pairc ui chaoimh

managed to attach a small version of the plan.

its plain that the second pitch is quite an imposition on whatever the city council had planned for the enlarged public park encompassing the old showgrounds and the atlantic pond.

anyone here involved in landscaping who can suggest a better alternative?

@rofbp wrote:

it stands on a very prominent site on the river, and will be even more visible once the bridge is built from tivoli across to the docklands

is that possible, or will the gaa involve any architects? will they slap an engineer’s roof on it and be happy with that?

Considering the floods around that area earlier this year, I would have thought that a swimming pool might be a better bet for a site by de Banks.

This attitude towards this project from the council really annoys me.

Cork is crying out for a first class football/rugby stadium. Now that the CC is effectively giving the GAA the land from free, they could have at least insisted that the venue would be opened up to Munster/Cork City FC etc. when required.

It could have been a leading light but instead the inward looking GAA attitude prevails. Given the views of the Cork County GAA board (which are only echoed by their NI brethren) the chances of this stadium being “opened-up” under other circumstances.

A victory for GAA but a sad day for sport in the city.

A proposal to make it multi-disciplinary was put before the council in 1988, but was defeated by a combination of a GAA vote (all FF councillors voted against with the exception of Gary O’Flynn who didn’t vote) and local councillors worried about the haranguing they’d get about traffic arrangements (Five of the six in the South-East ward voted against, the only exception being Laura McGonigle (FG) who didn’t vote).

There’s an election under the bridge since then, but of those councillors who retained their seat, the votes were

Tim Brosnan (FF) Against
Chris O’Leary (Green) Against
Denis O’Flynn (Lab) Against
Terry Shannon (FF) Against
Jim Corr (FG) Against
Seán Martin (FF) Against
Mary Shields (FF) Against
Michael Ahern (Lab) Against
John Buttimer (FG) Against

Brian Bermingham (FG) Did Not Vote
John Kelleher (Lab) Did Not Vote
Dara Murphy (FG) Did Not Vote
Patricia Gosch (FG) Did Not Vote
Laura McGonigle (FG) Did Not Vote
Fiona Kerins (SF) Did Not Vote

Mick Barry (Soc) For
Catherine Clancy (Lab) For
Jonathan O’Brien (SF) For
David McCarthy (Ind) For
Michael O’Connell (Lab) For
Lorraine Kingston (Lab) For

Which is all marginally tighter now, not that it makes a difference.

The real problem is the councillors in the South-East ward. People will remember who voted for increased traffic disruption and punish them, but few would remember who voted against. At the local elections, I raised this with some of the councillors who voted against (I live at the other end of the LEA towards St Finnbarr’s Hospital) and they seemed genuinely surprised to be asked about it. You can be damn sure if they voted for and people in Blackrock experienced more traffic congestion that they would have been asked.

Why do they need a second pitch beside it? I thought the surrounding area was going to be made into a public park?

If they really need an all weather pitch cant they just put it up the road in the blackrock or Mahon gaa grounds where they have lots of spare land.

It should be made open to all sports and aesthetically speaking I really would love to see a thomond park style stadium.

It’d be great if they did something nice here – not a botch job by some engineers like the Gaelic Grounds in Limerick, which looks like a shambles compared to its IRFU neighbour.

The Council need to apply some pressure to the GAA to hire an architect and a decent one at that. An architect will probably save them money in the long run and a nice clean, simple design doesn’t need to be much more expensive than the bog standard we often see.

They’ve shown great vision in Croke Park – let’s have the same in the grounds and club facilities around the country.

Eduardo Arroyo did this beautiful stadium in spain – only 10,000 seats but great thought put into the design.

while i appreciate your points regarding opening gaa grounds to other sports, i’d like to return to the issue of what they build.

i share the concerns of many posters that the gaa will basically go with an engineering solution only.

as i see it, and as i pointed out on the lansdowne road thread, a stadium has only 3 basic functions:

• every fan should have a good view
• every fan should be safe
• ideally the design should foster a good atmosphere at the game.

i would say that thomond park meets those objectives and simultaneously a beautiful design. the steep pitch of the stands means everyone is relatively close to the action, while the curving design means most of the seats are near the centre of the field. the old terraces at either end have been retained, which enhances the atmosphere.

if three 35-year-old sides are retained, alongside one brand new stand, the job of making the stadium seem one unified design seems harder to me. therefore, i feel roofing the current uncovered stand in a similar manner to the new stand seems an important element in achieving a coherent design. i think i saw one of the models for the norman foster towers on the old ford depot had put a roof on the uncovered stand. anyone have a picture?

i would also prefer if any floodlights are integrated into the roof rather than placed on pylons in the corners

santiago calatrava designed new roofs for the old olympic stadium in athens for the 2004 olympics. they look fairly impressive!

with regards to the renovation of the other 3 sides, i suppose safety and comfort concerns take precedent:
the tunnels underneath are dark, dangerous in a crowd, lacking in facilities like toilets and lack commercial opportunities like shops, restaurants, bars and concessions stands.

the entrances onto the terraces/stand are at the bottom of the slope, which makes exiting at the end dangerous, as everyone is pushing down the steps. i thing the answer to these problems is to:

1. blow out the back wall of the tunnels and align the new areas beneath the stand/terrace with the outer concrete buttresses. this would give space for all the missing facilities mentioned above, while making below the terrace/stand a lighter more comfortable and safer place to mingle.

2. add ramps/stairs similar to croke park hogan/canal/cusack to allow egress off the back of the terrace at the end of the game. these could be closed before the game to ensure an entering crowd doesn’t crush forward before the match.

3 spread the turnstiles along all the length of each stand/terrace rather than the current situation where they are concentrated in the corners, which makes crushes more likely before each match.

shouldn’t form follow these functions?

