It would probably cheaper to seat the upper section if we were doing the absolute minimum. Large terracing is expensive and getting a safety certificate will be trickier as I’m told the authorities are more lenient to seats.
The key to the North stand is can we just reinstate the terracing to a good level but leave the underpinning as is, I don’t know before our resident expert pipes up. In which case it would be cheap and end up like the one at Fax which would be fine by me. A full redevelopment would be astronomical, possibly more than the East stand due to moving so much toxic earth.
My understanding is that along with the ageing concrete blocks crumbling the 'underpinning ' is a problem also. The patching shows where the dops have occurred and the undualating terarcing. I very much doubt with modern day standards patch and go will not be acceptable but I am confident that those in charge of the design and development will have a handle on all these matters.
My understanding is that along with the ageing concrete blocks crumbling the 'underpinning ' is a problem also. The patching shows where the dops have occurred and the undualating terarcing. I very much doubt with modern day standards patch and go will not be acceptable but I am confident that those in charge of the design and development will have a handle on all these matters.
Hasn’t the base beneath got arsenic in it or some such rubbish?
Hasn’t the base beneath got arsenic in it or some such rubbish?
Yes, it has, it's ok for the use it has now but if it were to be used daily by people it would need removing. I believe thats one of the reasons why the previous developer couldn't or wouldn't develop the site, as ever I may be wrong but that's what I understand.
To do it properly they would. It will need new drains, services footings, the lot. Best get rid of it all as it will prevent issues later on and will be cheaper in the long run.
Hasn’t the base beneath got arsenic in it or some such rubbish?
My guess is that the terrace is laid on ash and/or colliery spoil which naturally has arsenic occurring with in it. Most of Yorkshire is built on colliery spoil and the arsenic is not particularly soluble so is not a problem unless it has to be removed. As the spoil will contain arsenic and other contaminants it will incur a higher level of land tax when it’s taken to a license tip so will be expensive to remove.
As to the stability I wasn’t an engineer but if it’s loose it may be possible to stabilize it by pressure grouting but that’s costly as well so either way it’s an expensive job.
To do it properly they would. It will need new drains, services footings, the lot. Best get rid of it all as it will prevent issues later on and will be cheaper in the long run.
I meant in the short term, I can't see it all being done at once, I assume thats what MC means by Phase 1 etc.