Temp Seats at HP

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, botrash, charlie, uncovered

H1987
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by H1987 » Thu May 31, 2018 11:23 pm

al_quaker wrote:How to make BM even less appealing than it already is to away fans - shove them into uncovered seating which will likely offer a terrible view and charge them £16
Any worse than uncovered hard standing with a worse view? I'm not sure.

dickdarlington
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by dickdarlington » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:33 am

Some sensible and reasoned discussion here. With most viewing that the seats aren’t worth the investment.

My understanding is that the seats could be made permanent. However, the bigger picture is what would hamper this. And it’s that same picture that would hamper a small terrace being built. To get to 5k with 2k seats (for FL membership) something a little more than twice the size of what we have presently would need to be built. Be it terracing or a seated stand. Building something smaller would require demolishing, or expensively expanding backwards as progression occurs.

The infrastructure group are looking at all options for Blackwell, some more viable than others, as the most important factor for them is to not waste any more money, or further hamstring future development with short term solutions. The temp seats Have been given as an option (admittedly short term themselves) to increase the overall experience for a relatively small amount, but would also not be a massive hurdle when something larger is required (I.e. no foundations etc).

There are no easy answers to this unfortunately.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 11338
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Darlo_Pete » Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:06 am

At the moment capacity is not an issue and the seating in place already would be more than adequate for the vast majority of games at BM this upcoming season.

BUSHEAD
Posts: 1507
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by BUSHEAD » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:16 am

Spyman wrote:How much does a permanent terrace cost that would take up the same footprint? Say half the length of the tinshed and uncovered (for now).

Any ideas?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Hi Gareth,

Thank you for your email.

As a very approximate budget, one of our lightweight 6 tread covered
standing terraces at 50m long x 2.5m deep would be £52,400.00 + VAT. Price
includes delivery and installation on site. Does not allow for foundations.

This can be dependent on ground location, final design and steel rates at
time of ordering.

I hope this helps but should you require a proper quotation or any further
information, please contact us.

Regards,
Louise
Stadium Solutions (UK) Limited
9B Valley Farm Business Park
Reeds Lane
Sayers Common
West Sussex BN6 9JQ
Always the victim, its never your fault

Darlo Dodger
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 9:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Darlo Dodger » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:23 am

On balance I don't think that bringing the seats to BM is worth doing.
One of the points made is that the market is awash with temporary seating so these seats have no, or no significant, market value.
If that is right then there might be different but still unused and unwanted seating / standing structures available from somewhere or other which we could get our hands on and which could be used, or more easily adapted for use, at BM in the longer term.
This is complete conjecture but if we start from a point where we have circa £20K available to spend on improving the viewing experience for supporters then we should not just be looking at these seats but anything else that might be available in the market where prices are currently very low.
Essentially I think we should just forget that these seats are "ours" and ask ourselves how we would spend £20k to improve the ground for supporters if we were minded to do so. The seats are an option but that is all they are. Since they do not fit into any long term plans I am happy to leave them where they are.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:57 am

al_quaker wrote:
Darlogramps wrote:Alternative is to knock down the clubhouse and build there, which would be the most convenient in terms of location.

But the obvious problems are that A) we don't own the ground and unless there's a substantial benefit to do so, I don't see the rugby club allowing it and B) the old chestnut, financing it.
.
I can't see a feasible way as to how a FL ground will ever be there unless the clubhouse side is developed. I would love to see some plans as to how it might come together both at the next level and hypothetically the FL if we ever get that far (although of course it raises the question as to whether spending millions on developing a plot of land for which we only rent the pitch for a few hours every other weekend is the best course of action, but I'm getting ahead of myself).

I guess once the sporting village is either on or off the table, a longer term plan can develop.
If the hub is a no go... this is a massive problem. The report also rules out a structure in front of the changing room where those seats are now, but if we're stuck at BM, there is an option

I'm just going to drop this like a bomb and run because people have shouted me down on it before.... but here goes...

Move. The. Pitch.

If you slide it up so the pipe intersects the corners our problems could be solved... could also bring those seats as a temp structure as, if they can be made permanent, they're at BM then and if we do reshuffle things about they could be incorporated into another part of the ground.

There's a lot of space to work with at BM.

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11553
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Spyman » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:07 am

BUSHEAD wrote:
Spyman wrote:How much does a permanent terrace cost that would take up the same footprint? Say half the length of the tinshed and uncovered (for now).

