sidcow Posted February 17 VT Supporter Share Posted February 17 44 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I think that's the plan for the Holte End car park. And for a bar in a tent we should be grateful. Tip our hat to the lord and masters and hope some gruel is thrown in to fortify us for the cold winters night. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 Where we'd want to expand is mostly taken up by the playground and basketball court space anyway. I'm generally against the wild overreach of heritage protection, it's a problem all over the world. There has to be a balance but there are groups of people for whom cities must exclusively be monuments to the past and any push towards progress so that they can be enjoyed by people is resisted. Nobody is asking for Aston Hall to be demolished but the fact that we're barred from expanding slightly further into some trees 200m away from the hall is crazy to me. Surely the basketball court that is currently in that space is more of an affront to heritage than the historic stadium of one of the oldest football clubs in the world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: I think that's the plan for the Holte End car park. But that doesn’t help any of us in the Upper Trinity or North for getting a drink at the ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted February 17 VT Supporter Share Posted February 17 49 minutes ago, sidcow said: And for a bar in a tent we should be grateful. Tip our hat to the lord and masters and hope some gruel is thrown in to fortify us for the cold winters night. You’re going to ask for more aren’t you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted February 17 Administrator Share Posted February 17 42 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said: I'm generally against the wild overreach of heritage protection, it's a problem all over the world. There has to be a balance but there are groups of people for whom cities must exclusively be monuments to the past and any push towards progress so that they can be enjoyed by people is resisted. I can't speak for Oz, but cities in the UK have changed massively in the last ten years, primarily around reducing the number of cars and freeing up the space wasted on roads. There's plenty that can be done in cities without impacting historical or green spaces. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 1 hour ago, sidcow said: And for a bar in a tent we should be grateful. Tip our hat to the lord and masters and hope some gruel is thrown in to fortify us for the cold winters night. Gruel is £8 a bowl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 Just now, VillaJ100 said: Gruel is £8 a bowl And you have to bring your own bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 17 VT Supporter Share Posted February 17 19 minutes ago, sne said: And you have to bring your own bowl. Own bowl? This isn't London you know. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 8 minutes ago, sidcow said: Own bowl? This isn't London you know. Stupid Londoners think they are so great with their fancy gruel and soulless bowls 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderPower_14 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 28 minutes ago, limpid said: I can't speak for Oz, but cities in the UK have changed massively in the last ten years, primarily around reducing the number of cars and freeing up the space wasted on roads. There's plenty that can be done in cities without impacting historical or green spaces. Absolutely, it is similar in Oz, but it's basically always met with pushback even when it's a very positive public project that will enhance the use of the city for a large proportion of the residents. I live in Adelaide where we had Adelaide Oval, another historic old sporting ground, remodeled just over a decade ago. There was strong opposition from the usual nimby heritage obsessed types who similarly were complaining about encroachment on public parklands, and despite that the stadium has been a complete success and has enhanced the area and the entire city by any measure. I'm very supportive of maintaining or at least maintaining the level of green spaces over an area. But this is exactly the sort of scenario where the heritage listing can unnecessarily get in the way. We've already got pillars on the Aston Hall side of Trinity Road, and then there's a playground, a basketball court and more sporting facilities. In a perfect world you wouldn't have a stadium stand hanging over the road like it does, but Villa park has been open for 130 years. Aston Villa leaving the area for a modern stadium elsewhere would be of great detriment to both the heritage of the area, and the club. The grounds of Aston Hall are not going to be meaningfully impacted by us say, filling in the corner between the Holte and the Trinity. Obviously this is all pointless discussion if the club don't actually want to expand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) I come back to the point that while we may in theory be able to achieve some deal with the council that involved building something slightly into the park, it seems no easier or cheaper to do that than to replace the North Stand, which is clearly not fit for purpose. The Trinity Road Stand is not really our problem. If the club don't want to build backwards into a crappy car park we already own, they're not going to get into the wrangling with the council that would be required for building on the park, still less re-routing Trinity Road. Edited February 17 by