villa4europe Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 What I genuinely dont know with anfield is how they've done it with the loadings, I'm not sure if they've used a steel frame to spread it or if the footings the original stands were on were future proofed or if they've enhanced them or if they've underpinned or what But the idea that we can simply do what they did isn't necessarily true, that's a lot of weight being added It's not as simple as just building upwards and outwards on an existing structure, it's going downwards that's the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Captain_Townsend said: The point being we have even more space behind the North Stand, that's the whole point. That doesn't mean that the local residents will not face similar issues to those faced in Liverpool. Suddenly an extra 20,000 people tramping past their homes, parking outside their front gate, the extra exhaust fumes caused by more cars stuck in traffic jams, reduced access to sunlight (Liverpool have had to convert many properties into businesses because they are not subject to the same planning restrictions), etc. There's a whole heap of issues that need to be properly assessed. Of course the NS redevelopment plans had been approved but I'm not sure whether expanding any other stands wouldn't face significant issues. In which case spending a bucket load of cash that we might end up throwing away before we've even managed to break even on the project would be a pretty flawed approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 minute ago, allani said: That doesn't mean that the local residents will not face similar issues to those faced in Liverpool. Suddenly an extra 20,000 people tramping past their homes, parking outside their front gate, the extra exhaust fumes caused by more cars stuck in traffic jams, reduced access to sunlight (Liverpool have had to convert many properties into businesses because they are not subject to the same planning restrictions), etc. There's a whole heap of issues that need to be properly assessed. Of course the NS redevelopment plans had been approved but I'm not sure whether expanding any other stands wouldn't face significant issues. In which case spending a bucket load of cash that we might end up throwing away before we've even managed to break even on the project would be a pretty flawed approach. And they can't "just move". There's all kinds of stories about residents living close to Anfield who had homes valued at £80k who received offers from the club of circa £30k (which they rightly refused) only to see the market value drop to around £35-40k because of all the issues in the area and a sudden lack of people wanting to buy in an area with an unclear future and / or unable to get mortgages because mortgage companies were (rightly) worried that the property values would decline further and so if the owners failed to meet their mortgage payments then the mortgage company wouldn't be able to recover their costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 14 VT Supporter Share Posted February 14 The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that most of the issues can be resolved with proper traffic management and use of one way systems around the ground. Liverpool does not have 2 railway stations adjacent. How are less people driving there? We're right on the edge of a motorway and have a dual carriageway either side of the ground. We need a properly designed plan that looks at traffic flows and ensures cars can get away easier. Need to stop fleets of taxis approaching inwards as thousands of cars are going the other way also. Dedicated Taxi routes are needed. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) 35 minutes ago, allani said: That doesn't mean that the local residents will not face similar issues to those faced in Liverpool. Suddenly an extra 20,000 people tramping past their homes, parking outside their front gate, the extra exhaust fumes caused by more cars stuck in traffic jams, reduced access to sunlight (Liverpool have had to convert many properties into businesses because they are not subject to the same planning restrictions), etc. There's a whole heap of issues that need to be properly assessed. Of course the NS redevelopment plans had been approved but I'm not sure whether expanding any other stands wouldn't face significant issues. In which case spending a bucket load of cash that we might end up throwing away before we've even managed to break even on the project would be a pretty flawed approach. We have had, on and off, planning permission to do this for the guts of 20 years. Circa 50k is what our capacity was in the days of a standing Holte, not that long ago. Better use of the adjacent rail line is essential, as is a more staggered approach to arrivals and departures on match day - all of which was factored into the plans er had. If we were talking Witton Lane as our only option for expansion I would take your point entirely but behind the current North we have absolutely acres of space. We could get hotels in behind the new stand if we wanted (just an example of potential)! Edited February 14 by Captain_Townsend 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 46 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said: We have had, on and off, planning permission to do this for the guts of 20 years. Circa 50k is what our capacity was in the days of a standing Holte, not that long ago. Better use of the adjacent rail line is essential, as is a more staggered approach to arrivals and departures on match day - all of which was factored into the plans er had. If we were talking Witton Lane as our only option for expansion I would take your point entirely but behind the current North we have absolutely acres of space. We could get hotels in behind the new stand if we wanted (just an example of potential)! Ah the hotel. Wasn't that Doug's plan for the Holte Hotel? Has the club actually confirmed that they will be redeveloping the stumps this summer into the GA+ Warehouse experience yet? If they can't even tart up an old brick shed then my expectations will be even further lowered. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 14 VT Supporter Share Posted February 14 29 minutes ago, delboy54 said: If we move VP from Aston to say the NEC will we change our name like Wimbledon did to MK Dons?.....seeing as we won't be in Aston anymore....perhaps this will be another one of those fan feedback things like the debacle of the badge, terrace view etc etc Will this then give SMA the green light to claim the city as their own...? Always been a massive Solihull Villa fan M8! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) I think there was a survey on this in 2021? I remember the result was we wanted to stay at VP and keep the 4 stand aesthetic. Please tell me this happened and it wasn't my imagination? Edited February 14 by Captain_Townsend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 14 VT Supporter Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Captain_Townsend said: I think there was a survey on this in 2021? I remember the result was we wanted to stay at VP and keep the 4 stand aesthetic. Please tell me this happened and it wasn't my imagination? You are mistaking about 10 posters on VT for the general opinion of fans as a whole is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 14 Moderator Share Posted February 14 2 hours ago, The Fun Factory said: Has the club actually confirmed that they will be redeveloping the stumps this summer into the GA+ Warehouse experience yet? They have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 5 hours ago, sidcow said: The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that most of the issues can be resolved with proper traffic management and use of one way systems around the ground. Liverpool does not have 2 railway stations adjacent. How are less people driving there? We're right on the edge of a motorway and have a dual carriageway either side of the ground. We need a properly designed plan that looks at traffic flows and ensures cars can get away easier. Need to stop fleets of taxis approaching inwards as thousands of cars are going the other way also. Dedicated Taxi routes are needed. Having lived in Kent for most of my life (before heading south) I can tell you that the government are very keen on using motorways as car parks and so we could easily copy the "solutions" used on the M20 and deploy them on the M6 on match days. It solves all the problems of too many cars on the streets around the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted February 15 VT Supporter Share Posted February 15 Could we not buy the land behind the trinity and build a new stadium whilst still using Villa Park, loads of room I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 1 minute ago, Follyfoot said: Could we not buy the land behind the trinity and build a new stadium whilst still using Villa Park, loads of room I think Park of Aston Hall so would be nigh on impossible to build anything there, would affect the setting of the hall too much 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 23 minutes ago, MrBlack said: Buying Aston hall off the council (I believe it just about makes a profit) and trying it in with our corporate packages, or hosting events there linked to the club, would actually be a way to increase our FFP position. Not to mention the fact we'd own the land and be able to convert some of it for extensions of the stadium. Its so close to us that it would be madness not to consider buying it. Long term, owning it could save us a lot of problems in the future. And like I said, it makes as much money as it costs to run. The council want rid of it to pay off their wage bill debt. The building is only going to get older, and even if it 'just about makes a profit' (I have no idea if this is true, but let's say it is) that suggests it could easily become a financial burden under very lightly-changed circumstances. We are building a new building, nearer to the stadium, which will clearly be part of the football club. It's going to be easier to sell corporate packages there than some quasi-National Trust experience half a mile away across a park. It's genuinely one of the worst ideas I've heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: The building is only going to get older, and even if it 'just about makes a profit' (I have no idea if this is true, but let's say it is) that suggests it could easily become a financial burden under very lightly-changed circumstances. We are building a new building, nearer to the stadium, which will clearly be part of the football club. It's going to be easier to sell corporate packages there than some quasi-National Trust experience half a mile away across a park. It's genuinely one of the worst ideas I've heard. Depends how much it would cost I guess. For me, the real value would be in the land we acquire right next to the current trinity stand. But I'm sure the club have considered whether it's beneficial or not and the fact we havent suggests they think not (although given the accusations in the Heck thread who knows what's going on behind the scenes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 10 minutes ago, MrBlack said: Depends how much it would cost I guess. For me, the real value would be in the land we acquire right next to the current trinity stand. But I'm sure the club have considered whether it's beneficial or not and the fact we havent suggests they think not (although given the accusations in the Heck thread who knows what's going on behind the scenes). Genuine q: how would owning land the other side of Trinity Rd help? Unless we propose to re-route the road it's not clear why it would be much use to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Genuine q: how would owning land the other side of Trinity Rd help? Unless we propose to re-route the road it's not clear why it would be much use to us. Exactly that, or extend the stand further over the road. It gives us options that wouldn't even be on the table if the land was privately owned. Given how tight we are on the opposite side of the stadium it gives us other options if we look at a complete rebuild also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 I'll say it again. There's no way in hell you could build on the grounds of Aston Hall. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunther Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 (edited) On 14/02/2024 at 14:40, sidcow said: The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that most of the issues can be resolved with proper traffic management and use of one way systems around the ground. Liverpool does not have 2 railway stations adjacent. How are less people driving there? We're right on the edge of a motorway and have a dual carriageway either side of the ground. We need a properly designed plan that looks at traffic flows and ensures cars can get away easier. Need to stop fleets of taxis approaching inwards as thousands of cars are going the other way also. Dedicated Taxi routes are needed. Some sort of road management is the only way forward if we're going to increase capacity. I'd love to see the walking to the ground figures for different clubs. I'd wager than Liverpool's walking figures are orders of magnitudes above ours. We might have some dense housing locally like Liverpool, but far fewer locals are Villa fans I'd guess. We also have a lot of industrial units around reducing density (not sure what it's like around Liverpool). Lets face it, if you lived within a 2 mile radius of the ground and are able-bodied, walking would be cheaper, quicker and easier. Edit: I see Rugeley Villan has already made a similar.point Edited February 15 by blunther Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 17 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said: I'll say it again. There's no way in hell you could build on the grounds of Aston Hall. Even if you owned it, and just used the edges of the grounds that are right next to the stadium? I can't work out on what basis your saying it can't be done if you own it. Is there a law that protects the trees on a listed building's land? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts