New stadium thread

[Edinburghdon]

garbage. Charlie Love stood up first at the big "NO" meeting, and spouted a load of hysterical shite, including all of the above, in order to scare the auld fogies into action. Many have put this sort of rubbish in their planning complaint if you care to wade through them.

 

The various Facebook and twitter pages was also littered with the same hysterical pish, it's been quite sad really.

[RicoS321]

Some interesting views in this thread.

 

Personally, I am all for the new stadium, the club badly needs new facilities, not just the stadium but the training facilities are vital.

 

Location wise, not really that bothered by the Kingford location, it wont be any different for me to hope in the car and swing round the AWPR to the new Stadium than it is currently for me to travel through the City Centre.

 

I tend to keep quiet on this matter as I see no sense in debating the stadium with anyone, we all have varied views and we can go back and forth until we were blue in the face. One thing I will say, is that the No Kingsford Group, although raising some valid points, have also spouted a load of old rubbish at times. Blood on the streets, urinating through letter boxes, fans running riot, property values diminishing...have these people been  to Pittodrie on a match day?!?

 

I seriously hope when the time comes that the Aberdeen City Council sees what Aberdeen FC does for this City and back them to the hilt.

 

You criticise - correctly - the no kingsford group for their spouting of rubbish, but then throw in a couple of bits or nonsense yersel just to even it up?

 

First, the training facilities are not contingent on the stadium, they are two entirely separate things. This keeps getting used as a positive when it isn't.

 

Second, you say that the location won't make a difference to you. That's entirely irrelevant and very typical of the general public to everything these days (I'll be fine, so point x doesn't matter). You're not looking at this as an individual (or you shouldn't be if you're a fan of the club) so whether you'll go, or it's closer to Garlogie's hoose, is not the point. You should be asking yourself if it's a good location for the football club, it's fans, and the wider city it is supposed to belong to. Do you honestly think it's the best location possible for maximum attendances in the coming decades (i.e. ignoring the initial boost from the new development)?

 

Third, you tell the council to back Aberdeen FC because of what it does for the city? What does that even mean? Can you quantify that? If it does so much for the city, then surely moving it to the border of the shire is a terrible idea?

 

Finally, you say you keep quiet on the issue, but then you say you're all for it and the council must back it and then criticise others (again, correctly) for the opinions. Which is it? You've either got an opinion or you don't. People like you (nae you though!) have constantly told me to "get behind the move" and then proceeded with the nonsense you just have. It's like you've barely even thought through the proposal. You've taken a "meh, I'll be fine, attitude" without really questioning the issues that'll see yer lifelong-supported club shifted from the city to which it belongs. I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with you telling the council what they should think or do. Either have an opinion and back it up or don't bother. Indifferent, unquestioning, attitudes like yours in this case are equally as bad as those on the "no to kingsford" side.

 

That's just my tuppence worth mind, dinna take it too seriously, I'm nae getting personal.

[manc_don]

No Kingsford have not at anytime used these as valid arguments not for a stadium.

 

These have not been presented to the Council as valid reasons against the Concept.

 

Reasons put forward against the concept have been researched fully before the campaign began and include:

 

Road issues

Transport issues

Local Plan

 

As there is a big 'get facts right' ethos on here, please get your facts correct.

 

Not in the official document, but it has been widely reported that those scaremongering tactics have been used.  You can't try to portray the official NKS campaigners as clean as a whistle, they are not and have been embroiled in numerous petty arguments online (which you confirmed). Anyway, i'd rather not get bogged down about who said what and get back to the points you raised.

 

I find it very hard to believe that Hearts a) have their stadium or b) will have their stand running over utilities which are protected by an easement and therefor allow full access to those utility companies to ensure they can maintain whenever they so decide.  This would allow them to dig up vast areas of the concourse / pitch or wherever they ran.  Services get re-routed to accommodate any building work if there is an alternative.  Given the cost of their works i'd be surprised if there were any serious diversions required.

 

You'll also find that no one has disputed (not even the club) that Pittodrie can be redeveloped.  It just cannot be done so to the levels required or desired to help sustain the vibrant future for it.  We missed out on the land behind where the gasholders were, probably because we were skint.  Whilst I think it was a massive missed opportunity as it would provide us with the land required, I can't see how this would be a valid argument.  Increasing the heights of any of the existing stands would result in a rights to light issue from any of the houses around, as both Tom and I have said throughout this thread.  Unfortunately we do not have the budget of the Chelsea of Liverpool's who can afford to buy up the surrounding properties. 