@reddy wrote:

Eduardo Arroyo did this beautiful stadium in spain – only 10,000 seats but great thought put into the design.

i like that a lot, and i would put up with floodlights in the corners if they looked like that!
the stadium looks class at night too:

one concern i would have is the “15 metre circulation” on the plan above, and how this would affect the line of the old railway.
if this was ever to be used for a luas-type system, how would these interact. is the current uncovered stand built right on the line of that old railway? would the city council retain access/ownership of the line? who owns the line currently? is there a right of way under the stand?

Council to vote today on the development

http://examiner.ie/ireland/council-to-vote-on-30m-plan-for-cork-stadium-122414.html

Council voted in favour of this proposal yesterday. A councillor noted the action from the GAA was the most intense and prolonged lobbying he had ever seen.

I think this is disgraceful for the following:

• Going against specific advice of both City Manager and senior planners. Look where that kind of thing got us during the Tiger years.
• Handing over land the City Council had to CPO at cost to the city to a private organisation
• GAA say the training facility had to be at the Páirc. Why? What’s wrong with having it in another location? Nothing. It’s a vanity.
• City funds are effectively being used for the benefit of GAA fans only. If this was to be a municipal stadium it would have changed the dynamics of it altogether and would have been something everyone could get behind
• GAA spokesman said having this facility and the stadium at the heart of the new Marina Park would be a great addition. He could be right, but I guarantee you in ten years time when all of this is done (I’m being optimistic! :rolleyes:) the stadium will be locked up and inaccessible, as will the training facility. Some centrepiece.

– in the same vein, and as something of a backup to the last point above, I was out for a walk with my daughter on Sunday morning, doing my usual route, which takes me down the Marina and through the Atlantic pond before heading for home. Halfway down the Marina, I was stopped at a barrier by a Garda and some private security guys. Ticket checkpoint. This is at 11.00 for a 14.00 match, and they’ve decided to cordon off a large chunk of Blackrock/Ballintemple. I was quizzed for a while before I finally convinced the Garda that I and my 12 month old baby were not in fact going to the GAA match. He was slightly incredulous that I wasn’t going to it, and in fact asked “Where are you going?!”. As I walked through the barrier his parting comment was “Be careful”. I was on the lookout for rabid Kerry fans looking to steal my child from that point onwards….

@Angry Rebel wrote:

Council voted in favour of this proposal yesterday. A councillor noted the action from the GAA was the most intense and prolonged lobbying he had ever seen.

I think this is disgraceful for the following:

• Going against specific advice of both City Manager and senior planners. Look where that kind of thing got us during the Tiger years.
• Handing over land the City Council had to CPO at cost to the city to a private organisation
• GAA say the training facility had to be at the Páirc. Why? What’s wrong with having it in another location? Nothing. It’s a vanity.
• City funds are effectively being used for the benefit of GAA fans only. If this was to be a municipal stadium it would have changed the dynamics of it altogether and would have been something everyone could get behind
• GAA spokesman said having this facility and the stadium at the heart of the new Marina Park would be a great addition. He could be right, but I guarantee you in ten years time when all of this is done (I’m being optimistic! :rolleyes:) the stadium will be locked up and inaccessible, as will the training facility. Some centrepiece.

– in the same vein, and as something of a backup to the last point above, I was out for a walk with my daughter on Sunday morning, doing my usual route, which takes me down the Marina and through the Atlantic pond before heading for home. Halfway down the Marina, I was stopped at a barrier by a Garda and some private security guys. Ticket checkpoint. This is at 11.00 for a 14.00 match, and they’ve decided to cordon off a large chunk of Blackrock/Ballintemple. I was quizzed for a while before I finally convinced the Garda that I and my 12 month old baby were not in fact going to the GAA match. He was slightly incredulous that I wasn’t going to it, and in fact asked “Where are you going?!”. As I walked through the barrier his parting comment was “Be careful”. I was on the lookout for rabid Kerry fans looking to steal my child from that point onwards….

I agree with you 100%.
The GAA have shown themselves to be ruthless land grabbers.
What now for the docklands project project that is 10 years in the making?
I really hope the former owners of the showgrounds site that were turfed out against their will for the ‘common good’ sue the councillors that went against professional advice and agreed to sell the land.

the gaa’s response to the news

interesting that the evening echo focused on the lobbying effort by the gaa in the run up to the vote. (you can look at the front page in a link on the right side of the page, though this will change with tomorrows edition)

personally, i agree with the previous 2 posters: there is no justification for a “centre of excellence” in the showgrounds. the only reason for the gaa to have a pitch next to pairc ui chaoimh is as a warm up area for matches in pairc ui chaoimh itself. with pitches available at blackrock, st. michael’s and ballinlough gaa clubs, the camogie board’s ground and pairc ui rinn, any of these could be used by teams as warm up sites, and they can be escorted to the ground then, removing the only plausible reason for a second pitch there. using a pitch for warm up for 3-4 afternoons a year is a complete waste of resources.

a wild idea: do the gaa want to develop a stadium of 4000-5000 capacity stadium near pairc ui chaoimh in order to free up the sale of pairc ui rinn for residential development? pie in the sky idea?

why would anyone accept the gaa’s argument that the refurbishment of pairc ui chaoimh cannot go ahead without the second pitch? where else would the build a stadium? how would they afford a complete new build of 50000 seater, when most of the current stadium will be remaining in place. the pairc ui chaoimh refurbishment would have proceeded whether the land for the second pitch was available or not.

It would seem to me that a training centre could be located anywhere near the city, and may make more sense to be located on the outskirts rather than somewhere so central.

the proposed pitch will ruin the new park in the showgrounds, but i disagree with the city council that this decision puts the dockland redevelopment in jeopardy: one compromised park design should not have a deterrent effect on developments worth billions: the economic situation is the dominant factor here.

of course the second pitch could be turned down at the planning stage

overall, a poor day for the docklands, but not fatal. strong design principles must be insisted upon by the city council for the stadium design, to mitigate for a compromised park design, no stand should be allowed for the second pitch. on the positive side, at least the gaa have the wherewithall and the drive to refurbish the eyesore that is pairc ui chaoimh.

sorry for the rambling post again!