Any ideas?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Hi Gareth,

Thank you for your email.

As a very approximate budget, one of our lightweight 6 tread covered
standing terraces at 50m long x 2.5m deep would be £52,400.00 + VAT. Price
includes delivery and installation on site. Does not allow for foundations.

This can be dependent on ground location, final design and steel rates at
time of ordering.

I hope this helps but should you require a proper quotation or any further
information, please contact us.

Regards,
Louise
Stadium Solutions (UK) Limited
9B Valley Farm Business Park
Reeds Lane
Sayers Common
West Sussex BN6 9JQ
Yeh see I'd rather spend £60k on something like this that was permanent than £20k +removal costs on something temporary.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

H1987
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by H1987 » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:12 am

To me, the considerable barriers to future expansion are the existing stands as much as anything else. The tin shed should’ve been built with more rows as it had in its prior state, and the seated stand should’ve been deeper. It was all rushed.

I wonder if a potential future solution might be moving the existing seating stand behind the goal, and a much larger stand to be built on the sideline.

Anyway, regarding the seats, I now have faith in the guys running the show to make the right decision for the club, but we’ve made a string of poor decisions since 2012. Our success on the field has been all the more remarkable for it. We rushed getting BM ready.

To be honest, if we’re thinking of future football league aspirations, there’s probably a point where moving the pipe might be the wise decision. There’s a lot of money in the football league of course, and you get a couple of years to get it up to standard I believe. With the current restrictions and infrastructure, the only realistic way to get 2,000 seats and 5,000 capacity would be either replacing the clubhouse with a significant structure, or probably building over the pipe. It could well be that moving the pipe would be the cheaper option. I think we should focus on national league aspirations for now. I don’t think we will be worrying the football league in an awfully long time, sadly. I do however, think we will be back in the national league within 5 years.

H1987
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by H1987 » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:14 am

Spyman wrote:
BUSHEAD wrote:
Spyman wrote:How much does a permanent terrace cost that would take up the same footprint? Say half the length of the tinshed and uncovered (for now).

Any ideas?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Hi Gareth,

Thank you for your email.

As a very approximate budget, one of our lightweight 6 tread covered
standing terraces at 50m long x 2.5m deep would be £52,400.00 + VAT. Price
includes delivery and installation on site. Does not allow for foundations.

This can be dependent on ground location, final design and steel rates at
time of ordering.

I hope this helps but should you require a proper quotation or any further
information, please contact us.

Regards,
Louise
Stadium Solutions (UK) Limited
9B Valley Farm Business Park
Reeds Lane
Sayers Common
West Sussex BN6 9JQ
Yeh see I'd rather spend £60k on something like this that was permanent than £20k +removal costs on something temporary.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
That’s arguably worse for long term ground aspirations though. At some point, we need more seats. Some seats raised behind the existing standing would be an easier way to achieve this. If you put that terrace in up to the pipe, where are we going to fit the extra 400ish seats for national level?

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11553
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Spyman » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:36 am

H1987 wrote:
Spyman wrote:
BUSHEAD wrote:
Spyman wrote:How much does a permanent terrace cost that would take up the same footprint? Say half the length of the tinshed and uncovered (for now).

Any ideas?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Hi Gareth,

Thank you for your email.

As a very approximate budget, one of our lightweight 6 tread covered
standing terraces at 50m long x 2.5m deep would be £52,400.00 + VAT. Price
includes delivery and installation on site. Does not allow for foundations.

This can be dependent on ground location, final design and steel rates at
time of ordering.

I hope this helps but should you require a proper quotation or any further
information, please contact us.

Regards,
Louise
Stadium Solutions (UK) Limited
9B Valley Farm Business Park
Reeds Lane
Sayers Common
West Sussex BN6 9JQ
Yeh see I'd rather spend £60k on something like this that was permanent than £20k +removal costs on something temporary.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
That’s arguably worse for long term ground aspirations though. At some point, we need more seats. Some seats raised behind the existing standing would be an easier way to achieve this. If you put that terrace in up to the pipe, where are we going to fit the extra 400ish seats for national level?
Fair point - perhaps terrace in a different location then?

All I'm ithinking is if we want a quick(ish) fix to improve viewing angles we might as well make it a permanent solution at a still achievable cost. At some point we will also need more terracing as it's by far the most effective way to increase overall capacity, so I'd rather put this (theoretical) money towards that, personally.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

Quakerz
Posts: 20959
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Quakerz » Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:37 am

H1987 wrote:To me, the considerable barriers to future expansion are the existing stands as much as anything else. The tin shed should’ve been built with more rows as it had in its prior state, and the seated stand should’ve been deeper. It was all rushed.
Indeed.

The tinshed should have been 12 rows (giving a capacity of 1,500 rather than 1,000), the seats should have been 10 rows or so (giving a capacity of around 1,000 rather than 588).

No thought whatsoever was given to the future where it was obvious to many that we'd probably have to knock down/rebuild to achieve future ground grading. Build it right in the first place FFS.

It was all about hitting the minimum for as cheap as possible, which I understand - but what was the cost of the 8 row tinshed as opposed to a 12 row tinshed for example? One thing is for sure - building a 12 row tin shed in the first place wouldn't have cost as much as building an 8 row tin shed then having to knock it down and then build a 12 row tinshed!

To be honest, the ground is a fuck up.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

spen666
Posts: 1408
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by spen666 » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:04 pm

Quakerz wrote:
H1987 wrote:To me, the considerable barriers to future expansion are the existing stands as much as anything else. The tin shed should’ve been built with more rows as it had in its prior state, and the seated stand should’ve been deeper. It was all rushed.
.....

No thought whatsoever was given to the future where it was obvious to many that we'd probably have to knock down/rebuild to achieve future ground grading. Build it right in the first place FFS.

.....

It seems that there was too much of a rush to get back to playing in Darlington, and because of that I think the failings you describe came about.

I get the impression that it was thought moving back to Darlington would bring about a more significant increase in crowds than it has and therefore increased income and as such a move was brought about too rapidly to sensibly consider the issues you describe

However, its not going to help anyone to look back and say what should have been done. The ground is as it is and any future development needs to take this into account.

I have often wondered if the clubhouse side can be developed a bit like Barnet have done at The Hive to include seating all the way along the side.

The biggest problem is that works to bring the ground up to EFL standard are likely to be very expensive and without an outsider investor, it seems difficult to see how the fans can support the cost of redevelopment and a full time side which would realistically be necessary to get out of the National League.
_________________________________________________________________
Twitter: @spen_666

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 11338
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Darlo_Pete » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:30 pm

The tinshed in my opinion was always too small, but I guess that would have just added more cost to moving from HP to BM. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

User avatar
D_F_C
Posts: 1596
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 8:43 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by D_F_C » Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:54 pm

Wasn’t the tinshed built based on the amount of money we raised? We didn’t raise quite enough so it had to be built smaller?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

super_les_mcjannet
Posts: 5177
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by super_les_mcjannet » Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:16 pm

D_F_C wrote:Wasn’t the tinshed built based on the amount of money we raised? We didn’t raise quite enough so it had to be built smaller?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That was the seats, tin shed was always planned as it is.

Difficult time as we were raising cash via 500 club so any money taken would have removed budget.

Whilst I agree it hasn't worked out for the best in the long run in terms of capacity challenges etc. but not sure at the time we thought we would raise the money (which we didn't for the seats) never mind making the tin shed bigger.

Not surprised the club don't want to spend any further money on BM currently.
[url=http://www.backtodarlo.co.uk][img]http://www.mydarlo.co.uk/img/BTD-therm-350x100.jpg[/img][/url]

User avatar
HarrytheQuaker
Posts: 2551
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by HarrytheQuaker » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:00 pm

Come on guys everyone knows it's a great little ground with huge potential of getting us back in the league that why fans have raised thousands to get us where we now..
Stick with it..


Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

liddle_4_ever
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:13 am
Team Supported: Darlo
Location: Scotland

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by liddle_4_ever » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:14 pm

I made many comments prior to the ground being developed about more financially efficient designs taking a long term view, including moving the pitch away from the club house and building deeper stands (both seated and terrace) to ease future developments but we have what we have.

Increasing the tinshed capacity beyond what it is now would have required the old metalwork to be scrapped and replaced with new (which would be costly). The design we currently have is contained, it can't be increased. The size of each step is dictated to us, the tiny old step size at Feethams wouldn't be permitted today. Also no additional steps could be added as it would reach beyond the span of the roof.

