according to this website http://fsf.org.uk/latest-news/view/bristol-city-propose-rail-seats-at-ashton-gate the capacity will be 26,500 after the re-build but if safe standing gets the go ahead the capacity of Ashton gate would rise to 29,000
It's forty million but it's not about seats. It's about corporate facilities and that's where the cost goes. Capacity could increased significanty by spending less.
Is the redevelopment being built in a way that we can add more rail seats if required?? I have looked around and can't find anything, I might have to pop down tonight
It's not just about increasing the capacity - it's about updating facilities etc - someone on here recently posted a survey of away fans, and AG was bad for that compared to others
The experience absolutely needs to improve, but is this money being best spent at Ashton Gate? I think the cost reflects just how much work it'll take to get it up to scratch for the leagues we are in now. Imagine the **** we'd get if we actually defied the odds and made it into the Premier League... Ashton Vale is the only way forward for me. It's what Lansdown desperately wants, it's what the fans want, and it's what the city wants.
The money proposed for a redevelopment reflects how much it's owner wants to spend on corporate facilities. The stadium as it is can generate income enough to equal that of club's promoted elsewhere. The facilities can be improved at a lesser cost, capacity also increased. When nirvana was reached Blackpool and Bunley used premiership cash to improve their stadia. I don't remember a national outcry that "clubs with stadiums like that ...!" There has been no in depth research into what fans want between Gates and Vales. The only proportional consultation did not offer an option beyond Ashton Vale yay or nay. Living in Bristol I cannot see this groundswell of opinion it's what the City wants, it is never mentioned away from football in my personal life or workplace.
