can see the pitch if you stand up, or go on tiptoe, or lean sideways, or stand on somebody’s shoulder….
However, unlike the beautiful game, Gaelic is just a lot of country boys who can’t keep their socks up running madly all over the pitch, knocking lumps out of one another… Never saw the attraction, myself.

You’ve obviously never been to Copper’s John.
Forget Croke Park, Copper Face Jack’s on a county colours night is the Mecca of any GAA player worth his salt.

I wish I was on that N17…

foremanjoe: touche! (accent omitted)

@johnglas wrote:

Oh God; it’s bad enough to be bored by football everywhere else, we now have an extended ‘discussion’ about whether or not you can see the pitch if you stand up, or go on tiptoe, or lean sideways, or stand on somebody’s shoulder….
However, unlike the beautiful game, Gaelic is just a lot of country boys who can’t keep their socks up running madly all over the pitch, knocking lumps out of one another… Never saw the attraction, myself.

You’ve also never watched Kevin Kilbane/any Sam Allardyce team play ‘The Beautiful Game’.

Now you’re getting personal… (The Premier League is a bunch of overpaid, terminally self-admiring people who can kick a ball a bit, and…? And you lot over there actually watch it instead of getting a life!)

@johnglas wrote:

Now you’re getting personal… (The Premier League is a bunch of overpaid, terminally self-admiring people who can kick a ball a bit, and…? And you lot over there actually watch it instead of getting a life!)

I’ll be honest with you John, the only interest I have in the premier league is down to my fantasy football team. Aside from that I really couldn’t give a toss!

Ditto. But there is some intersting stadium architecture… The new Lansdowne looks exciting if eccentric; the real test will be how it integrates with its surrounding suburb (round the edges) and how the crowds react. From a distance (e.g. Grand Canal Harbour) it looks like a magnificent alien spaceship has landed in Woking (cf. War of the Worlds).

@johnglas wrote:

Ditto. But there is some intersting stadium architecture… The new Lansdowne looks exciting if eccentric; the real test will be how it integrates with its surrounding suburb (round the edges) and how the crowds react. From a distance (e.g. Grand Canal Harbour) it looks like a magnificent alien spaceship has landed in Woking (cf. War of the Worlds).

I agree. I love it already and it isn’t even finished!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey74Q4ezKlU&feature=related

GregF: Metric:Stadium Love – loved it! Cool, man.

anybody know what colour they’re going for with the seats !?

its important !

Green with “ireland”/”[sponsers names]” spelled out in white.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/magazine/2009/1024/1224257031401.html?via=mr

Would like to simply see the word IRELAND spelt out in the seat design. Would be nice if Orange could feature also but suspect that in deference to the rugby guys it will be a simple green & white

@murfee wrote:

Would like to simply see the word IRELAND spelt out in the seat design. Would be nice if Orange could feature also but suspect that in deference to the rugby guys it will be a simple green & white

But the rugby guys are the only ones who actually have an ‘orange’ presence in the flag sense

Could they not compromise ? Rugby emblem on one side with the soccer one on the other. Like the San Siro in Milan where the two major soccer clubs in that city share the ground. And on reflection, would Aviva not insist on their corporate logo being displayed in the seating arrangements ?

However, while it makes no difference when there is a capacity crowd in attendance, I would prefer if the seating colour complemented the rest of the structure. Bright multicoloured seats would do nothing for the sleek silver lines of the rest of the stadium. Croke Park have done well in this regard. The pale blue and grey seats there blend in easly with the overall appearance of the arena, (and indeed, the prevailing skies overhead). Decisions concerning colour are all the more important in open ended (Horse shoe shaped) stadia, which for all intents…. both Croker and Lansdowne are, given the size Hill 16 and the Havelock Square ends respectively.

Looks like at least some of the seats will be, wait for it………. green!:

@dermot_trellis wrote:

Looks like at least some of the seats will be, wait for it………. green!:

I am shocked I am. I wonder if we shouldn’t have nice Hibernian blue seats in one of our stadia?

Nope, I think that there is protective plastic covering.

“Nope, I think that there is protective plastic covering.”

Maybe…. but if there is, then under that they really are green, with “Ireland” or [sponsers] spelled out in white.
Or at least, so we were told on the recent AAI site visit.

Totally off topic here but I have to get this off my chest.

THIERRY HENRY IS A CHEATING BOLLOX. :mad::mad::mad:

Now – Back to seat colours.

@Global Citizen wrote:

Totally off topic here but I have to get this off my chest.

THIERRY HENRY IS A CHEATING BOLLOX. :mad::mad::mad:

Now – Back to seat colours.

That’s not too far off the point Dude, after all he was the architect of Ireland’s downfall.
Paul McShane has to be culpible too though, he got caught wrong side.
In fact, I’m not sure that fella even knows where the right side is.

@Global Citizen wrote:

Totally off topic here but I have to get this off my chest.

THIERRY HENRY IS A CHEATING BOLLOX. :mad::mad::mad:

Now – Back to seat colours.

Great post, first time I’ve laughed since !

The Green seats suffice and will do nicely. No need for Orange, for that colour despite being incongruously on our national flag is the preserve of the British community aspect of NI….who don’t seem to use it either, bar on the 12th of July every year.

Anyone ever see some of the GAA grounds around the country where they have multicoloured seats side by side – a block of blue beside red beside yellow beside green etc….looks fucking awful and cheap.

Btw, great having two national stadia….Croker and Lansdowne. Remember the day when we had SFA.

Not forgetting Tallaght and Thomond …….and the RDS.

Agree its great to have a number of decent stadiums but disagree fundamentally that we have 2 National stadia – thats a contradiction in terms. Once opened, the Aviva will be our only National stadium. Roll on 2010.

The Board has just confirmed DCC’s decision to grant pp for the Aviva Stadium name signage – one on the east and one on the west of the Stadium – dismissing arguments that it represented a contravention of the development plan, would negatively impact heritage, distract Dart drivers (?), cause D4 to explode, finish off the polar bears etc etc.

234798. Everything looking good for the unveiling in (May?) Can’t wait to see it.:D

Latest photos from lrsdc.ie

dated Jan 18th 2010

you can see the sections of green seating from the first couple of pictures.

That cropped Havelock Square end certainly gives the stadium quite a strange shape when viewed from the air!

On the whole, it’s going to be a terrific venue for Irish sport but unfortunately theres no getting away from the fact that the capacity is just too small!! 🙁

@Tuborg wrote:

That cropped Havelock Square end certainly gives the stadium quite a strange shape when viewed from the air!

You were going to say bed pan weren’t you and then you thought better of it and decided to say ‘strange’ instead;)

@Tuborg wrote:

That cropped Havelock Square end certainly gives the stadium quite a strange shape when viewed from the air!

On the whole, it’s going to be a terrific venue for Irish sport but unfortunately theres no getting away from the fact that the capacity is just too small!! 🙁

I’d say the plan is to buy up the properties behind the Havelock Square end over time and complete the stadium properly at a later date. At least – that should be the plan!
If followed through, one would imagine this would increase the capacity to somewhere between 60,000 and 65,000. For me, this would be just about the right size.

It does look like a toilet seat.

let’s meet at the seat for the match 😛

@gunter wrote:

You were going to say bed pan weren’t you and then you thought better of it and decided to say ‘strange’ instead;)

I didn’t want to compare our new national stadium to a piss pot, but you can’t deny theres a resemblance there! 🙂

Let’s hope Ireland aren’t shit in it!!:D

thats a piss poor attempt at humour

Pity the Brazil game isn’t there. I reckon the midfield partnership of Kaka and Dudu would really suit the new place

(sorry folks but that’s the winner 😉 )

i suppository it is

it kind of looks like that, at some stage in the design process, the site location fell between two stools

@alonso wrote:

Pity the Brazil game isn’t there. I reckon the midfield partnership of Kaka and Dudu would really suit the new place

(sorry folks but that’s the winner 😉 )

I’d say you were a bit flushed after squeezing out that nugget:o

@Tuborg wrote:

I didn’t want to compare our new national stadium to a piss pot, but you can’t deny theres a resemblance there! 🙂

Of course it’s not our national stadium, our national sports along with a host of others can’t be played there.

These puns are driving me potty.

Presumably the design can cope with blockages as well as sudden evacuations.

I am so sorry for starting this!

It works at both ends.

Believe it or not the em.. ‘evacuation passages’ in the stadium are technically known as vomitaria.

In an emergency, the stadium is designed for 50,000 people to be evacuated through these vomitaria in about 8 minutes I think. Visions from The Exorcist come to mind.

@PaulC wrote:

I am so sorry for starting this!

I don’t get that one.:confused:

You should never poo poo a good pun.

New ground level photos of the Potty Bowl!:

More exterior ones on the development site:
http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=130

It’s certainly looking truss-o-riffic and they hang very close over the top tier of seats, time will tell whether it ends up looking clunky and over-engineered or whether all that steel skeleton adds something to the character of the place.

Far too much toilet humour going on here. I don’t want to go through the motions.
But with only 50,000 bums on seats it looks like money down the drain.

I’ll get my coat.
Just point me to the nearest vomiteria :rolleyes:

What happens when Ronan O’Gara (or Johnny Sexton) kicks a Garryowen in this stadium?
I can see the whole upper tier of spectators suffering whiplash trying to follow the flight of the ball.
Very disappointed with those trusses, there must have been a more discreet method of implementing them but it was probably more expensive and deemed not to be worthwhile.

@foremanjoe wrote:

What happens when Ronan O’Gara (or Johnny Sexton) kicks a Garryowen in this stadium?
I can see the whole upper tier of spectators suffering whiplash trying to follow the flight of the ball.
Very disappointed with those trusses, there must have been a more discreet method of implementing them but it was probably more expensive and deemed not to be worthwhile.

Yep I agree – the top picture in that interior series hints at that alright. The ball will be lost in a mess of struts.

I would have thought the obvious spot for the big screen was directly over the goal on the vast blank cladding over the single tier….good spot to drape flags from too.

Overall, its pretty good, love the exterior, but disappointed with the network of clunky trusses inside, and there is no excuse for it if they do obstruct views from the Gods.

@Peter Fitz wrote:

I would have thought the obvious spot for the big screen was directly over the goal on the vast blank cladding over the single tier….good spot to drape flags from too.

There’s probably an issue with glare at that end, I’d imagine that’s why there’s no screen down there (yet).

@foremanjoe wrote:

There’s probably an issue with glare at that end, I’d imagine that’s why there’s no screen down there (yet).

the black rectangular yoke to the right is a screen though isn’t it?

@Peter Fitz wrote:

the black rectangular yoke to the right is a screen though isn’t it?

Aye, ’tis.
That truss will keep it nice and shaded though. 😉

How big are those screens…They don’t look overly massive, which is a bit of a shame.God knows we love overly massive…

photographic evidence of sightline restrictions

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=131

from Wednesday.

Magnificent!

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=132

New interior shots, starting to lay the pitch.

@Peter Fitz wrote:

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=132

New interior shots, starting to lay the pitch.

Yet again the North end is largely absent from the photos. This ‘U-Shaped stadium’ term is really becoming a very Irish thing

U stands for Unfinished IMO. Why, oh why, can’t we at least have one fully enclosed stadium?

Here is a very good video of the stadium, filmed in the last couple of weeks…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl7MQ89VjlA