New stadium thread

[CtS]

Next we'll be discussing Andrews cock in millimetres.

[tom_widdows]

Next we'll be discussing Andrews cock in millimetres.

 

Why not

everyone else does

[Superstar Tradesman]

Surely the other point is to have more facilities that can make the club money out with a Saturday (sic) which you're idea would never do, infact it would probably reduce that income Mizer.

Pittodrie may have been developable (is that a word) at some point but sadly it isn't now

 

This was my point regarding the areas behind the DD and South Stand.

 

You could build something the height, width and twice the depth of the DD on that concourse to house corporate hospitality, indoor training facilities, hotel rooms, whatthefuckever.  But Milne doesn't want to and you lot are falling for his half-arsed lies of not being able to knock a roof down and stick a new one up over the Mainer.

 

If he can gut schools, hospitals, factories and warehouses and turn them into flats then he sure as shit can turn a football stadium into a football stadium.

 

Take the blinkers off.

[Tyrant]

This was my point regarding the areas behind the DD and South Stand.

 

You could build something the height, width and twice the depth of the DD on that concourse to house corporate hospitality, indoor training facilities, hotel rooms, whatthefuckever.  But Milne doesn't want to and you lot are falling for his half-arsed lies of not being able to knock a roof down and stick a new one up over the Mainer.

 

If he can gut schools, hospitals, factories and warehouses and turn them into flats then he sure as shit can turn a football stadium into a football stadium.

 

Take the blinkers off.

 

 

I don't doubt that it's possible from a physical point of view (as I've said previously in this thread) but isn't the issue there the money? ie not being able to raise any for carrying out such work?

[Kowalski]

Next we'll be discussing Andrews cock in millimetres.

 

I don't think Andrew's got much choice by all accounts.

[bloo_toon_red]

Make no mistake, I too would much, much prefer that we stay at Pittodrie.  But working in the industry and profession that I do, as well as Tom and manc_don, I'm able to take an objective view based upon the facts relating to this particular development which supersedes that of my own desire to stay at Pittodrie.  That's not us being patronising, condescending or vitriolic, it's just a basic fact - face it mizer I hold my hands up to the fact that you know much much more about drawing graphs than anyone else here! 

 

You could build something the height, width and twice the depth of the DD on that concourse to house corporate hospitality, indoor training facilities, hotel rooms, whatthefuckever.  But Milne doesn't want to and you lot are falling for his half-arsed lies of not being able to knock a roof down and stick a new one up over the Mainer.

Plain and simple, it's pretty obvious that there's an absolute ton of stuff that you and many on here don't know about the issues of modern stadia and you really just need to accept that you're wrong.

 

If someone was to build a new shopping centre in the middle of town for example, people would be pretty happy to accept (or at the very least they wouldn't question) that there needs to be a big car park, lifts, sprinkler systems, fire escapes and evacuation procedures for large volumes of people.  It's no different in a stadium.  If you go to any modern stadium you probably wont notice that there are emergency escapes everywhere, that there are sprinkler systems, that there are service risers, but because you have something here to compare it to, in this case a run down stadium on a constrained site, you are emotionally attached and you don't realise that if there was a fire in the south stand that the only way you can evacuate 6,000 people is on to the pitch and then shoehorn them out through the gate between the main stand and the merkland.  You probably don't know that in a modern stadium there are restrictions on how many seats can discharge onto an external stair and then into a vomitory and then into an escape stair.  You probably also don't realise that a tiered stand allows larger sections of seats and slightley less vomiotories per tier but that it puts an extra strain on the internal escape stairs, resultantly taking up more internal space within the stand and concourse.

 

These were issues that were raised when I did some work on Hibernian FC's new East Stand which changed halfway through the design process from a two-tiered stand with executive boxes into a single tiered "Kop-style" stand.  And I can also tell you that building regulations changed midway through the design process which meant that we needed to re-design the whole thing.  If it's difficult for building professionals to keep up, what hope have lay people?

 

Doing an extension is far cheaper than building from new!

Comparitively speaking, it isn't.  If for example you were putting a 4m x 4m (or 13ft x 13ft  ) it might cost you about £30k.  About 25% of that cost is associated with getting stuff onto the site, altering the existing building to prepare for it (knocking down walls, protecting fittings etc) and then making everything good at the end again.  But if you bought a house off plan and went to the builder and said you wanted a 4m x 4m sunroom on the back of it, it might cost you £20k, much less because the infrastructure issues are not the same.  Using the same logic, if Loirston Stadium is to cost £24m, the cost of completely redeveloping Pittodrie would be in the region of £35m-£40m.  Using mortgage speak, with no cash in the bank and no assets to pay for it, this would require a 100%mortgage.  Above and beyond the fact that the stadium cannot be redeveloped on the existing site on an economic scale, there's not much in the way of additional land to allow the club to provide extra facilities to generate more income.

 

I think the club were hoping for in the region of £14m - £18m for the land that Pittodrie sits on which would represent a massive "deposit" for the works.  They did receive bids, I've seen the drawings for one of them but I have no idea at all as to the financial level the bids went in at.  I haven't seen a business plan for the new facilities but I would imagine as part of the feasibility study that there is one relating to the Calder Park/Loirston scheme and that it would show that with these shiny new state of the art facilities the club/Talltray Ltd intends to make £Xm profit per year from it, be that conferencing, events etc.  This of course would allow the banks to be in a position to lend the club/Talltray Ltd the extra money it needs to build it.

 

I'm absolutely certain that the feasibility study would show that all of these issues being raised by all here (tunnel under main stand, access to and from South Stand, turning the stadium 90degrees) have been looked at, costed, considered and rejected.  If the document was made public then it might put these doubts to rest.

[Superstar Tradesman]

There's a lot of reading in there BTR and I just don't have the time at the mo, so I'll take this:

 

 

I don't doubt that it's possible from a physical point of view (as I've said previously in this thread) but isn't the issue there the money? ie not being able to raise any for carrying out such work?

 

And say this:

 

The funding for the new all-singing, all-dancing stadium has never been explained.  So why do people think we can afford to buy that but not afford to renovate?

[glasgow sheep]

stuff

 

Always wondered how Hibs got away with the away stand given your info re fire safety.  The place would be an absolute death trap if you need to try and quickly evacuate the top tier.

[Tyrant]

There's a lot of reading in there BTR and I just don't have the time at the mo, so I'll take this:

 

And say this:

 

The funding for the new all-singing, all-dancing stadium has never been explained.  So why do people think we can afford to buy that but not afford to renovate?

 

 

Don't get me wrong.. I'd much rather stay at Pittodrie than move. I don't want to move at all but as I understood it we'd have a mortgage on a new stadium which would raise money that redevelopment wouldn't. Which is apparantly why we have to move. Whether that's true or not is another kettle of ball games.

[bloo_toon_red]

There's a lot of reading in there BTR and I just don't have the time at the mo, so I'll take this:

 

And say this:

 

The funding for the new all-singing, all-dancing stadium has never been explained.  So why do people think we can afford to buy that but not afford to renovate?

 

The answer is in there ST, and after you read it you'll see it's pretty straightforward. Have a read, it'll be worth it. 

 

If for example you were putting a 4m x 4m (or 13ft x 13ft  ) extension on to your house it might cost you about £30k.  About 25% of that cost is associated with getting stuff onto the site, altering the existing building to prepare for it (knocking down walls, protecting fittings etc) and then making everything good at the end again.  But if you bought a house off plan and went to the builder and said you wanted a 4m x 4m sunroom on the back of it, it might cost you £20k, much less because the infrastructure issues related to the existing buildings are not the same.

 

Using the same logic, if Loirston Stadium is to cost £24m, the cost of completely redeveloping Pittodrie would be in the region of £35m-£40m.  Using mortgage speak, with no cash in the bank and no assets to pay for it, this would require a 100%mortgage.  Above and beyond the fact that the stadium cannot be redeveloped on the existing site on an economic scale, there's not much in the way of additional land to allow the club to provide extra facilities to generate more income.

 

I think the club were hoping for in the region of £14m - £18m for the land that Pittodrie sits on which would represent a massive "deposit" for the works.  They did receive bids, I've seen the drawings for one of them but I have no idea at all as to the financial level the bids went in at.  I haven't seen a business plan for the new facilities but I would imagine as part of the feasibility study that there is one relating to the Calder Park/Loirston scheme and that it would show that with these shiny new state of the art facilities the club/Talltray Ltd intends to make £Xm profit per year from it, be that conferencing, events etc.  This of course would allow the banks to be in a position to lend the club/Talltray Ltd the extra money it needs to build it.

 

I'll also add that in keeping Pittodrie as it is, and doing piecemeal alterations like a new roof here, an extra set of toilets there is simply a sink in the club's already depleted resources.  It's like living in an old dilapidated house versus a new-build.  It's a money pit that we can't afford.  Yes, moving is a risk, but it's a risk that will modernise the club.

[bloo_toon_red]

Apologies for the double post but don't want to keep putting in really long-winded ones!

Always wondered how Hibs got away with the away stand given your info re fire safety.  The place would be an absolute death trap if you need to try and quickly evacuate the top tier.

Can't really comment on the other stands as I wasn't personally involved, but they were developed over a period of time, possibly before building standards were tightened up as a result of the Green Guide.  I think though that it is possible that the stands may be compartmented (certainly the South Stand/away end), that is to say that if a fire breaks out, it can be contained in one area of the building, and would allow a safe passage of escape in more than one direction.  If you look closely next time you're in the RDS, in the upper level concourse where the kiosks are, the large double doors that are almost always open on a matchday, are fire doors and in the event of an evacuation these would be closed to compartmentalise one area of the stand from the other.

All really riveting and exciting stuff I know...

[TENEMENTFUNSTER]

Apologies for the double post but don't want to keep putting in really long-winded ones!Can't really comment on the other stands as I wasn't personally involved, but they were developed over a period of time, possibly before building standards were tightened up as a result of the Green Guide.  I think though that it is possible that the stands may be compartmented (certainly the South Stand/away end), that is to say that if a fire breaks out, it can be contained in one area of the building, and would allow a safe passage of escape in more than one direction.  If you look closely next time you're in the RDS, in the upper level concourse where the kiosks are, the large double doors that are almost always open on a matchday, are fire doors and in the event of an evacuation these would be closed to compartmentalise one area of the stand from the other.

All really riveting and exciting stuff I know...

 

Aye, despite agreeing that it LOOKS like a firetrap and does indeed appear to be a cheap pile of shite, I do remember the compartmentalising of the concourse etc with firedoors, much like the RDS.

 

In theory that would provide the necessary time for evacuation.

[Kowalski]

DST recently ran a survey amongst our members based upon the recent decision by Aberdeen City Council to reject the club’s application for the new stadium and training facilities at Loirston Loch.

 

We received 584 responses and thanks to everyone who took the time to take the survey and to those who shared their views with us on this matter. In response to this DST have written to Aberdeen City Council expressing the views of our members on this emotive topic.

 

The results for the survey are shown in full below. Thank you.

 

Do you support Aberdeen City Council’s decision to reject the application?

 

Yes 74 (13%)

 

No 497 (87%)

 

Should AFC now seek an alternative stadium location?

 

Yes 375 (65.3%)

 

No 199 (34.7%)

 

If yes, where should this be?

 

Aberdeen City (North) 62 (12.

 

Aberdeen City (East) 36 (7.4)

 

Kingswells 48 (9.9)

 

Aberdeenshire (North) 35 (7.2)

 

Aberdeenshire (West) 36 (7.4)

 

Aberdeenshire (South) 69 (14.3)

 

I do not think AFC should move to another location 161 (33.3)

 

Should AFC seek investment, if possible, to re-develop Pittodrie, rather than moving?

 

Yes 315 (55%)

 

No 258 (45%)

 

Should DST write to Aberdeen City Council with a summary of the DST membership opinions?

 

Yes 554 (96.3)

 

No 21 (3.7%)

[maverick sheep]

 

Most of those answers contradict one another completely.

 

96.3% want DST to write to the council and tell them that members' opinions are pointlessly inconsistent and essentially utterly worthless?

 

 

Good luck.

[glasgow sheep]

Most of those answers contradict one another completely.

 

96.3% want DST to write to the council and tell them that members' opinions are pointlessly inconsistent and essentially utterly worthless?

 

 

Good luck.

 

Aye

I wrote a lengthy email to DST instead of completing their poll as it was a waste of time.

[bloo_toon_red]

Most of those answers contradict one another completely.

 

96.3% want DST to write to the council and tell them that members' opinions are pointlessly inconsistent and essentially utterly worthless?

 

 

Good luck.

 

Waste of time.

Interesting for me that I was 1 of only 21 to say no to that question.

Really is an "idiot's guide to making a polll".  Are DST run by idiots?

[tlg1903]

Anyone heard anything new recently?

[glasgow sheep]

[glasgow sheep]

DST Meeting with Aberdeen City Council

 

Earlier this month representatives from Dons Supporters Together met with representatives from the Aberdeen City Council (ACC) to discuss the recent Aberdeen FC stadium developments and the rejection of plans for a training complex in partnership with Cove Rangers. The following questions put to the council are taken primarily from feedback sent to us from members that we collated and sought to put directly to ACC. Thank you to everyone who got in touch with us regarding this issue.

 

Questions for ACC re the AFC (Stadium) and Cove/AFC joint applications

 

What was, and is, the nature of the relationship between AFC and local political groups, plus individual Councillors, specifically Councillors Crockett and Young, past and present involved during both of the application processes i.e. Loirston Loch (LL) and Cove R/AFC joint application?

Relationship was with Cove Rangers who are acting as applicants – AFC were only agents

 

Has Labour (rather than the coalition) always been against the new (LL) stadium and why?

Labour were against original move to LL but are NOT trying to prevent move now given previous decisions

 

Has Labour always been against the Allen Park/Calder Park plans? If so, Why?

No but ACC need to ensure best value on sale of land – particularly given the 12 year period to get to this point

 

Why is Labour  seeking to “kill them off” now as this seemed to be progressing fine until the change of power in ACC (e.g. invoking the whip)?

Not seeking to kill off – but to ensure due process and best value.  Things could still proceed albeit with delays

 

Were AFC consulted re delaying the ratification of the joint application planned that ACC were scheduled to do pre the local elections. Who proposed the delay until after the election?

Not answered

 

Does ACC not benefit economically from LL/Calder Park?

Is ACC concerned about the very real prospect of AFC moving to Aberdeenshire given the various offers of land that have been made to AFC plus the demographics of AFC’s supporters base being such that a move would be well received?

Yes there is some benefit economically but not huge, yes ACC is concerned and want the club to still be within the city

 

Why does ACC not view AFC as an asset to the city, as there is no evidence of working together for the benefit of communities in the city and Aberdeenshire?

ACC do see club as asset to city

 

Surely ACC would not want the 3rd largest city in Scotland to be without an SPL club plus suffer the loss of income to the city that would ensue and to be blamed for all this e.g. if AFC had to play European matches in Glasgow?

ACC see misinformation here given AFC has not sorted out ownership of ground for actual stadium with Muir Group.

Historically, did ACC only ever offer 2 sites, and why? e.g. Loirston (LL) and Kings Links

Before Cllr Crocket’s time, but ACC not in business of “offering sites” they want, rather, to facilitate the right move

 

Was the Kings Links option ever viable given it is deemed as “Common Good” land?

There are some difficulties but these could be overcome (as is happening in Edinburgh currently, and also with some other Common Good land sell-off in Aberdeen)

 

In what year, and why, did ACC renege on the previous proposal for a community stadium?

Did not get a year, but with current financial climate community option is simply not a starter

 

Could this community concept be reinstated e.g.at Kings Links or given most fans would prefer to stay at Pittodrie, would ACC consider taking over Pittodrie as a community investment, re-developing it and then lease it back to AFC?

No – see above

 

Did (when?) the council insist on a 2nd access route for LL (and for parking <totally inadequate>) as a condition of the planning application?

There was already an alternative (to Calder Park development) access route in proposal

 

Is Calder Park the only option for this 2nd route or does ACC believe there are others?

No apparently not

 

If yes, then why did ACC block the Calder Park (request for an extension of time?) request, knowing it would jeopardise the LL application, already approved…..and why does the Council claim AFC can still proceed with LL?

Issue is one of ensuring deliverability and best value for ACC

 

How can the “chicken & egg” situation for AFC and Cove over the funding for both applications be resolved i.e. from ACC’s perspective, how can AFC confirm funding arrangements if the linked proposals that are necessary remain rejected/ delayed?

ACC see this as AFC issue – but feel the issue with Muir Group needs to be resolved first

What is Councillor Young looking to see in this regard re his questioning of evidence that confirmed finances are in place for both applications?

Some concern over the viability of the schemes – ACC want to be sure things can proceed to conclusion – officers concerned over the business case

 

As it was claimed that the Cove application has been on-going for 12 years why was this extension not permitted, especially given that ACC knew the impact of doing so? Was the original application submitted solely by Cove and when did AFC (and others) get involved to change it to a joint one?

It is not dead yet – reports will be back before council in Feb 2013 and the current proposals could then be accepted

 

What are the obligations upon Cove (AFC) in this application e.g. does it remain that use of the land must be for recreational purposes only? If yes, is this obligation met by the proposed community sports complex including AFC’s dedicated training facility?

Yes  – ACC insists on Community Benefit – which recreational meets

 

Can Cove and/ or AFC appeal/challenge the ACC decision – or just Cove?

Cove – as they are the applicant

 

Does Cove own the land at Allen Park, or do they lease it from the council?

Cove own the land

 

Is it correct that the plans to build a sports centre on Allen Park have been changed to build houses?

Understanding is houses are planned

 

Is this change of green belt to brown belt land permitted and/or has it been approved?

This is already agreed

 

Is SMGH the only buyer involved for Allen Park? Has their offer been formally rejected?

Not Known

 

Is it correct that ACC believe SMGH’s offer to be below market value? If yes, has the current M/V been determined and how big is the gap?

There is such a concern – council (given history and current climate) must achieve best value

 

As ACC has taken control of the land, then is the deal at an impasse until the M/V is obtained and paid?

Certainly blocked until return to council in Feb 2013

 

Can other parties now step in to offer more to ACC?

Yes

 

It has been stated that ACC got legal advice that they could not sell the land to a single private buyer (SMGH) as this would immediately be challenged by others, especially where the land sale is below market value. Is this assertion correct as it seems detrimental to Cove’s rights and also would SMGH not have had the same legal advice before they offered?

Restated that council need to achieve – and be seen to achieve – best value

 

Why has ACC disregarded the SFA’s wishes regarding their desire to link the Calder Park development with the North East Regional training centre?

SFA input is noted but they are not part of any commercial deal.  ACC do want an  SFA centre in the area

 

When ACC offered AFC the LL site, did ACC claim they owned the land?

Was that claim correct?

ACC own some of the land, Muir the other sections.  On original plan stadium was on council land, but design changes have moved to to the Muir section

 

When was it sold to Hermiston Securities? Why?

Were AFC informed and what action was taken?

ACC still own land, Hermiston (Muir) another bit

 

What does ACC believe are the options now open to AFC (and Cove) re both applications?

ACC and clubs still talking.  Things could still go head on original basis, stadium could proceed with Calder Park development but different access, a new site could be agreed

 

Is there a conflict of interest for any councillors involved e.g. interests in Cove, Banks O’Dee; AFC?

No

 

How does ACC propose to break the impasse, and rebuild mutual trust, with AFC, specifically Messrs Crockett and Young, e.g. the latter’s description of AFC’s vice chairman as a “stranger to the truth”?

ACC and clubs are still talking – view is megaphone diplomacy is not helping and ACC are surprised at AFC comments. Believed the relationships are fixable.

[maverick sheep]

so we can stop fucking about and build on king's links then? coonsil say that is a viable option, so why have we been told it isn't?

 

 

interesting to note they don't view aberdeen as an asset to the city (or what money the council/councillors) pocket. And also interesting they claim AFC have spread misinformation. Certainly get the impression that's happened re King's Links.

[Tyrant]

so we can stop fucking about and build on king's links then? coonsil say that is a viable option, so why have we been told it isn't?

 

 

interesting to note they don't view aberdeen as an asset to the city (or what money the council/councillors) pocket. And also interesting they claim AFC have spread misinformation. Certainly get the impression that's happened re King's Links.

 

 

Because where will they build new flats?

[tom_widdows]

I suspect in their eyes Cove needs a tescos/ asda/ morrisons etc. the latter in particular since they were shafted with their plans at kepplestone

 

[maverick sheep]

sneaky that the training complex area is now only being approved for flats. it's almost as if the coonsil strung afc along just as an excuse to change the greenbelt to brown and scam a few quid for themselves.

[Superstar Tradesman]

Never wanted it out there in the first place.

[manc_don]

http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/3073800