Re: New Stadium Updates : Wed Dec 16, 2020 9:16 pm  

Redscat wrote:

I'm sure Snowie will know from his personal involvement a few years ago, but I seem to recall that the north terracing consisted of the BISON concrete pre-cast hollow floor slabs that consisted of about 25mm top and bottom thickness of concrete with a hollow core of approx. 100mm. Over the years of supporting the crowds the top thickness used to crack and subside exposing the void. Subsequently the voids were filled with poured concrete patching which over time tended to create an uneven surface,
I don't recall a wholesale replacement of the north terracing in my time of attending BV.

yes we did some pepper testing first with a long thin drill bit all around areas that was in need of attention to decide what we was dealing with and had no concerns with the depth on the west stand bar for the few near the toilet area in the corner, like vasty said it was fairly new compared to the rest,
the north stand was totally different matter as it went through in seconds meaning the anchoring bolts would of had nothing to adhere to, one or two just had the drill bit fell through once it had penetated the concrete the only option was to dig every post out as the east stand, had to laugh when TRB said it was no problem so I repied he could crack on with it then

I did at one time find some information with photos about when the north stand was developed, all of the concrete believe or not was laid by volunteers by hand now that is moving mountains, not sure but I think its in the dreadnought book

Re: New Stadium Updates : Wed Dec 16, 2020 9:41 pm  

vastman wrote:

You won’t have done, they were in a draw at the club when I saw them in 2005. There were three versions dating from the late 80’s, up until the millennium, the latter were done as part of our SL application. I actually had to sign a confidentiality agreement to see them but I’m sure nobody cares now. They were never made public because they were never going to happen.

Anyway all were rejected. The main reasons were as follows.

1. Not enough access for emergency vehicles.

2. Poor general access and no parking.

3. Due to lack of space for facilities an unacceptable financial return for the outlay.

Even then the east and south stands were the obvious contenders for upgrading.

We all fondly remember the old west stand but let’s be honest it was ridiculously cramped underneath even by the standards of the day. It’s only suitable as a terrace unfortunately. Don’t see a problem with that myself.

As a matter of interest which ground have a stand that only has a narrow path behind two thirds of it. The only one I can think of is Cas which like BV is a relic. Like BV that terrace was built long before modern stadia regulations. I don’t make the rules, what is certain is that you can’t replace the west terrace like for like, ithe new structure would have to meet modern criteria.

This states that there must be unimpeded access for emergency vehicles including a fire tender. So it’s a minimum one way road. Added to that you’d need a pedestrian walkway as well. That starts to eat away a lot of space.

Didn’t realise it went to planning and WMDC rejected them, should be in the public domain if that’s the case. Remember early 2000s talk of us buying the old wilderspoon main stand for the west side. Had to go through an alley underneath some terrace houses away end at Luton, no chance of getting emergency vehicles through there.

Up the Trin

Re: New Stadium Updates : Wed Dec 16, 2020 9:45 pm  

vastman wrote:

The roof wouldn’t obscure the view, that’s a bit of a myth.

The gantry can't be lowered - it's already "flat", and permission couldn't be achieved for a roof of a height that would go above the gantry.

A roof at the permissible height would obscure the gantry sight lines.

This was covered in a fan's forum at BV, in the none too distant past.

It's not a myth; it's physics and planning permissions.

Re: New Stadium Updates : Wed Dec 16, 2020 9:47 pm  

Wakefield City wrote:

Didn’t realise it went to planning and WMDC rejected them, should be in the public domain if that’s the case.

Never got to the public domain, as they never got as far as seeking permission.

The council planning officers advised they would never pass, so that was the end of those ideas.

Re: New Stadium Updates : Wed Dec 16, 2020 11:51 pm  

Well it got people speculating . It is a damn mess and not expecting anything stupendous . Few tiers of safe terracing and a basic roof to to host away support.

Re: New Stadium Updates : Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:43 am  

dboy wrote:

The gantry can't be lowered - it's already "flat", and permission couldn't be achieved for a roof of a height that would go above the gantry.

A roof at the permissible height would obscure the gantry sight lines.

This was covered in a fan's forum at BV, in the none too distant past.

It's not a myth; it's physics and planning permissions.

I remember and your right. We differ only in that you believe it and I don’t.

The myth I refer to was SKY saying no, they didn’t.

The roof at permissible height is incorrect imo. To me that the club was making excuses. Roughly speaking the height of the old west stand sets a historical precedent and that I know to be true.

Problem is the roofing used is technically temporary and that’s where the restriction is, the next size up so to speak was too pricy. Also the bit they did build is just as much in site lines as it would be full length, never really got that argument.

To be honest I don’t blame the club it was never vital, at the time it was just a fop. The roof has served its purpose. What I would be interested in is knowing the lifespan of these roofs, that I don’t know?

Anyway these are side issues, it’s just fair to say the west terrace is the most limited section of the ground.

Re: New Stadium Updates : Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:50 am  

Wakefield City wrote:

Didn’t realise it went to planning and WMDC rejected them, should be in the public domain if that’s the case. Remember early 2000s talk of us buying the old wilderspoon main stand for the west side. Had to go through an alley underneath some terrace houses away end at Luton, no chance of getting emergency vehicles through there.

Up the Trin

Never needed to go to public, these were feasibility studies, all rejected in advance so no point.

As for Luton you’re spot on and there are others but you’re missing the point.

