Thursday, 5 November 2026
Rīga TV

World and Latvian news in one place

LatviaPublished: 5 November 2026 at 14:11

Opinion: Stadium idea in Skanste and the question of state-owned land

A commentary in the Latvian daily Diena discusses a proposal to build a football stadium in Riga across Skanstes Street, on state-owned land that currently houses the Saeima's vehicle depot. The author compares the project with other publicly significant buildings.

Foto: Diena

A blogger's commentary in the opinion section of the Latvian daily Diena discusses a proposal to build a stadium for football in Riga. The newly named site lies across Skanstes Street, on the way from the existing arena. The text is the author's personal assessment rather than a news report, so the conclusions below are his.

The author writes that he views the idea with optimism because he neither plays nor follows football. He is more interested in the choice of location. On the cadastre website kadastrs.lv he found two land plots listed as owned by the state. The area of the potential stadium is currently occupied by the Saeima's vehicle depot. He expresses surprise that land in an area long mentioned as Riga's new development centre has remained unprivatised.

Earlier ideas for the same area

The author recalls that the site was named many years ago as suitable for a concert hall. The concert hall is now to be placed in the old Political Education House. A plan for the Latvian Museum of Contemporary Art, which was to be at the other end of Skanstes Street, has largely fallen away. Land ownership was cited as the reason.

Comparison with other buildings

He compares the stadium with the National Library of Latvia and the Song Festival stage in Mežaparks. In his view, projects with symbolic meaning and poetic names win public goodwill. The stage has no everyday use, but, as with the stadium, the chance to host rare visits by foreign pop stars is cited.

He closes by ironically advising the idea's authors to find a catchy name, for example “the Big Hole”. He says this would ease the later justifications that follow buildings promised at the outset without spending public money. His verdict is “let it go ahead!”.

Comments

0/1500

Comments are automatically moderated. No hate, threats, personal data or spam.

Loading comments…

More in this category