The Aberdeen Mega-Hyper New Stadium Thread

[Dunty]

6 hours ago, EdTheDuck said:

..aaaand there we have it. Anyone with a different POV is stupid, we just don't understand because we're thick.

The debt for Kingsford has reduced from at least £20M to £7M according to you despite the cost of the build rising from $40M to £50M but we're stupid? Maybe we have found that elusive Magic Money Tree? You demand answers but fill your posts with unashamed "Party Doctrine" based on the decrees of The Great Leader and nothing else?

If I wasn't a gentleman I would probably use swear words at you but I won't

 

It isn't according to me, it's what Aberdeen believe their debt/mortage will be. It's in the stadium application.

You're suggesting Aberdeen should choose a more expensive project (which increases the debt - that isn't a party line, it's simple maths) and reduce their capability to pay off that debt.

 

3 hours ago, HibsFan said:

My solution would be to wait things out, as always in football people come and go, but stadiums can be there for hundreds of years. Milne is an utter fraud and, without being too morbid, if you wait for his death, I'm sure you'll see that Pittodrie is perfectly viable as a football ground once again.

 

Well, we've found the village idiot there. Thanks for that input.

 

1 hour ago, strichener said:

Aberdeen can redevelop on site.  Aberdeen will not put any effort into showing that Pittodrie can be re-developed simply because they don't want this as a solution.  Their latest submissions still do not show that they have exhausted other possibilities.

The idea that the current site could only house a 12k stadium is almost as ludicrous as stating that Kingsford is the only option.

A 20,000 capacity stadium? Go ahead, tell us how it can be done. And if your examples are Tynecastle and Easter Road then you need to think again, because modern building regulations won't allow it, and their height would block the light to the flats behind the Pittodrie.

[aDONisSheep]

6 minutes ago, Aberdeen Cowden said:

Millions of his own?? Really.

Aye, millions!  At my last count he'd spunked circa £9m on various share issues and debt write offs, but that was before the recent big debt write off so I'd guess it is well north of £9m now.

Some of it was because of his own miss-guided largesse, particularly in the 90s when it was not unknown for Aberdeen to lose £3m plus a year.

Yours

aDONis

 

[kingjoey]

15 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

To be fair Robinson probably went in with the best of intentions as well

What does that have to do with Stewart Milne? 

[lubo_blaha]

There is absolutely no chance that you could only redevelop Pittodrie to 12k. The RDS alone holds 6220. The rest of the ground holds 14,627 (not including around 1000 seats we're not allowed to sell for H+S reasons). Are we really meant to believe that an area that we'd only be able to have 6000 people in an area that currently hold 14,000+?

Obviously opportunities were missed to purchase the surrounding land when the gas works and timber yard were turned into flats. Don't know all the ins and outs but surely that would have made sense looking forward. It also probably scuppers ever building up the way with the planning constraints involved with nearby housing.

 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

What does that have to do with Stewart Milne? 

I refer you to my previous post expressing deja vu when reading about Milnes efforts to sell the clubs home

And hibsfan’s reference to it suggesting that both were “Shysters”

[PauloPerth]

10 hours ago, lubo_blaha said:

There is absolutely no chance that you could only redevelop Pittodrie to 12k. The RDS alone holds 6220. The rest of the ground holds 14,627 (not including around 1000 seats we're not allowed to sell for H+S reasons). Are we really meant to believe that an area that we'd only be able to have 6000 people in an area that currently hold 14,000+?

I agree.

If you replaced one of the stands behind the goals at McDiarmid Park with the Richard Donald Stand, we'd have a capacity of just over 15,000. 

So all Aberdeen would have to do is build 3 stands identical to McDiarmid Park, and the capacity would be over 15,000, yet we're meant to believe the biggest capacity physically possible is 12,000. It is plainly the biggest pile of shite you'll ever hear.

I think 20,000 is very manageable.

[fatshaft]

13 hours ago, strichener said:

Aberdeen can redevelop on site.  Aberdeen will not put any effort into showing that Pittodrie can be re-developed simply because they don't want this as a solution.  Their latest submissions still do not show that they have exhausted other possibilities.

The idea that the current site could only house a 12k stadium is almost as ludicrous as stating that Kingsford is the only option.

Again, under modern regs, not the case, T-W is an architect, he admits he did a back of the fag packet mock up, but feels the club are more or less on the money.

 

I'd suggest he probably knows better than you or I?

[fatshaft]

12 hours ago, Aberdeen Cowden said:

A "punt" in this case is buying something of little value because there isn't permission to do anything with it. Any losses would be minimal.

The Kingsford site would be worth millions with planning permission. Don't think the owners of the site will be getting much, do you?

AC, you seem to be totally missing the point, purchase is dependent on receiving planning permission for the stadium. Planning consent would only be for the stadium. there's no punt here at all. The amount of land being bought and re-zoning being sought is solely for the football activities. You seem to think there's some cunning master plan that you're not expanding on?

[strichener]

9 minutes ago, fatshaft said:

Again, under modern regs, not the case, T-W is an architect, he admits he did a back of the fag packet mock up, but feels the club are more or less on the money.

 

I'd suggest he probably knows better than you or I?

So a professional architect does a bag of the fag packet calculation and that is supposed to be it.  Architect and structural engineers make mistakes all the time when they actually take the time to try and do their job properly.  Anyway, one guy backing an Aberdeen design does not make it the only option.

As for this continued mention of H & S and modern regs - exactly what H & S legislation or modern regs would require a reduction on seating capacity to the extent of a near 50% reduction?  Absolute fantasy.