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Hearts Stand is already well on the way to construction.  Several buildings have been demolished and its being created in same way as Liverpool stand i.e. encased over old stand then workings done.

 

Its being paid for by donations from Foundation of Hearts (direct debits from fans) and secured by the owner women who has all the cash.

 

Given the new stand will be the centre point of the stadium - facilities, hospitality, conference rooms, ticket office, shop of course utilities, metrics are being re-routed.

 

The toilets wont flush into the street.

[donsdaft]

Well that's an improvement on the old open terracing behind the goal then.

 

[OxfordDon]

As there is a big 'get facts right' ethos on here, please get your facts correct.

 

I 100% agree with this sentiment.

 

Hearts Stand is already well on the way to construction.  Several buildings have been demolished and its being created in same way as Liverpool stand i.e. encased over old stand then workings done.

 

Its being paid for by donations from Foundation of Hearts (direct debits from fans) and secured by the owner women who has all the cash.

 

Given the new stand will be the centre point of the stadium - facilities, hospitality, conference rooms, ticket office, shop of course utilities, metrics are being re-routed.

 

The toilets wont flush into the street.

 

And these all appear to be genuine facts (can't really comment on the rerouting bit).

 

I'm not clear on the point you are making though?

[manc_don]

Hearts Stand is already well on the way to construction.  Several buildings have been demolished and its being created in same way as Liverpool stand i.e. encased over old stand then workings done.

 

Its being paid for by donations from Foundation of Hearts (direct debits from fans) and secured by the owner women who has all the cash.

 

Given the new stand will be the centre point of the stadium - facilities, hospitality, conference rooms, ticket office, shop of course utilities, metrics are being re-routed.

 

The toilets wont flush into the street.

 

Who said anything about public health and service providers within the building? I was talking about Utilities in the street.  You think I don't know that the services serving a building that won't exist in it's previous guise won't get re-routed to suit the new layout?  You were the one who mentioned utilities running through the site which is completely different to serving the site.  That is common practice and not a reason why we cannot expand Pittodrie.  What I was also relating it to was those which run down Pittodrie street and comparing it to the situation you were describing.  I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

[RicoS321]

Unfortunately we do not have the budget of the Chelsea of Liverpool's who can afford to buy up the surrounding properties.

 

Don't we? Again, it goes back to the (lack of) drawings. If we could see the elevations along with the lighting profiles, we'd know the answer. What if, in order to gain two meters in height across the entire South stand, we only need to buy the bottom flats in two of the buildings? What if that only cost £1M? What if that gained us three extra 500 seat full length rows? What if we could create a stepped stand which had height at the RDS end sloping down to the flat's end which gained us an extra 500 seats?

 

I don't think you know. I don't think Tom knows. If I was in your position - as experts on the subject - I'd be absolutely dying to find out, dying to pick holes in the evidence and see if I could see something that they've missed. Even if it's just to flash yer skills on a public forum and show what they could have done better and eek out an extra couple of hunner seats. I find it strange that you're both so willing to accept the club's assurance. Especially as it's backed up by some pretty flakey history with regard to pushing the project, and some even flakier history regarding Milne's dealing with previous public land and the cooncil (i.e. he was utterly ruthless in pursuit of his own best interest/cash). It's such a huge omission, I'm surprised that you either of you feel confident in supporting the new stadium and feel comfortable making an informed decision. It's different for me like, I just have to remain suspicious because I don't have all the facts in front of me and if I did I could only defer to folks like you to put down all my suggestions.

[Reidzer 1314]

You criticise - correctly - the no kingsford group for their spouting of rubbish, but then throw in a couple of bits or nonsense yersel just to even it up?

 

First, the training facilities are not contingent on the stadium, they are two entirely separate things. This keeps getting used as a positive when it isn't.

 

Second, you say that the location won't make a difference to you. That's entirely irrelevant and very typical of the general public to everything these days (I'll be fine, so point x doesn't matter). You're not looking at this as an individual (or you shouldn't be if you're a fan of the club) so whether you'll go, or it's closer to Garlogie's hoose, is not the point. You should be asking yourself if it's a good location for the football club, it's fans, and the wider city it is supposed to belong to. Do you honestly think it's the best location possible for maximum attendances in the coming decades (i.e. ignoring the initial boost from the new development)?

 

Third, you tell the council to back Aberdeen FC because of what it does for the city? What does that even mean? Can you quantify that? If it does so much for the city, then surely moving it to the border of the shire is a terrible idea?

