Stadium Updates (All Clubs)

[placid casual]

There really is no club comparable to bohs when it comes to polishing a turd.

[nigel-harps1954]

As said above, I believe nothing until the keys are handed over to the finished project.

[D24Saint]

We all know, in our hearts, that none of us will live to see any of this.

I certainly wont believe it until I see a 3D model anyway.

[pateen]

As said above, I believe nothing until the keys are handed over to the finished project.

What's the latest hold up with the Harps project. Money?

[Nesta99]

There really is no club comparable to bohs when it comes to polishing a turd.

I enjoyed that piece of spin myself before id seen others comment, gas stuff!

[joey B]

What's the latest hold up with the Harps project. Money?


Good question!

1st April 2021 the last announcement of “funding “…..

http://merrionstreet.ie/en/news-room/releases/provisional_allocation_of_3_991m_for_finn_harps_st adium.html

I haven’t seen another update on any progress on anything since , if there was I’ve missed it….

[redarmyfaction]

Good question!

1st April 2021 the last announcement of “funding “…..

http://merrionstreet.ie/en/news-room/releases/provisional_allocation_of_3_991m_for_finn_harps_st adium.html

I haven’t seen another update on any progress on anything since , if there was I’ve missed it….

Very hard to understand the lack of progress, there must be opposition at some level we are not seeing after so many years pf zero progress.

[EalingGreen]

In the "Attendances" thread, Nesta99 made the following point, which I think I should properly reply to in this thread, as follows:


If those numbers hold up for the Brandywell its bound to add weight to getting phases 2 and 3 of the new stand on the agenda quicker!?


And on this point I know EYG and I have disagreed on this before (apologies all round!), when I asserted that DCFC and Glentoran had both been promised c.£10m each from the £36m Sub-Regional Stadium Funding originally allocated/ringfenced by Stormont over a decade ago (i.e. before the usual political screw-ups caused it to be delayed again and again.)

For procedural/legal reasons etc, this promise had to be on a "nod and a wink" basis, but sources close to Robinson (East Belfast/GFC) and McGuinness (Derry/DCFC) at the time made it pretty clear that this should happen. Most recently, the NI Sports mininster (and IFA) have specifically mentioned the Glentoran grant, and while the Brandywell has not been so specified in writing, a local (SDLP) Councillor in Derry referred specifically to it as funding Phases Two and Three:

"Councillor Tierney – a lifelong Derry City fan who is standing as an MLA in the upcoming election – explained that the local council had footed the bill for Phase One of the Brandwell revamp (believed to have cost somewhere in the region of £7m, and which transformed the turf pitch into a 4G one).
He said that since at least 2016, the understanding has been that the cash for Phase Two (which he said had not been 100% costed as yet) would be coming from the [sub-regional] stadium fund.
This would mean significant work to at least two of the spectator stands, bringing the venue up to European standards."
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/shelving-football-stadium-grants-has-shafted-republic-of-ireland-league-squad-derry-fc-as-it-puts-plans-for-brandywell-into-deep-freeze-3573786

Now I know this was said in the run-up to (yet another bloody) election, but Tierney has been both consistent and explicit in this regard, eg:
https://www.derrynow.com/news/derry-sport/718387/cllr-tierney-decision-needed-on-stadium-funding.html

In addition, Philip O'Doherty was also pretty clear in statements from February (i.e. same time as Cllr.Tierney) that DCFC would be entitled to receive significant funding from the Sub-regional fund (if only the people at Stormont could get their act together*):

"Derry City FC chairman Philip O’Doherty has expressed his frustration at the latest delay in the sub regional stadia project and has called for the £36 million fund to be increased to combat rising inflation costs.
The plans to release funds promised to upgrade football stadiums across the north have been shelved, with Communities Minister Deirdre Hargey claiming the financial package needs to be signed off by the Executive.
Derry City Football Club, as anchor tenants of the Council-owned Brandywell venue, hoped to see the roll out of plans which included the construction of two sides on the Mark Farren Stand to create a larger capacity."
https://www.derryjournal.com/sport/football/derry-city-chairman-calls-for-ps36-million-sub-regional-stadia-fund-increase-3573842

[Meanwhile on a more technical note, EYG questioned whether there was physical room at the Brandywell for the 8k capacity promised for The Oval, but looking back through the original announcement, as revised in 2016, it states:
Purpose: To provide funding towards the achievement of safe stadia. The
stadium should be suitable for hosting high level competition matches with a
moderate capacity level of 6,000 to 8,000 persons
https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/consultations/dcal/sub-regional-stadia-programme-for-soccer.pdf
Meaning that 6k should easily be accommodated the the Brandywell.]




* - I know, I know...

[Glen Of Aherlow]

https://finnharps.ie/donegal-community-stadium-update-may-2022/

Latest on Finn Harps stadium

[Mr A]

Well since pateen asked we thought we should give an update

[EatYerGreens]

In the "Attendances" thread, Nesta99 made the following point, which I think I should properly reply to in this thread, as follows:


And on this point I know EYG and I have disagreed on this before (apologies all round!), when I asserted that DCFC and Glentoran had both been promised c.£10m each from the £36m Sub-Regional Stadium Funding originally allocated/ringfenced by Stormont over a decade ago (i.e. before the usual political screw-ups caused it to be delayed again and again.)

For procedural/legal reasons etc, this promise had to be on a "nod and a wink" basis, but sources close to Robinson (East Belfast/GFC) and McGuinness (Derry/DCFC) at the time made it pretty clear that this should happen. Most recently, the NI Sports mininster (and IFA) have specifically mentioned the Glentoran grant, and while the Brandywell has not been so specified in writing, a local (SDLP) Councillor in Derry referred specifically to it as funding Phases Two and Three:

"Councillor Tierney – a lifelong Derry City fan who is standing as an MLA in the upcoming election – explained that the local council had footed the bill for Phase One of the Brandwell revamp (believed to have cost somewhere in the region of £7m, and which transformed the turf pitch into a 4G one).
He said that since at least 2016, the understanding has been that the cash for Phase Two (which he said had not been 100% costed as yet) would be coming from the [sub-regional] stadium fund.
This would mean significant work to at least two of the spectator stands, bringing the venue up to European standards."
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/shelving-football-stadium-grants-has-shafted-republic-of-ireland-league-squad-derry-fc-as-it-puts-plans-for-brandywell-into-deep-freeze-3573786

Now I know this was said in the run-up to (yet another bloody) election, but Tierney has been both consistent and explicit in this regard, eg:
https://www.derrynow.com/news/derry-sport/718387/cllr-tierney-decision-needed-on-stadium-funding.html

In addition, Philip O'Doherty was also pretty clear in statements from February (i.e. same time as Cllr.Tierney) that DCFC would be entitled to receive significant funding from the Sub-regional fund (if only the people at Stormont could get their act together*):

"Derry City FC chairman Philip O’Doherty has expressed his frustration at the latest delay in the sub regional stadia project and has called for the £36 million fund to be increased to combat rising inflation costs.
The plans to release funds promised to upgrade football stadiums across the north have been shelved, with Communities Minister Deirdre Hargey claiming the financial package needs to be signed off by the Executive.
Derry City Football Club, as anchor tenants of the Council-owned Brandywell venue, hoped to see the roll out of plans which included the construction of two sides on the Mark Farren Stand to create a larger capacity."
https://www.derryjournal.com/sport/football/derry-city-chairman-calls-for-ps36-million-sub-regional-stadia-fund-increase-3573842

[Meanwhile on a more technical note, EYG questioned whether there was physical room at the Brandywell for the 8k capacity promised for The Oval, but looking back through the original announcement, as revised in 2016, it states:
Purpose: To provide funding towards the achievement of safe stadia. The
stadium should be suitable for hosting high level competition matches with a
moderate capacity level of 6,000 to 8,000 persons
https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/consultations/dcal/sub-regional-stadia-programme-for-soccer.pdf
Meaning that 6k should easily be accommodated the the Brandywell.]


* - I know, I know...

1) We've been through this. There was never any suggestion of Derry getting £10m from Stormont (other than from yourself), and the council there wasn't even looking for that amount. It was £3m, and I posted links which stated that. God knows why you're still claiming otherwise despite the evidence. You need to just accept this and move on. The required sum will have increased now due to the rise in construction costs, but even with that I still can't see it being £10m.

2) To repeat again, I can't see where you would fit 8,000 into the Brandywell. 6k absolutely, as I said. But I can't see how it can accomodate 8,000 without major surgery to its layout.

[Nesta99]

....,

[Nesta99]

https://finnharps.ie/donegal-community-stadium-update-may-2022/

Latest on Finn Harps stadium

So its now alternative of the alternative, alternative, steel based, as it could have been say 2010, No messing at all with builders now...if Govt pony up it will be done this time by 2023? Whats the role of the original builder now, how much was paid to same to date, how has land transfer been sorted or minimise the vested interest that hampered the project. Is Finn Park still to remain in use and who will pay for upkeep of both when Stranrolar opens or have trustees agreed to sell - 2 stadia is some luxury to have and keep in safe condition!

"we are now very hopeful that the Department of Sport will approve the recommencement of work in the near future" How many times has this been said? Hope lives eternal but this is taking the pish! Local economy conjecture and stock BS. Project has become cheaper in the last 15 months by 3.5mil, sure hang on another 15 months.....

This project must have been held up by the ars*ng around of the original developer and a reneging on the land swap for Finn Park when it dropped in value, compounded by a mish mash of debt, nama, and the general f*ckaboutery in construction and someone still wanting a cut rather than cutting losses and sucking up the gamble that didnt pay off, like the average person is expected to do.

The way the the Dept of Sport kept this project at arms length is indicative of how things have been messy and not a reneging on the project in principle - I vaguely recall it being said that funding is fully in place previously? And yeah its a bit fresh to seem so frustrated by the messing when my own club may not even have applied for ground development grants, but at least there hasnt been wasting of time and money submitting plans, start work, change tack again and again using grant money amend plans, to now do it... again. Bohs selling Dalymount twice and Rovers needing to have Tallaght bailed by SDCC is really off in the distance now in comparison to this saga!

[EatYerGreens]

So its now alternative of the alternative, alternative, steel based, as it could have been say 2010, No messing at all with builders now...if Govt pony up it will be done this time by 2023? Whats the role of the original builder now, how much was paid to same to date, how has land transfer been sorted or minimise the vested interest that hampered the project. Is Finn Park still to remain in use and who will pay for upkeep of both when Stranrolar opens or have trustees agreed to sell - 2 stadia is some luxury to have and keep in safe condition!

"we are now very hopeful that the Department of Sport will approve the recommencement of work in the near future" How many times has this been said? Hope lives eternal but this is taking the pish! Local economy conjecture and stock BS. Project has become cheaper in the last 15 months by 3.5mil, sure hang on another 15 months.....

This project must have been held up by the ars*ng around of the original developer and a reneging on the land swap for Finn Park when it dropped in value, compounded by a mish mash of debt, nama, and the general f*ckaboutery in construction and someone still wanting a cut rather than cutting losses and sucking up the gamble that didnt pay off, like the average person is expected to do.

The way the the Dept of Sport kept this project at arms length is indicative of how things have been messy and not a reneging on the project in principle - I vaguely recall it being said that funding is fully in place previously? And yeah its a bit fresh to seem so frustrated by the messing when my own club may not even have applied for ground development grants, but at least there hasnt been wasting of time and money submitting plans, start work, change tack again and again using grant money amend plans, to now do it... again. Bohs selling Dalymount twice and Rovers needing to have Tallaght bailed by SDCC is really off in the distance now in comparison to this saga!

The switch to steel does beg the obvious question as to why this wasn't proposed/pursued previously. There are clubs in England who've had this model very successfully for a number of years now, so it's not like it's a new thing.

I share your scepticism after so long, bit hopefully this will finally FINALLY come to fruition.

[Nesta99]

Its been done in the biggest stadia for about 20 years with UEFA blessing, a no brainer, fraction of the cost of poured concrete with prefab sections also meaning much quicker completion. There has to be back scratching with concrete providers among many others for sticking with this outdated, inefficient and seriously environmentally damaging process. A stand can also be shoehorned in to an awkward and small site footprint never mind a greenfield site. We really need to stop with the construction gravy train in this country!! Its a general issue with a lot of capital projects but whatever has actually gone on on the Stranrolar build is a perfect storm or simply individuals holding out to get a slice of the grant pie or to recover a land speculation loss from the 2000s.

[EalingGreen]

1) We've been through this. There was never any suggestion of Derry getting £10m from Stormont (other than from yourself), and the council there wasn't even looking for that amount. It was £3m, and I posted links which stated that. God knows why you're still claiming otherwise despite the evidence. You need to just accept this and move on. The required sum will have increased now due to the rise in construction costs, but even with that I still can't see it being £10m.

Both Tierney and O'Doherty are in a position to know and they've specifically referred to Stormont money from the Sub-Regional fund being due to the Brandywell, including Phase Two/Farren Stand. They're not making it up.
And as for the exact sum involved, inflation over a decade, plus the fact that some of the money has been put forward by the Council, may mean that it will be reduced from £10m.
But you know the way Stormont works (or did do when Robinson and McGuinness were in charge): "If Themmuns is gettin' £Xm, then we must get it, too."



2) To repeat again, I can't see where you would fit 8,000 into the Brandywell. 6k absolutely, as I said. But I can't see how it can accomodate 8,000 without major surgery to its layout.
You tried to derail my whole point by asserting that the Brandywell physically cannot accommodate 8k capacity.
But the Stormont documentation I quoted specifies "6k-8k", which lower figure brings the Brandywell back into the equation.
In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if that capacity range was deliberately arrived at to allow for both sites to come within it i.e. 8k for The Oval and 6k for the Brandywell.

[EalingGreen]

Its been done in the biggest stadia for about 20 years with UEFA blessing, a no brainer, fraction of the cost of poured concrete with prefab sections also meaning much quicker completion. There has to be back scratching with concrete providers among many others for sticking with this outdated, inefficient and seriously environmentally damaging process. A stand can also be shoehorned in to an awkward and small site footprint never mind a greenfield site. We really need to stop with the construction gravy train in this country!! Its a general issue with a lot of capital projects but whatever has actually gone on on the Stranrolar build is a perfect storm or simply individuals holding out to get a slice of the grant pie or to recover a land speculation loss from the 2000s.
Re your bold, the perfect illustration of this is seen in Brentford's new stadium. It was built on a cramped, triangular site between three railway lines - previously it was only fit to operate a waste disposal facility - which dictated the unusual shape and design of the stadium.