Ideally I would love if they went with a similar design to the stands at SC Braga’s stadium.

@rofbp wrote:

the gaa’s response to the news

interesting that the evening echo focused on the lobbying effort by the gaa in the run up to the vote. (you can look at the front page in a link on the right side of the page, though this will change with tomorrows edition)

sorry for the rambling post again!

Yes, I read the Echo last night, had to take a second look to make sure I read it right; lobbying of councillors like never happened before in Cork, the city manager claiming to have been abused in the street for recommending rejection of the GAA plan!!

Fair play to the 11 councillors that stood up to the pressure and voted against the sale to the GAA. Particular kudos goes to the Green Party chairman Dan Boyle for making his opposition to the sale known, without a sitting councillor on the council the easiest thing for him to do would have been to keep quiet on the matter.

The saying that ‘the oppressed becomes the worst type of aggressor’ rings true in this instance; my son is quitting the GAA after reading of the abuse of the city manager stating “the Black and Tans will never be gone as long as the GAA behave in this manner”

Is the list of how various councillors voted available yet? I know all FF councillors voted for and Mick Barry and Ted Tynan voted against, but have no more information than that.

It’s something I will be remembering for future dealings with councillors.

Unfortunately, we get to see the GAA putting their vanity ahead of the needs of the city. With up to 20,000 apartment dwellers expected to be living in the docklands in 20 years time, a park is vital. As mentioned by another poster, the Centre of Excellence could have gone anywhere. And considering the dilapidated stated of Páirc Uí Chaoímh, I don’t trust the GAA to even maintain the place properly.

@jungle wrote:

Is the list of how various councillors voted available yet? I know all FF councillors voted for and Mick Barry and Ted Tynan voted against, but have no more information than that.

It’s something I will be remembering for future dealings with councillors.

Unfortunately, we get to see the GAA putting their vanity ahead of the needs of the city. With up to 20,000 apartment dwellers expected to be living in the docklands in 20 years time, a park is vital. As mentioned by another poster, the Centre of Excellence could have gone anywhere. And considering the dilapidated stated of Páirc Uí Chaoímh, I don’t trust the GAA to even maintain the place properly.

How they voted;

For the GAA;

John Kelleher (LAB)
Dara Murphy (FG)
Tim Brosnan (FF)
Ken O’Flynn (FF)
Tomas Gould (SF)
Tony Fitzgearld (FF)
Laura McGonigle (FG)
Terry Shannon (FF)
Kieran McCarthy (IND)
Emmet O’Halloran (FG)
Sean Martin (FF)
Fiona Keirns (SF)
John Buttimer (FG)
Mary Shields (FF)
Michael Ahern (Lab)
Ger Gibbons (Lab)
Mick Finn (IND)

For the city;

Ted Tynan (WP)
Mick Barry (SP)
Catherine Clancy (Lab)
Patricia Gosch (FG)
Jonathan O’Brien (SF)
Michael O’Connell (Lab)
Des Cahill (FG)
Denis O’Flynn (Lab)
Chris O’Leary (IND)
Jim Corr (FG)
Lorriane Kingston (Lab)

3 absent Bermingham (FG), Cremin (SF), and McCarthy (IND)

I think people are being a bit too optimistic about plans for the stadium’s redevelopment. The budget is reportedly 30m euros, for a 60K all seater stadium & excellence centre. In comparison to 400m+ for a 50K all seater (Aviva stadium).

What really amazes me is that councillors that are embedded in the GAA were allowed to vote on the matter. Surely there would be a conflict of interest?

:mad:This vote really needs to be challenged in court.

Such a shame that the council voted the way it did.

Pairc Ui Chaoimh would have looked fantastic surrounded by the proposed park.

I had visions of the Olympiapark, Munich on a smaller scale.

Oh well maybe in another 40 years. :rolleyes:

@who_me wrote:

I think people are being a bit too optimistic about plans for the stadium’s redevelopment. The budget is reportedly 30m euros, for a 60K all seater stadium & excellence centre. In comparison to 400m+ for a 50K all seater (Aviva stadium).

i think most people understand that this will be done on a limited budget, but that doesn’t mean you can’t do something decent with the design. it’ll just take a little bit of imagination. remember there won’t be a lot of major structural work on 3 sides of the ground

you could argue that the current shell has a stark bare quality to it, that could really be set off well if you had a good roof design put over it, with an imaginative lighting system at night perhaps: imagine it reflecting in the river as you come in over the new downstream crossing or drive in lower glanmire road.

if stark strong lines are what you are looking for, that suggestion by Demolition man above fits the bill, though it might look a bit unbalanced on one side of the pitch. are the wires part of the floodlighting system? pretty neat if they are!

i visited berlin last year, and the olympic stadium was completely renovated for the world cup in 2006. the roof there is sleek and simple, and the opening at one end is elegant.

their approach to concession stands was also interesting: once through the turnstiles, the area around the stadium is very large, almost park like. the shops/drinks stalls/fast food are all in pods around the sides, and are not part of the original stadium at all. i’ll post photos later

here are 2 pics of berlin olympicstadion

What stakeholder in the docklands would invest yet more money investing in a hospital, third level collage, offices etc without the provision of the public open space identified as crucial by EVERY report since the master plan for the area was put together over a ten year period?

Thousands of jobs are in jeopardy due to the greed of the GAA and the councillors that do the GAA’s bidding.

The best use for the land now would be to erect large gates at the Port of Corks Bonded Warehouse building and use the entire docklands as a new city landfill site.

If this type of carry on happened in any other EU country (with the exception of Italy; they also have a Mafia) there would be investigations launched.