 

Finally, you say you keep quiet on the issue, but then you say you're all for it and the council must back it and then criticise others (again, correctly) for the opinions. Which is it? You've either got an opinion or you don't. People like you (nae you though!) have constantly told me to "get behind the move" and then proceeded with the nonsense you just have. It's like you've barely even thought through the proposal. You've taken a "meh, I'll be fine, attitude" without really questioning the issues that'll see yer lifelong-supported club shifted from the city to which it belongs. I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with you telling the council what they should think or do. Either have an opinion and back it up or don't bother. Indifferent, unquestioning, attitudes like yours in this case are equally as bad as those on the "no to kingsford" side.

 

That's just my tuppence worth mind, dinna take it too seriously, I'm nae getting personal.

 

No worries on the serious front, we are all entitled to opinions and to share them.

 

On the training facilities, if this is down to being misinformed on my part then I apologise, I thought the facilities were tied with the stadium, as in one would not happen without the other, do the club have a another plan in place for purpose facilities within the City if Kingford gets rejected??

 

Location, yep you are right I did use my own personal view on how I would get to the stadium. In the long term I think think if fans want to got to see Aberdeen at Kingsford then they will go. There will be enough parking spaces and I am fairly certain public transport links will be in place and have the Club not also mentioned a shuttle bus service?? In the long term, would a move to Kingsford harm the club, no I dont think it will.

 

In terms of what the club does for the City, I think at this moment in time with the actual Football side of things being very positive, it gives the City a bit of boost! Heck I am certainly in a better mood when the Dons win! Add to that continuous years of European Qualification, one cup final this season and the possibility of another, I think personally it gives the City a bit of a lift. Also financially, I am sure after a home match, people will spend time in pubs and food outlets and spend money, ok you could argue that if the stadium moves to Kingsford, would people still do this in the City Centre, my honest opinion is yes. 

 

In terms of my opinion, yes I do have one and yes I do tend to keep and quiet with it. I have had numerous opportunities to share my opinion on the stadium, be it via social media or even in person, I just choose not to as a good % of the time it leads to some form of debate, but yep you are right, I have broken my usual vow of silence on the matter here in this thread.

 

I do like to think I have taken a good look at the proposed plans, I have seen what has been printed in the papers, watched what has been reported on TV, I even went along to the open event at Pittodrie, looked at the plans in person, asked a few questions and based my thoughts on that.

 

I would never go to a person and tell that they should 'get behind' or 'vote for or against' anything, all I can do is share my thoughts on the matter, whether that is for, against, yes or no. I never said that the council should back Aberdeen FC, just that I hope they do. Which at the centre of it all is my honest opinion, I hope the Kingsord plans go ahead.

 

You will probably read all that and think 'what a load of rubbish' to honest I probably wouldn't blame you. 

 

 

[Reidzer 1314]

No Kingsford have not at anytime used these as valid arguments not for a stadium.

 

These have not been presented to the Council as valid reasons against the Concept.

 

Reasons put forward against the concept have been researched fully before the campaign began and include:

 

Road issues

Transport issues

Local Plan

 

As there is a big 'get facts right' ethos on here, please get your facts correct.

 

Officially, yeah maybe not.

 

However what No Kingsford did do was campaign to entice people to petition against the Kingsford Stadium by using the some of the arguments I mentioned to stir up a bit of scare mongering. In my book, that is as good as coming from the horses mouth.

[OxfordDon]

It could look much better but it was the access I was referring to.

 

 

View wise I'd much rather see a game from basically any seat there.

 

By christ that's ugly.  Fair play to you for looking for creative options though 

[RicoS321]

No worries on the serious front, we are all entitled to opinions and to share them.

 

On the training facilities, if this is down to being misinformed on my part then I apologise, I thought the facilities were tied with the stadium, as in one would not happen without the other, do the club have a another plan in place for purpose facilities within the City if Kingford gets rejected??

 

Location, yep you are right I did use my own personal view on how I would get to the stadium. In the long term I think think if fans want to got to see Aberdeen at Kingsford then they will go. There will be enough parking spaces and I am fairly certain public transport links will be in place and have the Club not also mentioned a shuttle bus service?? In the long term, would a move to Kingsford harm the club, no I dont think it will.

 

In terms of what the club does for the City, I think at this moment in time with the actual Football side of things being very positive, it gives the City a bit of boost! Heck I am certainly in a better mood when the Dons win! Add to that continuous years of European Qualification, one cup final this season and the possibility of another, I think personally it gives the City a bit of a lift. Also financially, I am sure after a home match, people will spend time in pubs and food outlets and spend money, ok you could argue that if the stadium moves to Kingsford, would people still do this in the City Centre, my honest opinion is yes. 

 

In terms of my opinion, yes I do have one and yes I do tend to keep and quiet with it. I have had numerous opportunities to share my opinion on the stadium, be it via social media or even in person, I just choose not to as a good % of the time it leads to some form of debate, but yep you are right, I have broken my usual vow of silence on the matter here in this thread.

 

I do like to think I have taken a good look at the proposed plans, I have seen what has been printed in the papers, watched what has been reported on TV, I even went along to the open event at Pittodrie, looked at the plans in person, asked a few questions and based my thoughts on that.

 

I would never go to a person and tell that they should 'get behind' or 'vote for or against' anything, all I can do is share my thoughts on the matter, whether that is for, against, yes or no. I never said that the council should back Aberdeen FC, just that I hope they do. Which at the centre of it all is my honest opinion, I hope the Kingsord plans go ahead.

 

You will probably read all that and think 'what a load of rubbish' to honest I probably wouldn't blame you. 

 

Not at all min, good reply to a, what appeared on re-reading, slightly aggressive post! The facilities are tied to this particular application, but there is nothing stopping them doing the training pitches without the stadium in this location or like the one they began at Balgownie. I merely meant the argument that the club need new training pitches so we must move from Pittodrie is the flawed one.

 

It seems the second part where we disagree, and it's entirely subjective. I just can't see the club going through another Patterson-esque era and retaining crowds of over 10K shuttling to the outskirts of nowhere. I think the business case here is flawed. I say that because Aberdeen simply don't have the permanent financial advantage to ensure they remain second every season and they will at some point see a loss in form that sees them drop into the lower half of the league. Such is the nature of Scottish fitba. A prolonged period of finishing behind the huns would even see a drop of in attendances. The new stadium will give a boost, but it'll be temporary.

 

I seriously hope when the time comes that the Aberdeen City Council sees what Aberdeen FC does for this City and back them to the hilt.

 

That sounded like you saying the cooncil should back them!

[OxfordDon]

I seriously hope when the time comes that the Aberdeen City Council sees what Aberdeen FC does for this City and back them to the hilt.

That sounded like you saying the cooncil should back them!

 

Seeing as i've already got this thread open, i've always got time for a bit of petty pedantry through the form of an analogy:

 

I seriously hope Aberdeen win the Scottish Cup, but that disnae mean i think they should.

 

I should really close this and get on with some mair work.  You can thank me later. 

[RicoS321]

That sounded like you saying the cooncil should back them!

 

 

Seeing as i've already got this thread open, i've always got time for a bit of petty pedantry through the form of an analogy:

 

I seriously hope Aberdeen win the Scottish Cup, but that disnae mean i think they should.

 

I should really close this and get on with some mair work.  You can thank me later. 

 

A more applicable quote might have been:

 

After all Aberdeen have done for Scottish fitba, I really hope the SFA give us the cup.

[OxfordDon]

A more applicable quote might have been:

 

After all Aberdeen have done for Scottish fitba, I really hope the SFA give us the cup.

 

True, although you would have to conclude that with:

 

...although whether they should depends on your interpretation of "all Aberdeen have done for Scottish fitba".

 

I also do children's parties.

[Reidzer 1314]

That sounded like you saying the cooncil should back them!

 

 

Seeing as i've already got this thread open, i've always got time for a bit of petty pedantry through the form of an analogy:

 

I seriously hope Aberdeen win the Scottish Cup, but that disnae mean i think they should.

 

I should really close this and get on with some mair work.  You can thank me later. 

 

Touche 

[Ten Caat]

[quote author=jess link=topic=8217.msg313729#msg313729 date=14912543

 

15,000 capacity cost £19.8m in 2008. A Polish team bought the same design because it was so cheap and did it for 10,000.

 

 

As said by many.....absolutely awful looking. And the pricetag......it isnt really relevant as land purchase costs in a backwater of Poland are a helluva lot cheaper than even a site on the extremities of Scotland's third largest city and "oil capital" of Europe. Even moreso, construction costs in Poland are also a fraction of the cost of those here. All those Polish bricklayers, sparkies, plumbers etc aint coming here for the weather.....wages here are 2-3 times better than what they get paid there.

Pretty certain that on top of all this, red tape in Poland (and indeed virtually all over Europe) is far less stringent than we have here in the UK. All adds up to making a project there probably half the cost of what an equivalent stadium here would come in at.