HanoiVillan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thabucks Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) No chance we will look to extend the Trinity Road stand by squaring off the upper tier as the build costs would be huge for limited return and by nature these seats would be the least desirable. Maybe 30-50 years from now if we’re still locked into Villa park perhaps they look to add another tier like at Man Utd to the stand / rebuild completely. We had permission to extend part of the trinity highlighted to extend the corporate areas but this was dropped with the updated plans for the new North Stand for some reason. Edited February 17 by thabucks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen_Evans Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 I was just reading about Buckingham Group’s problems. I do wonder if the real reason for the cancellation is that we simply cannot find a contractor willing to build it at a sensible price, given how much financial protection a contractor would want in the current economic climate. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Stephen_Evans said: I was just reading about Buckingham Group’s problems. I do wonder if the real reason for the cancellation is that we simply cannot find a contractor willing to build it at a sensible price, given how much financial protection a contractor would want in the current economic climate. If it were that simple could Heck not just have said the current financial climate is one of the reasons rather than saying "we're not doing that" as it was a "bad idea" and we were "adding too many seats too fast". Edited February 17 by Captain_Townsend 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 23 minutes ago, Stephen_Evans said: I was just reading about Buckingham Group’s problems. I do wonder if the real reason for the cancellation is that we simply cannot find a contractor willing to build it at a sensible price, given how much financial protection a contractor would want in the current economic climate. This has always seemed like the most likely real reason IMO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 17 VT Supporter Share Posted February 17 3 hours ago, Stephen_Evans said: I was just reading about Buckingham Group’s problems. I do wonder if the real reason for the cancellation is that we simply cannot find a contractor willing to build it at a sensible price, given how much financial protection a contractor would want in the current economic climate. Where were you reading that out of interest? I'd very much like to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 17 VT Supporter Share Posted February 17 3 hours ago, Captain_Townsend said: If it were that simple could Heck not just have said the current financial climate is one of the reasons rather than saying "we're not doing that" as it was a "bad idea" and we were "adding too many seats too fast". Cocksucking fans wouldn't understand numbers. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 (edited) Out of interest and to get a better understanding, I've been reading articles from other clubs, fans, forums and journalists etc. From the likes of Newcastle, Man U, Everton, Chelsea etc. I know nothing about construction, but dealing alot of them makes it seem like large scale redevelopments are a greater risk ( Short, Medium and Long term ) and cost, than just building new stadium's altogether. It does seem Liverpool have redeveloped very successfully though. They all have the segregated camps of those who are loathe to leave their " home " and others who say it's time to move. Interesting. Edited February 18 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) I think there's too many limitations at Villa Park in pretty much every sense: from the experience as a fan, to financially as the club, for there to be just nothing major planned for Villa Park anymore. If expansion and modernisation is absolutely a no-go given the limitations of the site, the area, and FFP, I think it'd be a bit silly if NSWE and Atairos hadn't considered a new stadium at this point. At the very least, the club are clearly at a crossroads. It's a shame ground-sharing to absorb the financial hit of redeveloping Villa Park aggressively is off the table. It's sadly one of the many benefits of being a London club that they can just easily move into high-capacity stadiums with relative ease. At a big stretch you'd imagine the only stadium we could share would be the Molineux, which is both still a downgrade in capacity and regardless probably an absolute no-go for many good reasons. Just really don't see how much they can do with Villa Park given the spectre of FFP, and yet it's the spectre of FFP that's really showing Villa Park's age: especially compared to the modern, multi-venue builds that have more coherent and dedicated facilities for fans. Spurs' stadium is incredible and it looks like Everton will shape up to be very similar. Comcast/Atairos coming in may indicate that they're going to be a major player (with their huge investment and expertise in venue management) behind whatever the club chooses to do next. Edited February 19 by wishywashy 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wezbid Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 (edited) As an outsider not really knowing the area. What's the issue with expanding Villa Park? The houses surrounding? Would it be cheaper long term to home these people, elsewhere in new, bigger modern homes and have the room to play with? It's been years since I've been to VP and less than 10 times in my life. Edited February 20 by Wezbid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts