The railway line already exists and is used by goods trains from Portbury Dock. It needs a new station to replace the old Ashton Gate Halt at a cost of some £2 to £3 million. May only get built if and when passenger trains run from Parson Street to Portishead again.
OK This isn't me being patronising in any way although I'm sure many will take it that way. There is nothing here about cost or sustainability-Both key factors in modern construction.Sustainability is a key factor in planning and played a massive part in getting the Sainsburys deal through at AG through, albeit that may not come to fruition so our plans will have to do likewise. The stadium will cost £40m that means the design is about 100% in place as far as the exterior goes.Forget the corners being filled in and a underground pitch and car park.Only two corners will be open, very likely. Apart from that there is nothing in this that is new or not already happening or under consideration. Hopefully, the proposed stadium commitee (Fans Parliament/SC&T) will include some fans with a construction background who can ensure that supporters considerations regarding the inside of the ground are taken into account and that pressure is put in place realistically.
A functional enclosed stand behind the goal would hardly be costly. When football clubs are overtly commercialised this can have a significant negative effect e.g Cardiff. The form of the stadium can have a negative effect e.g Cardiff. Cardiff City may be viewed as progress to some, to others it would be an embarrassment. Football clubs surely have to be more than solely spread sheet driven? How do fans know points here are being seriously considered? Fans parliament? Where are they openly involving themselves in dialogue?
You are being patronising. Missed points raised. Consultation is meant to be representative so filling proposed stadium commitee (Fans Parliament/SC&T) full of structural engineers and accountants won't be. Corners open. Design already chosen then??? Proposed stadium commitee (Fans Parliament/SC&T)??? Who proposed that? Looks like boxes being ticked. Hopw this is more than fans might get to choose the paint, matt or gloss! If it is just about being sustainable is all just turn the Eastend in to a box and restaurant. Job done. Fair play to a fan trying to get some fans views in board.
Design is about 100% in place as far as the exterior goes ... The balloon for an end for fans, about fans, noisy fans may have already burst. Why not show what has been designed to fans so far? Smacks of keep it in the know. We need to they don't.
This could be already dead in the water then? 1. The design of and materials used in the construction of the stands / roofs must be conducive to good acoustics and amplification of the crowd noise. The majority of us are concerned that if a âBowlâ type design is used, the noise generated by the crowd will just disappear into the walls, roof and into the air at the front. Our concerns were vividly highlighted at the recent match at the Cardiff City Stadium, where those present report that the noise of a 25,000 crowd was very poor. Many of the modern stadia suffer from this problem and we very much want to retain throughout the rebuilt Ashton Gate, the crowd noise/atmosphere that is currently generated from the Wedlock stand. We consider that if this involves an extra cost, it would be recouped many times over in match points won for years to come
Fair play for the effort. Hopefully there will be "meaningful" engagement and consultation with fans.
all valid points we have some very good achitects in Bristol one in particular at Aztec and another behind park street...seen some of their work, but a new slate would be preferrable...( ashton) ..cant see if they rebuilt one of the stands, going underground would be a problem! Spent a lot of time in London City and seen the buidings that have risen from the piles they sink .......usually now having underground parking on 2 or 3 layers..also been under Canary wharf and that is "hollow" especially when you see what is above it, also been to within 3 floors of the top.....
Got an inkling that Bristol boy on here is on the working group or whatever it is. I think he is telling all to expect little as things are well on the way. This consultaion may be only that in name.
Thanks JGF; the Wedlock and Williams are planned for total demolition whatever the design of the stands that replace them. Foundations, if a single storey car park was built underneath, would just be that much deeper into the ground than if the stands were built up from ground level. Extra cost is about 4 yards more on each foundation support pillar and the concrete to floor and wall the underground level. Logic tells me that is not going to be a prohibitive cost. Building underground parking would either add to the parking revenue from the existing car park. Or if the club decided the extra revenue is not such a significant sum, the land area of the existing car park could be used for other buildings that would provide greater revenue than 25 home games per season. Is anyone able to confirm that the Winterstoke car park is now owned by either BCFC or Steve Lansdown. It was owned by Bristol City Council a few years ago.
If Bristol Boy is who I think it is, he is in contact with Steve Lansdown. If he says that something as fundamental as the exterior design is in place much of this thread can already be discounted.
It might be of benefit if all these fans bodies and supporter liaisons shared some specific detail. http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/152931-ashton-gate-re-design/
You may well be right, Wurzel. Most of us realise that the three pictures released when the club announced Plan B Ashton Gate are probably the tip of the iceberg. But if we present our views in a sensible and thoughtful way, we can at least say that we have been heard. And who knows some of our points may bring about some revision to the Board's thinking. Or as in the case of the reference to the Community Programme, may actually be beneficial to their operation. BRISTOL BOY We are not in a position to deal with costs and sustainability - that is the province of the Board and their architects. Although perhaps the do's and dont's of a rebuild of the existing stadium will not be the same as those imposed by the City Council Planners for the change of use as a retail supermarket on the site. For example there is a big difference between football and rugby at twice or maybe three times a week for about four hours per match and a supermarket operating 24/7 with a non stop flow of delivery vehicles and customer's cars. We would be rather naive if we thought that none of our points have already been discussed, included in or rejected from the Board/Architects plans. But as a football club, this is a totally different organisation than almost any other type of business. For example, I am a shareholder in BCFC, albeit a very minute amount and almost certainly other posters on this site and those on OTIB will also be the same. Our money helped to save our Club in 1982, so we deserve the dignity afforded to us of presenting our views on this major project that, if it goes ahead, will affect the fortunes of OUR CLUB for many years to come. An email costs us nothing so we do what we can. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. For the rest of our Not606 posters, I'll go through the document later this evening, try to reduce it's size without making any fundamental change to the points raised.