Originally designing the seating stand to have had more rows would seem obvious, however the cost per seat would increase (bigger steel work, more weight, bigger foundations, larger boundary fence etc etc etc). These increases in cost would be minimal compared with the long term cost of replacing them in future, however it could have resulted in us having insufficient finances to build a ground which met the ground grading requirements. It seems like those in charge were between a rock and a hard place.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Now is not the time to cry
Now’s the time to find out why
I think you’re the same as me
We’ll see things they’ll never see
Darlo’s going to live forever!

LoidLucan
Posts: 2518
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:29 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by LoidLucan » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:14 pm

I dont want to be too gloomy but given the fact that there are always several teams with loadsamoney to spend and will be for years to come in national north i dont think we'll be troubling the judges re National League requirements and certainly not the Football League for quite a few years to come. I suspect BM, perhaps with some more terracing for those who stand, will more than suffice. We'll be competing with teams chucking in the sort of cash we wont be able to compete with, Boost the Budget or not. Thankfully there will be several spending a lot less and we may just get a sniff of the playoffs given its extended format.

lo36789
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by lo36789 » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:10 pm

Whatever we do at the open end will be a future proofed structure I am sure.

Out of interest does anyone know how resaleable / easily dismountable / easily adjustable the modular stands are?

jjljks
Posts: 1321
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by jjljks » Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:13 pm

Move the pitch is right - away from BM to the Sports Hub, whenever the Council can get their finger out. The way it is going, they could knock down M&S when closed and have a town centre ground again - loads of useless space and plenty of parking, close to buses & rail etc.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 5932
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by loan_star » Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:09 pm

liddle_4_ever wrote:I made many comments prior to the ground being developed about more financially efficient designs taking a long term view, including moving the pitch away from the club house and building deeper stands (both seated and terrace) to ease future developments but we have what we have.

Increasing the tinshed capacity beyond what it is now would have required the old metalwork to be scrapped and replaced with new (which would be costly). The design we currently have is contained, it can't be increased. The size of each step is dictated to us, the tiny old step size at Feethams wouldn't be permitted today. Also no additional steps could be added as it would reach beyond the span of the roof.
From what I heard, the Tin Shed roof overhang was shortened to suit the terrace size underneath.
There would have been no need to scrap the old steelwork at all.

dickdarlington
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by dickdarlington » Sun Jun 03, 2018 6:46 pm

loan_star wrote:
liddle_4_ever wrote:I made many comments prior to the ground being developed about more financially efficient designs taking a long term view, including moving the pitch away from the club house and building deeper stands (both seated and terrace) to ease future developments but we have what we have.

Increasing the tinshed capacity beyond what it is now would have required the old metalwork to be scrapped and replaced with new (which would be costly). The design we currently have is contained, it can't be increased. The size of each step is dictated to us, the tiny old step size at Feethams wouldn't be permitted today. Also no additional steps could be added as it would reach beyond the span of the roof.
From what I heard, the Tin Shed roof overhang was shortened to suit the terrace size underneath.
There would have been no need to scrap the old steelwork at all.
That’s not true. The depth of the roof is the same now as it was at Feethams. Difference is the terrace steps are deeper. And the access path is under the roof itself. It wasn’t at Feethams.

The steelwork reduction was on the height. This was to enable the steel to be used with modern methods. I.e. bolted to foundations rather than embedded in the concrete.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 5932
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by loan_star » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:43 am

dickdarlington wrote:
loan_star wrote:
liddle_4_ever wrote:I made many comments prior to the ground being developed about more financially efficient designs taking a long term view, including moving the pitch away from the club house and building deeper stands (both seated and terrace) to ease future developments but we have what we have.

Increasing the tinshed capacity beyond what it is now would have required the old metalwork to be scrapped and replaced with new (which would be costly). The design we currently have is contained, it can't be increased. The size of each step is dictated to us, the tiny old step size at Feethams wouldn't be permitted today. Also no additional steps could be added as it would reach beyond the span of the roof.
From what I heard, the Tin Shed roof overhang was shortened to suit the terrace size underneath.
There would have been no need to scrap the old steelwork at all.
That’s not true. The depth of the roof is the same now as it was at Feethams. Difference is the terrace steps are deeper. And the access path is under the roof itself. It wasn’t at Feethams.