@rofbp wrote:

i think most people understand that this will be done on a limited budget, but that doesn’t mean you can’t do something decent with the design. it’ll just take a little bit of imagination. remember there won’t be a lot of major structural work on 3 sides of the ground

you could argue that the current shell has a stark bare quality to it, that could really be set off well if you had a good roof design put over it, with an imaginative lighting system at night perhaps: imagine it reflecting in the river as you come in over the new downstream crossing or drive in lower glanmire road.

I’m astonished that they can even build the 2-tier stand alone for that price. From what I’ve heard, the price per seat spirals once you add a second tier.

And – I haven’t been in Pairc Ui Chaoimh in a while so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong – but I’ve heard the rows are too tight for the existing seating, so they had to cut the tops off the back of the seats to allow leg-room for those behind. That’s not going to be easy to fix.

I’m not particularly enthused about what they can do for that price.

It does seem like a questionable decision alright. Why bother spending time and money creating masterplans only to wilfully ignore them at decision time. Why councilors have any say in panning matters I’ll never know.

As for the stadium redesign, does any know of the involvement of an architect? Can the GAA be lobbied about that considering the strength of their lobbying to the council?

Thomond Park has a good assessment of its redevelopment here -http://www.thomondpark.ie/news/6259.php – it cost €40m so the GAA may struggle to achieve much with €30m for both the stadium and centre of excellence.

@reddy wrote:

It does seem like a questionable decision alright. Why bother spending time and money creating masterplans only to wilfully ignore them at decision time. Why councilors have any say in panning matters I’ll never know.

As for the stadium redesign, does any know of the involvement of an architect? Can the GAA be lobbied about that considering the strength of their lobbying to the council?

Thomond Park has a good assessment of its redevelopment here -http://www.thomondpark.ie/news/6259.php – it cost €40m so the GAA may struggle to achieve much with €30m for both the stadium and centre of excellence.

Unfortunately an Architect hasn’t caught sight of the plans – purely an exercise in “sure it’ll be grand” engineering. The new two – tier stand will be completely out of context with the rest of the stadium, and the design language envisaged in the Dockland Masterplan and subsequent LAP.

This is after all the same organisation that considers the Gaelic Grounds in Limerick to be top class :rolleyes:…

@pleanala wrote:

This is after all the same organisation that considers the Gaelic Grounds in Limerick to be top class :rolleyes:…

Very true. What a disaster that’s been. They did have the vision (and the patience) for Croke Park though.

Today’s Evening Echo reports that the council are to sell the land that was earmarked as vital to the future of the Cork docklands for considerably less than what was paid by the city under the CPO; this just gets worse!!

Very good letter from the Green Party community development spokesman in the Echo as well, that guy has some balls to go against the Cork Mafia (Echo not online, I will scan and post the letter later)

That letter from today’s Evening Echo. Well said Mr. Murphy.

GAA plan opens up a can of worms

GAA legend Jimmy Barry Murphy (Evening Echo June 12) maintains that anyone that speaks out against the proposed ‘land grab’ by the GAA of a site acquired by Cork City Council under a compulsory purchase order for a public park as “narrow minded”. That statement is narrow-minded in itself.

In order for each of us to have access to infrastructure, in this case a public park identified as crucial for the development of the largest development project ever proposed in Cork Docklands, it is sometimes necessary that local authorities acquire land through the instrument of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO).

Local Authorities use their powers of compulsory acquisition of land through CPOs which are statutory in nature to ensure that all necessary lands are available to them for proper and sustainable development within their functional area.

The Land Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 is the foundation legislation in relation to CPOs. This law seeks to balance the right of the common good i.e. infrastructure and the right of individuals to own their own land.
The Constitution of Ireland, 1937 recognises and appreciates that people have a right to own their own land however this must be balanced in a social context for the common good.

When the CPO of the Showground’s site was proposed, Cork City Council engaged in extensive discussions with members of the public, designs for the public park were drawn up to complement the existing master plan for the entire Docklands project, this master plan was put in place at considerable expense to the Irish taxpayer over a 10 year period.

An oral hearing by An Bord Pleanala into a CPO is akin to planning and local governance Court; evidence is presented by a Local Authority to make a case for removing the title and enjoyment of land from a landowner for the ‘common good’.

In the case of the land in question; Cork City Council successfully argued that the land was essential to provide a public park for all the citizens of Cork.
To now use the acquired land for any other purpose while the ink is still wet on the CPO could open a legal can of worms.

It is unusual for the Green Party to be in agreement with the current Cork city manager and his senior planners. In this instance, however, Joe Gavin has our full support in his efforts to retain the land for the enjoyment of all the people of Cork.
Mr. Gavin has bent over backwards to facilitate the GAA; he has offered to sell them enough land to allow for the redevelopment of Pairc Ui Chaoimh, he has offered to donate land for training pitches in the Western suburbs of the city. Other sporting codes must be looking on in envy, wishing they would be facilitated in such a generous manner.

Mick Murphy, Green Party Spokesperson on Community Development.

Thanks for posting that, kite. I’d love to see it challenged.

Whilst I agree with much of what is said above I read during the week that the €40m was for phase 1 (a new stand and internal improvements) but that the whole project was a 10 year, €90m project. That gave me some comfort that this might be following more the Croke Park, bit by bit, model.

I have been posting on this site for years about the need for a municipal stadium in Cork. I think this will ultimately achieve that. Economics means the GAA will open it to all comers – the Croke Park experience shows that. Happily General Frank-o will also have retired by the time any of this is built.

I would love if it was a municipal, local authority owned facility but that can’t happen the way local government is funded in Ireland. I fully agree the City Council should seek top dollar for it. I also see a good basis for a challenge by the old Showgrounds owners.

All in all though everything remains on target for watching Cork City play Real Madrid in the CL semi final of 2020 down in the docklands (well assuming Madrid finish in the top 4 of La Liga in 2019 – that’s the only potential fly in the ointment as I see it).