But as this 2 minute time lapse video shows, building with pre-fab steel must have been far easier than had they used the old cast concrete method - doubtless much cheaper too, as well as being much more environmentally friendly etc:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBpWOB0Ju5I

Incidentally they started demolishing Brentford's old Griffin Park ground immediately the new stadium was finished - the Council requires houses to be built on the site - but that still hasn't been completed, because GP was basically concrete, including terraces, and that takes a lot of time and work to remove.

[bohsmug]

So the current plan for the Harps stadium now is the main stand to proceed as originally envisaged and then the rest is almost a mirror image of Salford City's stadium with a row or 2 extra? Whether it happens or not is one question but it seems a good plan to me. Especially if they put the TV gantry on the small side.

I wonder whether they are planning precast concrete decking on those stands or whether it's the more lightweight modular ones like Crusaders up north. Either option is probably good enough but precast concrete definitely feels better under foot. I hope it proceeds anyway and is done quickly from this point. There's barely a ground in the country that wouldn't be improved by lightweight, covered 6 or 7 row stands going in opposite the main stand or behind the goal(s).

[Neish]

The switch to steel does beg the obvious question as to why this wasn't proposed/pursued previously. There are clubs in England who've had this model very successfully for a number of years now, so it's not like it's a new thing.

I share your scepticism after so long, bit hopefully this will finally FINALLY come to fruition.

Its a lot to do with the spiraling cost, the original model/plan was conceived 15-20 years ago. Since then we had a massive worldwide recession, breixt, covid and not to mention successive inept & self serving governments in that time

[Nesta99]

Its a lot to do with the spiraling cost, the original model/plan was conceived 15-20 years ago. Since then we had a massive worldwide recession, breixt, covid and not to mention successive inept & self serving governments in that time

Other projects have been delivered under the same circumstances. I'll accept inflationary pressures and pairing back on SCG would have slowed things down but there is a lot more to the delays, and the defense above is largely a bunch of excuses. Even getting the main stand to usability and the pitch in like Athlone, would not be 15-20 years brexit/covid/recession/inflation/government delays - what about self serving construction companys bailing on agreements. If agreements were not in place then it is the club that is inept. Was there the required tender process for to appoint the construction company? I ask because if there wasnt and the builder has gone bust there is little recourse to get funding released as a new tender process et al would be needed. The Dept of Sport really dont want incomplete facilities that they have already allocated grants for - the will seek a solution but they will walk away if there are issues with landownership, grant money not used as intended, or disputes internally at a club or with external parties eg builders or landowners.

[Neish]

Other projects have been delivered under the same circumstances. I'll accept inflationary pressures and pairing back on SCG would have slowed things down but there is a lot more to the delays, and the defense above is largely a bunch of excuses. Even getting the main stand to usability and the pitch in like Athlone, would not be 15-20 years brexit/covid/recession/inflation/government delays - what about self serving construction companys bailing on agreements. If agreements were not in place then it is the club that is inept. Was there the required tender process for to appoint the construction company? I ask because if there wasnt and the builder has gone bust there is little recourse to get funding released as a new tender process et al would be needed. The Dept of Sport really dont want incomplete facilities that they have already allocated grants for - the will seek a solution but they will walk away if there are issues with landownership, grant money not used as intended, or disputes internally at a club or with external parties eg builders or landowners.

Most of the projects you speak of being completed in that time had either local big business or political personalities pushing them, Harps had none of this.

When the recession hit in 2008 the volunteers running Harps were busy enough with just keeping the club afloat and whilst they just about did so in several seasons those people deserve full credit as many LOI clubs either completely disappeared from LOI (Kildare, Monaghan, Fingal) or went into administration or very close to it (Derry, Athlone, Cork, Waterford) in that time. The new stadium was very much down the list of priorities then.

Many fans of other clubs just don't realize that Harps have a whole list of issues the majority of LOI clubs do not have, ie travel & accommodation much greater for Harps, no big financial supporter, running, cost of running their own stadium, and much more

[Nesta99]

Fair enough, keeping a club going is obviously more important than breaking a club in favour of a new stadium. But we havent been in a 15-20 year spell of austerity, grant money has been allocated and drawn down, the new ground/stand started, stopped (there hasnt been a clear answer as to why), capital grants were subsequently withheld or an application rejected, why? Additional money was then allocated to redo plans on a project that was already started. There are now another set of plans again and looking to change the method of construction which could have been a cheaper and quicker option originally. The reasons given for the delays have been govt ignoring the North West, Brexit, Inflation, recession, Im sure the Ukrainian War could be added now. Finn Park was to be sold but that was taken off the table as it is needed for underage and womens teams. Funding was said to have been in place from early on. It was to be a completed facility before moving in when the main stand could have been completed and accommodated the sort of crowds that Harps get. With all that has been said, you'd have to wonder what isnt being said and one aspect is that it looks like a construction stopped playing ball when Finn Park's value dipped. Which is far more understandable for delays than say Brexit.