The steelwork reduction was on the height. This was to enable the steel to be used with modern methods. I.e. bolted to foundations rather than embedded in the concrete.
I’ve re-read the article that was in the Echo and it mentioned the depth being reduced. For me the depth is how far back it goes, not the height. If the wording is wrong then fair enough!

H1987
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by H1987 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:35 pm

Yeah, that's sort of what I meant. Whilst it was never going to be 13 steps as it was at Feethams, you could definitely fit another few rows in. Which makes a heck of a difference when it's the length of the pitch.

There's no reason for the walkway to be covered at all. I don't know if it'd be possible to change this by adding another step or two, but it should've been done in the first place. Just as the seated stand should've had more rows.

Interested to see how the decision goes with this seating. Also, am i the only one that would prefer a sports hub at BM than out at the arena? I far prefer the location. Much more walkable from town. If we're going to start from scratch, i'd sooner do it at BM on another pitch away from the damned pipe.

Emdubya
Posts: 588
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:31 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Emdubya » Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:39 pm

H1987 wrote:Yeah, that's sort of what I meant. Whilst it was never going to be 13 steps as it was at Feethams, you could definitely fit another few rows in. Which makes a heck of a difference when it's the length of the pitch.

There's no reason for the walkway to be covered at all. I don't know if it'd be possible to change this by adding another step or two, but it should've been done in the first place. Just as the seated stand should've had more rows.

Interested to see how the decision goes with this seating. Also, am i the only one that would prefer a sports hub at BM than out at the arena? I far prefer the location. Much more walkable from town. If we're going to start from scratch, i'd sooner do it at BM on another pitch away from the damned pipe.
Yeah, shoulda done this,shoulda done that.We got what we could pay for while pouring magabucks into Grays budget.Or would you have been happy with another 50 grand of debt?.

onewayup
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by onewayup » Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:03 pm

Darlington fc is fan owned so fan funded, some posters on here seem to forget this and want to push on, we are where we are due to the backing of the fans pockets, so stop whingeing about it should have been this or should have been that, we are what we are with our good fans putting up the cash whenever it's been called for. Long may it continue.
Remember we have a club to support because of the fans, and successive volunteers who are of the highest caliber, a very big thank you to them all.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 1455
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Vodka_Vic » Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:17 pm

What would be useful is to find out what the minimum amount of steps required is for flat standing to be reclassified as terracing. I know that seats have to be minimum 4 rows. We could then find out if anything could be developed on the club house side.

Edit: This is what it says on NL ground grading

"Any level surfaces within the ground must be hard standing. i.e. tarmac, concrete, concrete paving or other approved materials. Spectator standing areas behind the goals must be terraced unless the overall ground capacity is achieved with the exclusion of one or both of these areas. The number of terrace steps to be commensurate in achieving the overall ground capacity".

It doesn't specifically specify a minimum amount of steps, does it, unless someone can read more into this than I can?

What I'm getting at here is could we add just one step above the flat standing to the clubhouse side to get that counted in the capacity, or reduce costs at the open end by the same token?

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 3711
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:08 pm

H1987 wrote:To be honest, if we’re thinking of future football league aspirations, there’s probably a point where moving the pipe might be the wise decision.

It's been stated on here many times that the pipe is non moveable.

H1987 wrote:Interested to see how the decision goes with this seating. Also, am i the only one that would prefer a sports hub at BM than out at the arena? I far prefer the location. Much more walkable from town. If we're going to start from scratch, i'd sooner do it at BM on another pitch away from the damned pipe.
Doesn't the "hub" have to be at The Arena - I thought that was the whole idea of it?
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

lo36789
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by lo36789 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:16 am

Vodka_Vic wrote:What would be useful is to find out what the minimum amount of steps required is for flat standing to be reclassified as terracing. I know that seats have to be minimum 4 rows. We could then find out if anything could be developed on the club house side...
What I'm getting at here is could we add just one step above the flat standing to the clubhouse side to get that counted in the capacity, or reduce costs at the open end by the same token?
Maybe I have misinterpretted. The whole '4 rows' thing is more to do with making something worthwhile.

At our current level flat standing is 'counted' to include being 4 deep with people. As a result when you build anything behind it if it has less than 4 rows you effectually lose on capacity.

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 11338
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Temp Seats at HP

Post by Darlo_Pete » Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:11 am

The pipe in movable, but would cost in excess of £1m to move it.

Post Reply