Appreciate the correction on the stadium budget, that sounds a lot better; though it still seems low for a second tier, IMO.

Likewise, I’d much rather see them build one stand really well, with scope to repeat that design on the far side or (ideally) all around the ground over time; rather than a mediocre upgrade now.

I’d absolutely love to see a quality shared stadium in Cork – it’d lead to lots of crossing over of fans. I’ve only been to a couple of games in PuC, and never been to a Cork City game; but if they shared a decent (clean!) modern stadium with Munster I’d happily attend all 3.

p.s. any chance of tickets for the CL final? Ah, g’wan!

p.p.s. I think I read on a thread here a couple of years back about the public gallery at a council meeting being cleared, when this issue was being discussed. Am I mis-remembering?

@browser wrote:

Whilst I agree with much of what is said above I read during the week that the €40m was for phase 1 (a new stand and internal improvements) but that the whole project was a 10 year, €90m project. That gave me some comfort that this might be following more the Croke Park, bit by bit, model.

).

Hi browser, a regeneration amount of 20 million was the figure up to the week of the vote by Cork city council. In the days running up to the vote that figure magically increased to 30 million.

Both the above figures were mentioned in reports put before councillors, either 20 or 30 million was mentioned in any news article I read; I would be genuinely interested to see any link to any forum where a figure of 90 million was mentioned?

@who_me wrote:

I’m astonished that they can even build the 2-tier stand alone for that price. From what I’ve heard, the price per seat spirals once you add a second tier.

And – I haven’t been in Pairc Ui Chaoimh in a while so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong – but I’ve heard the rows are too tight for the existing seating, so they had to cut the tops off the back of the seats to allow leg-room for those behind. That’s not going to be easy to fix.

I’m not particularly enthused about what they can do for that price.

the budget figure of 30 million is certainly a worry. i didn’t know 40 million was the price for thomond park, though that did involve 2 new stands and the purchase of a terrace of houses.

the “new” seats are appalling. they are one of the reasons i would be concerned about the GAA’s quality control regarding a new design: they put the seats in the uncovered stand, saw they were terrible, cut off the tops, then installed the same type of seats (with cut off tops!) in the covered stand. that indicated that they couldn’t care less about comfort of fans.

@kite wrote:

Hi browser, a regeneration amount of 20 million was the figure up to the week of the vote by Cork city council. In the days running up to the vote that figure magically increased to 30 million.

Both the above figures were mentioned in reports put before councillors, either 20 or 30 million was mentioned in any news article I read; I would be genuinely interested to see any link to any forum where a figure of 90 million was mentioned?

i’ve looked online and couldn’t find a figure higher than 30 million anywhere. it seems impossible to do any decent job for that kind of money

there is a very long thread on the same topic on the people’s republic of cork forum, and as you can imagine, the general consensus there is the gaa county board are right and should get to build whatever they want, and the city council are being unreasonable and obstructive. the necessity for a park is treated derisively. one of the few posters there who has the bigger issues in mind is linked to below:

http://www.peoplesrepublicofcork.com/~peoplesr/forums//showpost.php?p=3359017&postcount=105

EDIT:
found a post further on on that PRC thread that quoted an article in irish independent by colm keyes that said the project has a 50 million pricetag. (thats from after the council vote too!)

@kite wrote:

Hi browser, a regeneration amount of 20 million was the figure up to the week of the vote by Cork city council. In the days running up to the vote that figure magically increased to 30 million.

Both the above figures were mentioned in reports put before councillors, either 20 or 30 million was mentioned in any news article I read; I would be genuinely interested to see any link to any forum where a figure of 90 million was mentioned?

Hi Kite,

I’ve tried and tried and can’t find where i read this – but I am 100% certain I did. Nearest I could find from googling was Sunday Tribune article pasted below. It at least mentions €90m. The other article was more specific though.

That said, the various articles paint a picture of the county board having no real idea what they will do at all. I suspect they will eventually do it right as the only way to make this a success is to differentiate the stadium from the half assed competitors in Thurles, Killarney and Limerick (x 2 – one of which is, in fairness, two thirds assed! – I think the praise I’ve read for Thomand is way over the top though. Its functional at best). The county board, despite their best efforts, will probably ultimately build a fine stadium complete with necessary bells and whistles. Also their current position that there will be no “foreign games” in the new PuC will inevitably fall away for commercial reasons.

I would however agree with those who cannot understand why we need to cross our fingers on this in the first place. The need for proper design, multi sport use, etc should all have been written into the t&c’s for the sale.

Fears stadium rebuild will hit plans for park
John Downes, News Investigations Correspondent

“The city have signed a contract commissioning the design of the new Marina Park. When this design is completed, then we will be able to see exactly what we are sacrificing for an all-weather training pitch and more importantly the impact that this pitch will have on this proposed new public park,” he said.

Many thanks for that browser.
Some that voted in favour of the ‘proposal’ to sell are now seeking clarifaction on the matter in city hall. Expect some further developments over the next week.

Classic politician ploy?! Vote one way after all the lobbying, issue a stalling/equivocal statement, see which way the wind is blowing, then annouce loudly and proudly you are reversing position…because it’s what the people want. Have any of them any backbone….!?

In fairness, kite’s earlier post, said that Cahill was one of those to vote against when the original motion was put.

I notice that Cllr Sean Martin was on the front-page of Monday’s Echo calling for PuC to be made available to all sports. That would be the same Sean Martin who voted against it being a condition of the land transfer.

Now that is a truly two-faced politician.

@jungle wrote:

In fairness, kite’s earlier post, said that Cahill was one of those to vote against when the original motion was put.

I notice that Cllr Sean Martin was on the front-page of Monday’s Echo calling for PuC to be made available to all sports. That would be the same Sean Martin who voted against it being a condition of the land transfer.

Now that is a truly two-faced politician.

Yep, the same Sean Martin that sat in council for years congratulating the officials and manager for the great docklands proposal, the same Sean that is now reported in the Echo as saying he felt the docklands project was never a runner anyway!!

The County Board of the GAA were not long kicking him back into his box last night by stating that opening PuC to other sports would not happen.(Front page Evening Echo)

@kite wrote:

Yep, the same Sean Martin that sat in council for years congratulating the officials and manager for the great docklands proposal, the same Sean that is now reported in the Echo as saying he felt the docklands project was never a runner anyway!!

To paraphrase – “Irish people don’t want to live in apartments anyway”. If he opened his eyes he’d realise that the City Centre was packed to the rafters with young europeans who are working in Cork due to the ongoing expansion of multi-lingual contact centres in the City. Anyone trying to get a decent apartment in town will be aware of this.

When the commercial end of the Docklands is underway, a large part of it will undoubtedly be multi-lingual contact centres and related enterprise, and the 20,000 residents won’t be long following. Nobody said the 20,000 were going to be exclusively Irish! These people will need recreational space a lot more than some “centre of excellence”:rolleyes:

@jungle wrote:

In fairness, kite’s earlier post, said that Cahill was one of those to vote against when the original motion was put.

I notice that Cllr Sean Martin was on the front-page of Monday’s Echo calling for PuC to be made available to all sports. That would be the same Sean Martin who voted against it being a condition of the land transfer.

Now that is a truly two-faced politician.

That’s what I really thought was galling, when I saw that headline.

The council were in a position to demand multi-sport usage, or tell the GAA to go and jump. Instead, they caved to the GAA’s demand for more land for the centre of excellence and caved again in not requiring multi-sports usage as a precondition.

What they could have mandated, now they’re meekly begging for in the papers. 😡

The way they’re going, next thing they’ll be paying the GAA to take the land from them.

@who_me wrote:

The way they’re going, next thing they’ll be paying the GAA to take the land from them.

that isn’t going to be far from reality: the market price now will be less than the price the city council paid for the showgrounds initially

Looks like matters may come to a head next Monday.
Well done Mr. O’Leary for asking the tough questions.:)

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/councillors-may-face-legal-action-over-gaa-vote-123311.html

I am not too sure where I stand on this one, the more I look at it the more I veer towards Joe Gavin’s point of view.

One question I have though is that before the CPO of the showgrounds I was under the presumption that a good junk of this land was automatically going to the GAA, nowhere did I read that it might not because of the public park. Anyone else have this impression? Or was I relying too much on local media to highlight this fact for me??

There seems to be 2 strands of thought on this, one it is only 4 acres what is the big deal when the park will be over 20 acres still and the other that it is needed for the park. I would be happy to give the GAA the land for free if it was open to other sports and no centre of excellence (that can go on the straight rd) but selling land that was CPO’d for a park is madness when the centre of excellence can go anywhere and it won’t be opened up.

Big Cork GAA fan but I hate the backwardness of the CCC.

@Leesider wrote:

Big Cork GAA fan but I hate the backwardness of the CCC.

Can’t really say I’m a big GAA fan myself (not anti-GAA at all, just not a regular fan) – and I have to admit that Cork GAA have been the most successful sporting organisation by far in the city and county, both on and off the field.

In this case, there’s the potential for a mutually beneficial agreement: Cork GAA have a stadium, and need land to modernise it and add facilities. Cork City Council have land, and want a multi-sport stadium in the city. Instead of both sides compromising a little, but benefitting, the CCC just capitulated completely – to the degree their plans for a park are compromised, it’ll cost them money, and it may now land them in legal trouble.

On another note – and I really hope I’m just being a crazy conspiracy theorist here – I hope if the land is sold to the GAA for the centre of excellence, that a permanent centre is actually built there. And it’s not just a plan to acquire land adjacent to the stadium for the long term – remember the GAA wanted to build a hotel next to the stadium too, if memory serves.

@Leesider wrote:

I am not too sure where I stand on this one, the more I look at it the more I veer towards Joe Gavin’s point of view.

One question I have though is that before the CPO of the showgrounds I was under the presumption that a good junk of this land was automatically going to the GAA, nowhere did I read that it might not because of the public park. Anyone else have this impression? Or was I relying too much on local media to highlight this fact for me??……………

.

2.3 acres was always on offer to the GAA for the redevelopment of PuC during the CPO process.
I am a big GAA fan myself; but this county board land grab is a step too far for me.
Good luck to Cllr. O’Leary next Monday.

was looking at scott tallon walker’s website, after reading a hotel of theirs was nominated for world architecture award.
they had this image of a plan for the atlantic quarter in the docklands, and someone had stuck 2 new roofs on Pairc Ui Chaoimh!
what do you think?
obviously, the GAA say they are putting a 2 tier stand on the southern side, but same roof could be applied?
practical?
cost?
opinions?

Well, it seems the park for the docklands will definitely be 2 small disconnected parks rather than 1 unified area.

The Evening Echo carried a story a few nights ago confirming that 6.82 acres of land in the Showgrounds will be sold to the GAA for €1.7 million.
They also carried a plan of the layout of a new pitch situated south of Pairc Ui Chaoimh, as well as a basic drawing on an inside page, comparing the size of the new 2-tier stand to the current covered stand.

I will try to upload a picture of this later

[attachment=0:1muozaxs]IMG_1884.jpg[/attachment:1muozaxs]layout of new pitch alongside current stadium

comparison of heights of current and proposed stands

this seems incredible, but a straightforward folding of the picture seems to indicate that the back of the new stand is three times the height of the current stand, and is 4 times the height if you include the roof!!

i know these are the most basic of basic pictures, but that is scarcely believable

Interesting, thanks. I’d assume that image is just a rough guide, but at least it shows the plans are ambitious, which I like!

From the first image, it seems the new stand extends about 2/3 of the way around the pitch, is that correct? Is that because of the Marina & Atlantic Pond behind that end of the ground?