This stuff about travel costs, yes it is more than being based in Dublin where there are a number of clubs but Ireland is a small country and the vast majority of Harps games are within 3 hours travel especially with Cork, Limerick and Waterford in the 1st Division, not all clubs have a wealthy benefactor either, and not all clubs are as lucky as Shamrock Rovers by having a stadium built for them - the excetion rather than the rule. If Harps were already stretched by greater overheads than other league clubs then maybe taking on a major ground development was a folly. The Dept of Sport had obvious concerns about the project and it'd be interesting to hear their take!!

[Neish]

Fair enough, keeping a club going is obviously more important than breaking a club in favour of a new stadium. But we havent been in a 15-20 year spell of austerity, grant money has been allocated and drawn down, the new ground/stand started, stopped (there hasnt been a clear answer as to why), capital grants were subsequently withheld or an application rejected, why? Additional money was then allocated to redo plans on a project that was already started. There are now another set of plans again and looking to change the method of construction which could have been a cheaper and quicker option originally. The reasons given for the delays have been govt ignoring the North West, Brexit, Inflation, recession, Im sure the Ukrainian War could be added now. Finn Park was to be sold but that was taken off the table as it is needed for underage and womens teams. Funding was said to have been in place from early on. It was to be a completed facility before moving in when the main stand could have been completed and accommodated the sort of crowds that Harps get. With all that has been said, you'd have to wonder what isnt being said and one aspect is that it looks like a construction stopped playing ball when Finn Park's value dipped. Which is far more understandable for delays than say Brexit.

This stuff about travel costs, yes it is more than being based in Dublin where there are a number of clubs but Ireland is a small country and the vast majority of Harps games are within 3 hours travel especially with Cork, Limerick and Waterford in the 1st Division, not all clubs have a wealthy benefactor either, and not all clubs are as lucky as Shamrock Rovers by having a stadium built for them - the excetion rather than the rule. If Harps were already stretched by greater overheads than other league clubs then maybe taking on a major ground development was a folly. The Dept of Sport had obvious concerns about the project and it'd be interesting to hear their take!!

3 hours travel is a 6 hour round trip. most other Premier clubs only face that when travelling to Harps or Derry, Harps and Derry every 2nd week(excluding when they facing each other and sligo).

As for all you point about other projects and delays with Finn Park, sure Oriel is not vastly greater than Finn park and there has been little improvement there

[Nesta99]

3 hours travel is a 6 hour round trip. most other Premier clubs only face that when travelling to Harps or Derry, Harps and Derry every 2nd week(excluding when they facing each other and sligo).

As for all you point about other projects and delays with Finn Park, sure Oriel is not vastly greater than Finn park and there has been little improvement there

Ans there it is, the grand slam of excuses!

[EatYerGreens]

Both Tierney and O'Doherty are in a position to know and they've specifically referred to Stormont money from the Sub-Regional fund being due to the Brandywell, including Phase Two/Farren Stand. They're not making it up.
And as for the exact sum involved, inflation over a decade, plus the fact that some of the money has been put forward by the Council, may mean that it will be reduced from £10m.
But you know the way Stormont works (or did do when Robinson and McGuinness were in charge): "If Themmuns is gettin' £Xm, then we must get it, too." This is why trying to debate anything with you on here is both maddening and pointless. Whenever you're pulled up for getting something wrong (e.g. your laughable claims about the LSL), rather than just hold your hands up and have the grace, sense and integrity to admit you got it wrong - you instead pursue a dual strategy of pointless tangets to try to hide the fact you were wrong, whilst also doubling down on the original daft claim yet again.

To dissect your latest comments :

1) I have never claimed that there would be NO Stormont money for the Branyswlel, so your claim on that is irrelevant. As I have made clear repeatedly - and as the newspaper articles I posted previously to you on this have made clear - the plan for the Brandywell was for that Stormont regional fund to provide £3m of the £10m build cost. You made a claim that the contribution being sought from Stormont had been £10m, when in fact that was just the TOTAL cost of the project. But rather than just hold your hands up and accept that was an error, you're persisting with that £10m Stormont claim. For the love of god, please just stop.


You tried to derail my whole point by asserting that the Brandywell physically cannot accommodate 8k capacity.
But the Stormont documentation I quoted specifies "6k-8k", which lower figure brings the Brandywell back into the equation.
In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised if that capacity range was deliberately arrived at to allow for both sites to come within it i.e. 8k for The Oval and 6k for the Brandywell.

2) You don't need anyone to lend you a hand on derailing your own posts EG :D As for the Brandywell's potential capacity, you have previously admitted that you haven't been in the ground since the new stand went in there. So you're not exactly familiar with the place. Once that new stand is completed, the ground will have something like a 5,500 capacity (Derry fans please correct if wrong). I therefore challenge you to explain where an extra 2,500 could be fitted into the Brandywell. I don't care what any document may have suggested, or your theories about trying to equalise the capacity of the Brandywell and the Oval (like that is a credible issue for anyone really) - I'm talking about common feckin sense and obvious facts. Go on Google earth, look at the Brandywell, and tell us where an extra 2,500 vould be accomodated once the new stand there is completed all the way along. And please - don't bother replying until you've done that exercise, as it'll make you realise where you're going wrong.

[EatYerGreens]

Fair enough, keeping a club going is obviously more important than breaking a club in favour of a new stadium. But we havent been in a 15-20 year spell of austerity, grant money has been allocated and drawn down, the new ground/stand started, stopped (there hasnt been a clear answer as to why), capital grants were subsequently withheld or an application rejected, why? Additional money was then allocated to redo plans on a project that was already started. There are now another set of plans again and looking to change the method of construction which could have been a cheaper and quicker option originally. The reasons given for the delays have been govt ignoring the North West, Brexit, Inflation, recession, Im sure the Ukrainian War could be added now. Finn Park was to be sold but that was taken off the table as it is needed for underage and womens teams. Funding was said to have been in place from early on. It was to be a completed facility before moving in when the main stand could have been completed and accommodated the sort of crowds that Harps get. With all that has been said, you'd have to wonder what isnt being said and one aspect is that it looks like a construction stopped playing ball when Finn Park's value dipped. Which is far more understandable for delays than say Brexit.

This stuff about travel costs, yes it is more than being based in Dublin where there are a number of clubs but Ireland is a small country and the vast majority of Harps games are within 3 hours travel especially with Cork, Limerick and Waterford in the 1st Division, not all clubs have a wealthy benefactor either, and not all clubs are as lucky as Shamrock Rovers by having a stadium built for them - the excetion rather than the rule. If Harps were already stretched by greater overheads than other league clubs then maybe taking on a major ground development was a folly. The Dept of Sport had obvious concerns about the project and it'd be interesting to hear their take!!

Surely pointing to Brexit as part of the reason Finn Harp's new stadium hasn't progressed is somewhat of a stretch? What impact would it genuinely have had on the issue?

[Nesta99]

Surely pointing to Brexit as part of the reason Finn Harp's new stadium hasn't progressed is somewhat of a stretch? What impact would it genuinely have had on the issue?

Its Inspector Gadget levels of a stretch!

[nigel-harps1954]

I would wager strongly that Brexit had absolutely nothing to do with it.

I'm in no position to be saying what did or didn't happen, but certainly the economic crash initially played it's part, then some political reasons, then obviously we had the redrawn plans a couple of years ago and since then the massive increase in building costs meaning plans had to be redrawn again to a more cost effective solution.

[Nesta99]

I would wager strongly that Brexit had absolutely nothing to do with it.

I'm in no position to be saying what did or didn't happen, but certainly the economic crash initially played it's part, then some political reasons, then obviously we had the redrawn plans a couple of years ago and since then the massive increase in building costs meaning plans had to be redrawn again to a more cost effective solution.

Shouldnt that have been the case from the start?

[Mr A]

There is no question that in retrospect different decisions could have been made for the project but the FHFC side have absolutely acted in good faith at all times. Note that a lot of assumptions are being made above that are based on nothing but speculation.

The crash meant the value of Finn Park went through the floor, plus the environment generally became much more difficult. Also note that large scale grants are 70% funding meaning substantial other funding must be secured to get things moving- an issue for many many clubs all around the country not just us. Hopefully we are now close to getting things lined up and moving again.

[Nesta99]

It is often a stumbling black to obtain the % of funding required to draw down the full grant, and of course that the grant can be withdrawn and yer starting almost from scratch if let sitting. There is a company, possibly as part of the Dept of Sport that provides cheap loans to assist with this issue. It had become problematic elsewhere where a construction company provided the self funded % to draw down and get access to grant money and hence caused all sorts of issues on ownership especially in the event of eg delays, or disputes with county council building control departments - maybe by holding the project to ransom. Its also now why most projects like this are phased rather turnkey.

I totally acknowledge that comments or observations that I personally have made are based on hearsay, including much being said here including that full funding for the total project was in situ. I would also accept that Finn Harps have acted in good faith eg there is no alluding to grant money being used for anything but the project as has happened to delay and even totally derail other capital projects in this country before.

I do find it interesting that Finn Harps have been specifically stated to have acted in good faith. Have others not acted in good faith? if this is the case then it is understandable that the Dept of Sport have kept things at arms length for so long. It is also understandable that people at FH have not or cannot state why/what original agreements have not been fulfilled, but that contributes to people speculating, joining the dots, mainly that a developer reneged on agreements when there was a fall off in land value - imo thats tough luck, speculating on land values that dont return an expected opportunity for profit (or greater profit) is part of life and should lead to the courts getting involved unless there is a wink and not agreement in place. I would speculate that a construction company that is to get a tract of development land (Finn Park) will also have received the bulk of grant money drawn down for work done. If the construction company went out of business eg then again delays are understandable but that takes teasing out especially if work paid for by a grant has not happened as per the scheduled build and phased budget release when the commencement notice is issued. Regular audits of progress are supposed to be done but not something Ive found we are particularly good at and things tend to only crop up when something is wrong. We should be doing a lot more to protect the investment made by SPGs.

For what its worth when the YDC was build at Oriel Park I was uneasy that it was the club owners construction company that seemed to be the only tender, gaining control/ownership while being paid a wedge to build via a SPC grant, coflict of interest and all that. The YDC was also partially built on land not owned and bar the 2nd landowner being willing to cede his part of his land to the build, the whole lot could have been demolished, I wouldnt bet the piggy bank that it was a surveyors mistake or how LouthCoCo even granted permission when 2 landowners were involved. was the building moved and how did Building Control not notice when foundations were marked out. Also the land in question was bought for 800k, the significant tract of land remaining was subsequently sold for 60k 5 or 6 years later. In 2014 when Dundalk FC was for sale the new owners didnt want the YDC included in the purchase of the club due to the substantial building levies on the development still outstanding - levies stay with the building not the builder albeit these should have been factored in to cost when the grant was drawn down. Such messiness can have ongoing negative impact on future grant applications.

All in all when there are 15-20 years from the sod being turned it is usually due to significant messing and even while acting in good faith doesnt rule out errors maybe due to naivety, trying to get as much for as little as possible so cutting corners, not having a architect/project manager to keep builders in check, taking offers from constructions companies to get things moving which may be grand until things go wrong and its found there isnt some sort of recourse. It cant all be blamed, as above, recession, inlfation, travel costs or flipping brexit etc.

[joey B]

I see they’ve started work on the 4th stand in Tallaght,can we just let SDCC look after all the grounds in the country!!

[Neish]

Ans there it is, the grand slam of excuses!

More of a comparison really, with all the money Dundalk earned in last 8 years or so not much has changed in Oriel since i first visited it back in 2003

[Nesta99]

More of a comparison really, with all the money Dundalk earned in last 8 years or so not much has changed in Oriel since i first visited it back in 2003

Not much has changed since my first game in 1985, and older fans again can probably say similar from the 70s. I dont know what it has to do with Finn Harps tbh, we have hardly been standard bearers for facilities from the late 60's so poor comparison.

[Neish]

Not much has changed since my first game in 1985, and older fans again can probably say similar from the 70s. I dont know what it has to do with Finn Harps tbh, we have hardly been standard bearers for facilities from the late 60's so poor comparison.

You are asking for reason on no movement on the new Harps stadium, have heard and read about both new Dundalk stadium plus redevelopment of Oriel fairly regularly in last 10 years or so, yet nothing has happened. Its not as easy to just get a stadium built there many, many bridges to cross to get there.

The Northwest and especially Donegal is usually last on the list for funding, there has been talk of a bypass for Ballybofey/Stranorlar since the 70's or 80's, similar on a public swimming which we finally got in 2014.

[Nesta99]

Stadia that need any exemptions for licensing get round this by having plans in the works, every club that needs to hence have plans. Its not the same as permission granted, money allocated, project started and then stalled for nearly 15 years. 6600 all seater was ambitious but there would have been little wrong with an initial 1600 stand and some terracing and move on from that starting point. The revised revised paired back plans now make a whole lot more sense though will be more expensive, 8mil compared to 6 originally. I can assure you Louth and probably every country/region have people that seem to believe that they are the neglected spots by govt.

[D24Saint]

We should have word on Richmond by mid July but it’s looking good. We are getting on board a city council development plan alongside Shels & Bohs. The rumours are a 8000 all seater & we hand over some land to the council. How we will fit 8k in im not sure but I’d suspect the land in question is the wooded area across the camac.

[sbgawa]

We should have word on Richmond by mid July but it’s looking good. We are getting on board a city council development plan alongside Shels & Bohs. The rumours are a 8000 all seater & we hand over some land to the council. How we will fit 8k in im not sure but I’d suspect the land in question is the wooded area across the camac.

Would be great if that happened but i find it hard to believe tbh, also the wooded land over the camac is prety small and given it is on a river isnt very good for building

[D24Saint]

Would be great if that happened but i find it hard to believe tbh, also the wooded land over the camac is prety small and given it is on a river isnt very good for building

Wouldn’t think it would be to built on. I’d say the corpo would turn it into some sort of a wetland nature thing. I wouldn’t say they would allow the river to be built over. It’s badly needed as Richmond as much as I love it has become obsolete in its current guise.

[Glen Of Aherlow]

Wouldn’t think it would be to built on. I’d say the corpo would turn it into some sort of a wetland nature thing. I wouldn’t say they would allow the river to be built over. It’s badly needed as Richmond as much as I love it has become obsolete in its current guise.

If they can get an 8,000 all seater into the space available in Richmond i'll start going to mass again , but here's hoping they can get something done .

[Nesta99]

It could be done but wouldnt be cheap especially with the Camac running along the site. DCC might have been better off considering previous plans by St Pats than potentially providing an additional development never mind Dalymount + 2 now. I presume that previously mooted plan by St Pats is done with housing development started? The more the merrier as it could put pressure on other local authorities/Dept of Sport not to neglect potential regional projects!