Edited December 11, 2017 by strichener

[Dunty]

3 hours ago, strichener said:

So a professional architect does a bag of the fag packet calculation and that is supposed to be it.  Architect and structural engineers make mistakes all the time when they actually take the time to try and do their job properly.  Anyway, one guy backing an Aberdeen design does not make it the only option.

As for this continued mention of H & S and modern regs - exactly what H & S legislation or modern regs would require a reduction on seating capacity to the extent of a near 50% reduction?  Absolute fantasy.

Well the club believe the capacity would be around 12,000 - 14,000.

An independent architect which the other poster alludes to actually said 12,600, and admitted if he made various alternations he might get it to 13,000.

Where are the architects coming out and saying "that's bullocks, here's how you would get 20,000"?

To build a 20,000 capacity stadium, the club need to increase the footprint. At the very least, they need to build on the main road behind the main stand. At worst, they need to completely knock down all four stands and start again, maybe purchase some of the road behind the RDS, maybe even turn the stadium 90 degrees. 

No-one is saying it's impossible - what we're saying is it would cost the sort of sums that are far outwith Aberdeen's reach, not because the chairman wants to make money off some flats, but because he doesn't want to liquidate the club.

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Dunty said:

Well the club believe the capacity would be around 12,000 - 14,000.

An independent architect which the other poster alludes to actually said 12,600, and admitted if he made various alternations he might get it to 13,000.

Where are the architects coming out and saying "that's bullocks, here's how you would get 20,000"?

To build a 20,000 capacity stadium, the club need to increase the footprint. At the very least, they need to build on the main road behind the main stand. At worst, they need to completely knock down all four stands and start again, maybe purchase some of the road behind the RDS, maybe even turn the stadium 90 degrees. 

No-one is saying it's impossible - what we're saying is it would cost the sort of sums that are far outwith Aberdeen's reach, not because the chairman wants to make money off some flats, but because he doesn't want to liquidate the club.

Give me £20k and I will get an architect to show you how to get 20k into the site.  ACC obviously don't have an issue with moving Pittodrie St. as they have already provided AFC with approval for plans that does exactly that.

I understand what you are stating in terms of cost, however neglecting your house for 25 years comes at a cost...

Edited December 11, 2017 by strichener

[shootingboots]

26 minutes ago, strichener said:

Give me £20k and I will get an architect to show you how to get 20k into the site.  ACC obviously don't have an issue with moving Pittodrie St. as they have already provided AFC with approval for plans that does exactly that.

I understand what you are stating in terms of cost, however neglecting your house for 25 years comes at a cost...

Have they? 

[strichener]

5 minutes ago, shootingboots said:

Have they? 

Yes.  It would appear that the link to the ACC planning application documents no longer work and there is now no documents to view the details of the housing.  Luckily, AFC have already attempted to sell the site and the document clearly shows this.

 

[fatshaft]

13 minutes ago, shootingboots said:

Have they? 

no

[lionel hutz]

Just noticed that there;s an massive amount of land just South of the Don, or is that not an option for some reason?

The smaller shape is the size of one football pitch for reference.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Marr1

[fatshaft]

That's the 6 holer plus quite a large part of the 18 holer

[strichener]

13 minutes ago, fatshaft said:

no

Yes - here is the Pittodrie Street part of the  "Masterplan" that has been approved by ACC.  You will notice that Pittodrie street has been moved.

 

 

[gkneil]

10 minutes ago, strichener said:

Yes - here is the Pittodrie Street part of the  "Masterplan" that has been approved by ACC.  You will notice that Pittodrie street has been moved.

 

 

Pittodrie Street still meets Golf Road at the same place though. It also show's Merkland Road East has been extended there is a new road joinging Pittodrie Street and Merkland Rd E at 1 or maybe even 2 new points.

[Dunty]

1 hour ago, strichener said:

Give me £20k and I will get an architect to show you how to get 20k into the site.  ACC obviously don't have an issue with moving Pittodrie St. as they have already provided AFC with approval for plans that does exactly that.

I understand what you are stating in terms of cost, however neglecting your house for 25 years comes at a cost...

Sure you could get an architect to answer the question "Could you build a new 20,000 capacity stadium on the current footprint" for much cheaper than 20k.

 

If it was possible to purchase the main road off the council, then maybe it's doable. Hearts built a 6,500 main stand for £14m, so maybe ours costs the same, though their costs are spiralling and that's after cost cutting in the first place (no executuve boxes for a start). 

Hibs paid £6m for the east stand so maybe we pay the same for a new south stand (though would be smaller, probably around 4,000). Constructions costs have risen since then though. Merkland we could leave for a few years.

Minimum £20m for two new stands (which is ambitious), plus £10m training ground, plus the cost of one year without the main stand and another year without the south. Maybe, just maybe, it costs us £35m and that's being very hopeful.

And that is presuming the council allow us to build a significantly taller main stand than it is just now. Remember the RDS was to be at the Merkland side and was rejected because residents complained.

Pretty sure an architect would rubbish all that anyway but, to re-iterate my point, it's dependent on a bigger footprint and the council actually giving the club some help. 

And I think it's likely once an architects goes through it you're looking at a more realistic 17,000 - 18,000 capacity.

Edited December 11, 2017 by Dunty

[strichener]

40 minutes ago, gkneil said:

Pittodrie Street still meets Golf Road at the same place though. It also show's Merkland Road East has been extended there is a new road joinging Pittodrie Street and Merkland Rd E at 1 or maybe even 2 new points.

I stated that ACC were happy for AFC to move Pittodrie Street and some have stated that this is not the case.  Quite clearly the street has been moved even though the stend points are the same.  The relevant point is that ACC and specifically the roads department have not raised any objections on this part of the plans.  This shows that the council is willing to show a degree of flexibility around the site.