@who_me wrote:

Interesting, thanks. I’d assume that image is just a rough guide, but at least it shows the plans are ambitious, which I like!

From the first image, it seems the new stand extends about 2/3 of the way around the pitch, is that correct? Is that because of the Marina & Atlantic Pond behind that end of the ground?

Sorry the size of the upload is so small. i have attached a larger image here, and a more detailed explanation of each part as the text on the image is too small.

[attachment=0:230xfzxh]IMG_1884_2.jpg[/attachment:230xfzxh]

The light blue going around 2/3 to 3/4 of the ground is a “15m wide spectator circulation”. it does stop at the atlantic pond end, which i find a little strange. Perhaps it isn’t part of the stadium as such, and the existing parking area behind the blackrock terrace will perform a similar function for the new stadium?

The new two-tier stand is the red structure, with capacity increasing to 16500 (up 7043).
Article states that phase one is construction of this stand, creation of all-weather pitch with floodlights and covered 1000 seater stand on the monaghan road/south side, coloured pink on the image.

Article further states that phase 2 is the replacement of the uncovered stand and both terraces. From a pure spectators point of view, this is the news with which i am most happy. I had feared they would only refurbish the other 3 sides, and anyone who has been on a full terrace in PuiC knows how dangerous they are. Article states that capacity of stand will increase from 10000 to 11000, while capacity of terraces will both decrease by 758 to 11250.

The City End Terrace is partly coloured yellow on the picture. There is small print in the picture stating that “Marina Hall to be acquired”, (and i assume demolished). Whether this is for a deeper terrace, for the circulation area, or both is unclear.

Article states “pitch itself will not be changed”

The red lines to the north mark a new road, (i assume a diversion of the path which currently follows the old railway line) 7.35m wide.
175m of the stream there is to be culverted.

The yellow areas to the east and west of the training pitch show a “vendor, ticket and programme sales area” and “landscaped access routes”. Some of this area appears to now be sold to the GAA, while another area west of the city end terrace is to be “licensed to Pairc Ui Chaoimh”.

Article says “a portion of land will also be identified for possible parking use, that could be leased to the GAA and developed, at their cost, into a carpark”. Hard to know if this or the training pitch is the worst news from a public park point of view, but i suppose it could be ok if it was landscaped appropriately and accessible to park-users to park on on non-match days.

Thanks rofbp! I thought from the smaller image the blue in the plan view corresponded with the new ‘blue’ stand in the cross-section, and the red with the old red stand.

In that case, colour me a lot less impressed. Hopefully that’s just phase 1 though, and the rest of the ‘bowl’ will be similarly completed. It’d be great for once to have one covered, complete bowl stadium; unlike Croke Park, Lansdowne Rd or any other Irish stadium.

On a more cynical note again: what are the council up to? They CPO land from the MAS to build an ‘essential’ park. They then decide the park isn’t that essential, and sell the land to the GAA, at a significant loss. And the land in question isn’t for an ‘essential’ stadium, but a rather less than essential Excellence Centre.

If I wanted to be REALLY cynical, I’d suggest the reason for the Excellence Centre is to “reserve” land to be used at a later date for a hotel/conference centre. If that land had been used as part of the park, it would be nightmare ever to get permission to build on it. However now, if the GAA build this hotel in 10-20 years time, they’ll claim it’s on their own land so there’ll be much less opposition. :shh:

@who_me wrote:

Hopefully that’s just phase 1 though, and the rest of the ‘bowl’ will be similarly completed. It’d be great for once to have one covered, complete bowl stadium; unlike Croke Park, Lansdowne Rd or any other Irish stadium.

The article does confirm that the other three sides are to be rebuilt in phase 2. i had thought (feared) that they would merely refurbish them. I had heard that the terraces will be rebuilt as all-seater stands. The reported reduction in capacity there would support that. They are drawn in a similar layout to the new stand on the uncovered stand side, so i assume a level of uniformity will apply to those 3 sides, but don’t get your hopes up for a covered bowl: i had heard those three sides will be uncovered, and of course they will only have one tier, while the first phase will be 2 tier.

On a more cynical note again: what are the council up to? They CPO land from the MAS to build an ‘essential’ park. They then decide the park isn’t that essential, and sell the land to the GAA, at a significant loss. And the land in question isn’t for an ‘essential’ stadium, but a rather less than essential Excellence Centre.

i think it is pretty clear that the council planners don’t want to lose the park, but the politicians are all for it, as reflected in the vote a few months ago. i assume the planners are just making the best of a bad lot, and figure its better to cooperate on a good design and agree on some common principles for the leased area than to have a disjointed development of the area.
the centre of excellence is required, but i don’t know anyone who thinks it should be right next to pairc ui chaoimh. it would make much more sense to develop it on the outskirts of the city, where land was cheaper, and access was better. it would make even more sense to develop it in conjunction with some club on the city limits, Bishopstown or Douglas on the south side, Blarney, Delaney’s or Sarsfields on the north of the city.

You want proof that it isn’t primarily a centre of excellence: why does it need a 1000 seater stand?

If I wanted to be REALLY cynical, I’d suggest the reason for the Excellence Centre is to “reserve” land to be used at a later date for a hotel/conference centre.

It is certainly a land grab, but i wouldn’t credit the county board with as much foresight as you do. I think they just want it for parking, and i guarantee there will be cars parked on this centre of excellence’s all weather pitch for every big game in PuiC

Thanks again for the info.

At least the entire ground is being rebuilt, though it’s a shame if it’s not all covered. Why is it that we seem to do everything by half measures in this country?

I’d agree the centre of excellence doesn’t need to be right in that spot, adjacent to the stadium, which is why I’m a bit suspicious about it. IIRC, there were reports back at the start of the process that a hotel/conference centre were part of the GAA’s plans, so it’s wouldn’t surprise me if it were still part of their plans. I can’t fault them for taking care of their own interests, but it would be a crying shame if the park were to be significantly impacted just to build a (private) hotel rather than more public use.