 

Of course we mustnt let the W.A.N.K.S get wind of this. They'll be firing in emails to Wiggy informing him of how cheap we could do things there. Relocate to near the Ukraine border and we will save ££££££££s! Aberdeenski FC anyone?

[donsdaft]

Ach it's nae that bad looking, just mair Linksfield than Pittodrie.

[jess]

Brand New Stadium on unconstrained plot of land

 

 

As opposed to existing stadium constrained by Housing, & Collector Roads.

 

 

If you are going to continue with 'This is how I see the redeveloped pittodrie looking', may I suggest you search for examples of redeveloped stadiums in constrained environments.

 

Windsor Park

 

 

As said by many.....absolutely awful looking. And the pricetag......it isnt really relevant as land purchase costs in a backwater of Poland are a helluva lot cheaper than even a site on the extremities of Scotland's third largest city and "oil capital" of Europe. Even moreso, construction costs in Poland are also a fraction of the cost of those here. All those Polish bricklayers, sparkies, plumbers etc aint coming here for the weather.....wages here are 2-3 times better than what they get paid there.

Pretty certain that on top of all this, red tape in Poland (and indeed virtually all over Europe) is far less stringent than we have here in the UK. All adds up to making a project there probably half the cost of what an equivalent stadium here would come in at.

 

Of course we mustnt let the W.A.N.K.S get wind of this. They'll be firing in emails to Wiggy informing him of how cheap we could do things there. Relocate to near the Ukraine border and we will save ££££££££s! Aberdeenski FC anyone?

 

£19.8m one is in Germany. Polish one was about £10m. Aesthetics are not the focus. On that point I think moving away the design and everything matters a lot to make fans go there. If it was something like Juventus's stadium we were going to I could see the experience negating the location. But it's nae, even supporters of the move don't think the stadium itself is great. Whereas Pittodrie is already a mess and almost anything would be seen as improvements.

[OxfordDon]

Ach it's nae that bad looking, just mair Linksfield than Pittodrie.

 

From the outside, it keeps reminding me of thon giant self-storage warehouses you find on the edge of town

 

 

[manc_don]

Don't we? Again, it goes back to the (lack of) drawings. If we could see the elevations along with the lighting profiles, we'd know the answer. What if, in order to gain two meters in height across the entire South stand, we only need to buy the bottom flats in two of the buildings? What if that only cost £1M? What if that gained us three extra 500 seat full length rows? What if we could create a stepped stand which had height at the RDS end sloping down to the flat's end which gained us an extra 500 seats?

 

I don't think you know. I don't think Tom knows. If I was in your position - as experts on the subject - I'd be absolutely dying to find out, dying to pick holes in the evidence and see if I could see something that they've missed. Even if it's just to flash yer skills on a public forum and show what they could have done better and eek out an extra couple of hunner seats. I find it strange that you're both so willing to accept the club's assurance. Especially as it's backed up by some pretty flakey history with regard to pushing the project, and some even flakier history regarding Milne's dealing with previous public land and the cooncil (i.e. he was utterly ruthless in pursuit of his own best interest/cash). It's such a huge omission, I'm surprised that you either of you feel confident in supporting the new stadium and feel comfortable making an informed decision. It's different for me like, I just have to remain suspicious because I don't have all the facts in front of me and if I did I could only defer to folks like you to put down all my suggestions.

 

Don't get me wrong, Tom and I have had plenty of "offline" chats about this over the years.  I used to be dead set against the move from Pittodrie and did try to find holes in the argument. That's not to say I didn't but this was all without any real core information such as OS plans / sections through the site. 

[RicoS321]

From the outside, it keeps reminding me of thon giant self-storage warehouses you find on the edge of town

 

On the edge of town, like, for example, Westhill?

[100% Anti Kingsford]

Yes, Aberdeen City Council will 'just let Aberdeen FC have a stadium' just because they want to.

 

Doesn't work that way mate.

 

Fun times ahead.

 

[manc_don]

Yes, Aberdeen City Council will 'just let Aberdeen FC have a stadium' just because they want to.

 

Doesn't work that way mate.

 

Fun times ahead.

 

 

Really? You don't say...I thought you said ACC had offered AFC locations?  I'd say that would fall into that category. If it were true.

[OxfordDon]

On the edge of town, like, for example, Westhill?

 

 

 

Maybe we should just apply to build a large longterm self-storage unit and then store a football pitch inside it.