[D24Saint]

It could be done but wouldnt be cheap especially with the Camac running along the site. DCC might have been better off considering previous plans by St Pats than potentially providing an additional development never mind Dalymount + 2 now. I presume that previously mooted plan by St Pats is done with housing development started? The more the merrier as it could put pressure on other local authorities/Dept of Sport not to neglect potential regional projects!

There is still no building started in St. Michaels estate but its safe to assume the Richmond Arena dream is dead and buried. If we can work something out to stay in Richmond with an improved stadium then it would be the best alternative.

[nigel-harps1954]

A narrow two tier main stand is the only thing that springs to mind when suggesting 8,000 seats could fit into the space there.

[Nesta99]

There is still no building started in St. Michaels estate but its safe to assume the Richmond Arena dream is dead and buried. If we can work something out to stay in Richmond with an improved stadium then it would be the best alternative.

Yeah unlikely but ye never know, if the budgets need work to try and sort out potentially 3 clubs with 3 developments it could be revisited. It was more or less self financing wasnt it? so could appeal now rather than seen as too ambitious. It was a shame it didnt get more traction as it was an interesting concept and a first for these isles, yet not so outside the box that there isnt good examples of how it worked elsewhere. Housing, retail, services and new ground or high density social housing without meaningful thought for amenities and future development of that new community - not as if such mistakes was ever made before in this country....

I just cant see the Camac side being developed much without bridging or boxing the river, maybe a corporate facilities at a rooftop level, clubrooms type building and limited seating in front. More likely to get a 2 tier structure on the 3 other sides than the camac i think. Over double the size I know but a trip to Loftus Rd and ye'd be wondering whether trying to squeeze the absolute maximum out of a cramped site is worth it, but then you have the Brentford example mentioned in the thread above which shows what can be done.

[Glen Of Aherlow]

Yeah unlikely but ye never know, if the budgets need work to try and sort out potentially 3 clubs with 3 developments it could be revisited. It was more or less self financing wasnt it? so could appeal now rather than seen as too ambitious. It was a shame it didnt get more traction as it was an interesting concept and a first for these isles, yet not so outside the box that there isnt good examples of how it worked elsewhere. Housing, retail, services and new ground or high density social housing without meaningful thought for amenities and future development of that new community - not as if such mistakes was ever made before in this country....

I just cant see the Camac side being developed much without bridging or boxing the river, maybe a corporate facilities at a rooftop level, clubrooms type building and limited seating in front. More likely to get a 2 tier structure on the 3 other sides than the camac i think. Over double the size I know but a trip to Loftus Rd and ye'd be wondering whether trying to squeeze the absolute maximum out of a cramped site is worth it, but then you have the Brentford example mentioned in the thread above which shows what can be done.

Can't see how you could get very much down the shed end , let alone a 2 tier structure. Be very interesting to see what they come up with.

[D24Saint]

They will be up for architect of the year if they can fit 8k into the space with a few extra facilities added in. It will be interesting to see the design in the summer.

[Nesta99]

It'd be some piece of work indeed especially affordably. Richmond Park is probably one of the few grounds that a land swap is probably the real option. It would also make sense to reduce to a realistic capacity and then ground share for later European rounds if the need arises. Room for development of attendances in a modern facility is the priority rather than over reaching for 8k figure which is only one of the criteria for hosting European group games, never mind tv, hospitality and almost as expensive as the stadium to do, carparking. A lovely 8k ground could be built and yet still have a club scrambling for exemptions or alternative venues.

[EatYerGreens]

It'd be some piece of work indeed especially affordably. Richmond Park is probably one of the few grounds that a land swap is probably the real option. It would also make sense to reduce to a realistic capacity and then ground share for later European rounds if the need arises. Room for development of attendances in a modern facility is the priority rather than over reaching for 8k figure which is only one of the criteria for hosting European group games, never mind tv, hospitality and almost as expensive as the stadium to do, carparking. A lovely 8k ground could be built and yet still have a club scrambling for exemptions or alternative venues.

As a minor aside, it's only a matter of time until the car parking requirement for UEFA fixtures gets scrapped or significantly downplayed. There must be some allowance built into the system already, as a lot of the large big city stadia offer very little parking for anyone beyond match officials, teams, Directors and broadcast crew. The print media going to Arsenal or Spurs, for example, aren't all expecting to drive and park there.

[Nesta99]

Good point! The shift toward public transport in general should mean it is removed as a requirement. Would certainly suit us in Oriel beside the railway station and 10 minute walk from intercity busses also, but would significantly struggle to have a car park in the immediate proximity to the ground. We dont all benefit from regular public transport services but if focus on travel by car is to be reduced it'd probably similar requirements for all clubs regardless.

[Trequartista20]

Neil O'Riordan making unflattering comparisons of the LoI with England's fifth tier:

https://www.thesun.ie/sport/football/8805416/growth-league-ireland-englands-fifth-tier/