Things have moved on somewhat regarding this redevelopment:

Scott Tallon Walker have been appointed as project architects, it was announced by the Cork County Board:
http://www.gaacork.ie/taggedNews/101247/99/páirc_u%C3%ADchaoimh_design_team_announced

http://thescore.thejournal.ie/new-pairc-will-be-second-only-to-croker-says-rebel-county-chairman-321701-Jan2012/

I laugh because 16 months ago, i posted a picture on this thread from the Scott Tallon Walker website showing Pairc Ui Chaoimh with 2 new roofs, rendered as part of an image of a Docklands development.
http://www.stwarchitects.com/project-information.php?p=07090

We won’t get an AVIVA stadium, but if we ended up with a Thomand Park, I would be very happy

EDIT: not sure why gaacork.ie link isn’t displaying correctly

Should also have included that it was decided before Christmas not to redevelop as a 60000 seater stadium, but to redevelop in or around the current capacity: 45000

I hope Páirc Uí Chaoimh gets a really good redevelopment. If we’re serious about a 2023 Rugby World Cup and I hope we are, it’s crucial we have a great stadium in our third city.

hope Páirc Uí Chaoimh gets a really good redevelopment. If we’re serious about a 2023 Rugby World Cup and I hope we are, it’s crucial we have a great stadium in our third city.

Yes, Frank Murphy is very on top of this and has been working closely with the IRFU to ensure that the Rugby World cup comes to Ireland in 2023 and that the youngsters of Ireland and Cork get to see top class rugby (with all of athe associated high-profile media coverage). Local GAA clubs around the towns and villages of Cork and across Ireland are also well up for this and many meetings have already been held agitating for the development of PuC to be ready on time.

@Steady wrote:

hope Páirc Uí Chaoimh gets a really good redevelopment. If we’re serious about a 2023 Rugby World Cup and I hope we are, it’s crucial we have a great stadium in our third city.

Yes, Frank Murphy is very on top of this and has been working closely with the IRFU to ensure that the Rugby World cup comes to Ireland in 2023 and that the youngsters of Ireland and Cork get to see top class rugby (with all of athe associated high-profile media coverage). Local GAA clubs around the towns and villages of Cork and across Ireland are also well up for this and many meetings have already been held agitating for the development of PuC to be ready on time.

Well said! Not sure FM has the oval ball game high on his list of priorities (and proper order IMHO)! That said I would love a proper stadium for municipal use in the city (even if its owned by the GAA and leased out) and hopefully by the time this thing is built the appropriate permission from “Congress” will have been obtained. Personally though, apart from obviously watching Cork/Tipp and Cork/Kerry matches in a proper stadium, I’d be more interested in the Congress Motion so I could watch Cork City in the Champions League (a guy can dream can’t he?)!

@browser wrote:

Well said! Not sure FM has the oval ball game high on his list of priorities (and proper order IMHO)! That said I would love a proper stadium for municipal use in the city (even if its owned by the GAA and leased out) and hopefully by the time this thing is built the appropriate permission from “Congress” will have been obtained. Personally though, apart from obviously watching Cork/Tipp and Cork/Kerry matches in a proper stadium, I’d be more interested in the Congress Motion so I could watch Cork City in the Champions League (a guy can dream can’t he?)!

I can’t say I’m too well versed on the GAA, but weren’t the Cork County Board (or Cork clubs?) among the staunchest opponents of opening up Croke Park for the rugby & soccer? If so, it seems unlikely to me they’d be too accommodating to opening their own stadium to such sports.

It’s understandable why the GAA would be reluctant to help out the competition. But it’s so annoying, as a Cork sports fan, to see the 3 main organisations struggling with piecemeal stadium developments (Páirc Uí Chaoimh, Musgrave Park and Turners Cross) when with a merged effort they could achieve much more. The PUC site could be spectacular, hopefully we’ll see a stadium to do it justice. Who knows, it might even help kickstart some of the docklands developments (offices/bars/restaurants maybe, probably not residential!). Plus, if the 3 organisations shared a stadium, I reckon there could be a lot of cross-over of fans who start supporting the other sports as well. I’ve never attended a Cork City or Cork GAA game, and have not much desire to in TC or the existing PUC, to be honest.

I still have a vision of crowds strolling out along a nice new boardwalk along Kennedy Quay, stopping at bars, restaurants along the way. Eventually arriving at a shiny new PUC for a rugby/football/hurling/soccer game. Maybe I’m just dreaming! :crazy:

Hey Guys

Just to echo what has been said….I would love us to put in a bid for the 2023 RWC! However, I will believe it when I see it. Currently, Argentina, USA, Brazil, Russia and Canada are all interested!

In examining Pairc Ui Chaoimh…..it does look like a realistic and achievable plan given the current economic cliamate. However, I do share dissappointment that it won’t be a true 360 degree stadium. I’ve said it before but those planning stadia in Ireland seem to believe that it doesn’t rain here!! If done properly PIC has the ability to cater to a wider Munster and Irish audience that Semple Stadium simply cannot!

On a related point, I wish the GAA would abandon the 1920s notion of a stadium being basically a concrete bowl that people stand in. Some of their new constructions such as Limerick hold to this concept. The headline figures for the capacity of GAA stadia are grossly unrealistic because many of them are never full . Surely it would be better, particularly in smaller Counties, to have 10-20k all seater covered stadiums with appropriate factilities which are full every week rather then vast swathes of terracing that fans huddle against the elements on once a year!!!

http://gaacork.ie/taggedNews/160509/board_briefed_on_páirc_plans
No specifics on the design and no pictures, but a planning application in October is mentioned.

Also, mentions €12 million benefit for local economy from each event.
At 45000 capacity, that is €266 per patron! :crazy: :wtf: A plainly ridiculous figure