These are stands that were built pre-regulations and thus have less strict criteria. The problem comes when you replace them. When you do that to have to meet modern standards, you can’t replace like for like. That’s one of the reasons Luton’s ground has barely been developed, that is a ground in a truly awfull position.

Sure you’ve been to York? Without wanting to patronise but do you think you’d be allowed to build the Shambles under modern planning? That’s the problem.

The only real solution would be if the council would close the path and we could buy the land and perhaps some of the adjoining garden land. However we are in ransom strip territory there, nightmare.

Re: New Stadium Updates : Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:41 pm  

Fishermanscap wrote: Thought I'd start this so folk can add any updates they come across so as to keep folk as well informed as possible, pin it maybe mods? I'll kick off with this I found on the net, it's the architect's own site and gives a few more pics and bits of info, not much but a bit. Enjoy https://www.afl-architects.com/news/pla ... evelopment Just got around to reading the information by the architect from the link above. I Phase 1 The new East Stand will become an impactful focal point, with a FanZone and landscaped car parking creating a sense of arrival for travelling fans. An improved concourse will wrap around the eastern side of the new stand, facilitating safe and fully accessible movement for all visitors. In addition to the East Stand, the plans also outline further works to increase the stadium capacity from 7,258 to a total of 8,866. The North Stand, which is currently subject to health and safety restrictions, will be refurbished to increase capacity from a restricted 1,500 capacity up to 3,500 capacity. Existing floodlights will be upgraded to the latest LED technology and a 4G pitch installed for all weather use by both club and the community. Phase 2 Bringing together both club and the Wakefield Trinity Community Trust, phase two of the plans will see the refurbishment of the Rollin Shack. This will provide improved, multi-functional facilities to better engage with local residents. The proposals outline several provisions including a health and fitness suite, a strength and conditioning gym, a studio, learning spaces, meeting rooms, function lounge, club retails, café and changing facilities. These plans set out a broader vision for the stadium and its place within the Belle Vue community, bringing substantial social, environmental and economic benefits. With these new facilities, the Trust will meet its aims to assist in the regeneration of the area through engagement activities and the promotion of social inclusion. I can’t decide if this company will only be involved in phase 1 and 2, and not the complete stadium. Is it possible, that we only have funding for phase 1&2, therefore nothing drawn up for West and South side. I think the details are a bit sketchy at the moment. JM said on Monday night, this a 12+ month build. Is that just for phase 1 or both 1&2? Is it likely, that 1&2 together will take 2 years, meaning it will be 2024 at the earliest, before West and South ends can be considered for redevelopment? In the previous Q&A, JM said things had to be scaled back, due to funding. Perhaps I’m just a born pessimist, best news we’ve had for ages re Stadium, and I’m probably overthinking. Anyone else think we need some more details, just for clarification?

Fishermanscap wrote: Thought I'd start this so folk can add any updates they come across so as to keep folk as well informed as possible, pin it maybe mods? I'll kick off with this I found on the net, it's the architect's own site and gives a few more pics and bits of info, not much but a bit. Enjoy https://www.afl-architects.com/news/pla ... evelopment Just got around to reading the information by the architect from the link above. I Phase 1 The new East Stand will become an impactful focal point, with a FanZone and landscaped car parking creating a sense of arrival for travelling fans. An improved concourse will wrap around the eastern side of the new stand, facilitating safe and fully accessible movement for all visitors. In addition to the East Stand, the plans also outline further works to increase the stadium capacity from 7,258 to a total of 8,866. The North Stand, which is currently subject to health and safety restrictions, will be refurbished to increase capacity from a restricted 1,500 capacity up to 3,500 capacity. Existing floodlights will be upgraded to the latest LED technology and a 4G pitch installed for all weather use by both club and the community. Phase 2 Bringing together both club and the Wakefield Trinity Community Trust, phase two of the plans will see the refurbishment of the Rollin Shack. This will provide improved, multi-functional facilities to better engage with local residents. The proposals outline several provisions including a health and fitness suite, a strength and conditioning gym, a studio, learning spaces, meeting rooms, function lounge, club retails, café and changing facilities. These plans set out a broader vision for the stadium and its place within the Belle Vue community, bringing substantial social, environmental and economic benefits. With these new facilities, the Trust will meet its aims to assist in the regeneration of the area through engagement activities and the promotion of social inclusion. I can’t decide if this company will only be involved in phase 1 and 2, and not the complete stadium. Is it possible, that we only have funding for phase 1&2, therefore nothing drawn up for West and South side. I think the details are a bit sketchy at the moment. JM said on Monday night, this a 12+ month build. Is that just for phase 1 or both 1&2? Is it likely, that 1&2 together will take 2 years, meaning it will be 2024 at the earliest, before West and South ends can be considered for redevelopment? In the previous Q&A, JM said things had to be scaled back, due to funding. Perhaps I’m just a born pessimist, best news we’ve had for ages re Stadium, and I’m probably overthinking. Anyone else think we need some more details, just for clarification?

Re: New Stadium Updates : Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:56 pm  

This is such amazing news
The best news I’ve had all year in fact

I’m not sure we’ve ever got to the point where we’ve submitted plans before
I’ve seen artist impressions , maybe 3 lots now?

I’d like to go early and say the stand need naming after MC

I’m not sure I’m ready to believe it just yet

Is this really going to happen for us

Re: New Stadium Updates : Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:30 am  

musson wrote:

I’d like to go early and say the stand need naming after MC

That would certainly feed the resident haters on the two rugby forums.

I suppose the sensible options would be a sponsorship naming or Neil Fox?