Turf Moor stadium development - Corner stands

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:43 pm

BleedingClaret wrote:Andy, don't waste your breath Pal..... apparently if we can't shift a few hundred mainly poor seats where you can get ****** wet through for 30 35 quid or for 40 odd quid the restricted view ones and all the singles too, then building some quality blocks of seats with good facilities to attract extra fans is futile.

In a lot of people's eyes Development = Capacity Increase and they can't see past that, they are blinkered by it (Including the Chairman if the fans forum is anything to go by.)

Development = Facility improvements, if that also means a modest increase in capacity then so be it but first and foremost the ground needs to catch up the 30 or so years it has lost to other clubs since the late 80's, this was a time when our ground was the envy of the majority of clubs outside the topflight and some in it.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:05 pm

What a bizarre attempt at arguing going on with this thread, but I'm not surprised when I spotted who it was

Glad the club have got an idea of what they're doing for disabled supporters and if it's got the full backing of the disabled supporters group then I'm not sure what fully abled people are complaining about as this doesn't concern them in the slightest.

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:09 pm

Sidney1st wrote:What a bizarre attempt at arguing going on with this thread, but I'm not surprised when I spotted who it was

Glad the club have got an idea of what they're doing for disabled supporters and if it's got the full backing of the disabled supporters group then I'm not sure what fully abled people are complaining about as this doesn't concern them in the slightest.

Exactly, the 'does he take sugar in his tea' mentality is not what is needed here, the regular users of our non existent and quite frankly embarrassing disabled facilities (if we can call them that) should be the driving force behind any designs, these are the people that know what is required and what they would like from their matchday experience.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:10 pm

Logic often goes out of the window when it comes to rebuilding new stands.

For some illogical reason fans would rather sit in an uncomfortable plastic seat than on a nice spacious wooden one.

You'd never sit on a plastic seat in your house, yet there is desire to sit on one in a football ground. Strange.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:12 pm

Definitely agree that the club need to be looking at giving the entire facilities a “feel” appropriate to our current status. It is now(ish) or never, the coffers will never be this full again.

Thinking purely of myself as an example, with a family and living a long way away, every year I need persuading to keep renewing, the hassle is significent. If we were back in the Championship, I’m not convinced I would do it unless we were having a great season. If the whole matchday experience was top notch, it would make the decision far easier. But it isn’t. Huge queues at half time and outside. Elbows like lances to get to the toilets. Heaven knows how I’d take my little un. Wash my hands in cold water, hello tummy bugs. Even in the upper tier we get wet if the wind and rain is strong.

Absolutely right to prioritise disabled (cos they have to), players and staff (and, a little grudgingly, I’d accept the corporates too fall into this category). Soon though, it’s time for the rest of us. Taking us for granted could, in the long term, be a huge mistake.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:21 pm

Huge queues at most grounds in the home sections though, same with elbows required and busy toilets.
It isn't unique to TM.

I've sat in the home end at a few grounds these last few years and they all give the same basic experiences of queues both inside and out.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:16 pm

The Club are not daft. They do not want to spend on improving facilities for the general fan, so twist every call for stadium developments as a call for increased ground capacity, when in reality people just want a smarter ground with better facilities. The fans don’t want posts in the way of their view, they don’t want cramped concourses, and they don’t want getting wet when there is supposed to be a roof on the stand they’re in. They also don’t want to be sat below pitch level, so any new stands need to have a front row around 4-5 feet higher than they are now on two sides.

The fans who automatically respond with “we don’t fill it now” want their head’s looking at too, because they’re the ones giving the club the excuse for not improving what we have. We have the money, and this isn’t 1969-1973, we have plenty of cash to spend a fraction of our manual income on the ground.

Juan Tanamera · Post by **Juan Tanamera** » Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:53 pm

Two things spring to mind here for me:
1). This is a thread about building two long overdue stands to accommodate our disabled supporters, so why people have twisted round to redeveloping the rest of the ground is a tad baffling.
2). If some of you do need to discuss redevelopment, how about we wait a few more season's of establishing ourselves before committing untold millions.
After all aren't Liverpool, arguably one of the wealthiest clubs in England/Europe only recently undergoing partial redevelopment of Enfield?

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:08 am

Juan Tanamera wrote:Two things spring to mind here for me:
1). This is a thread about building two long overdue stands to accommodate our disabled supporters, so why people have twisted round to redeveloping the rest of the ground is a tad baffling.
2). If some of you do need to discuss redevelopment, how about we wait a few more season's of establishing ourselves before committing untold millions.
After all aren't Liverpool, arguably one of the wealthiest clubs in England/Europe only recently undergoing partial redevelopment of Enfield?

I would have thought a club with the worldwide appeal and financial riches of the size of Liverpool would be able to redevelop an entire borough not just part of it.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:08 am

Juan, we are making huge profits right now. Massive! If we drop back down we will not be making huge profits, but huge losses. The time to invest is when you have money, not when you have none. The last time we had no money and had to invest in new stands we threw those eyesores up we have now. Cheaply built, they don’t line up, and the brickwork is flaking now. They’ll need replacing themselves in no time.

Actually though, the main thing people have been asking for as in right now is replacement cladding and new signage on the Bob Lord. We could pay for that with the players’ weekly swear jar, or whatever they have going. The ground, particularly at that side, is a disgrace to look at, and the clean up work won’t cost much.

Juan Tanamera · Post by **Juan Tanamera** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:20 am

Goody1975 wrote:I would have thought a club with the worldwide appeal and financial riches of the size of Liverpool would be able to redevelop an entire borough not just part of it.

But they haven't, so what is everyone seriously expecting us to do?
Personally, I'd rather see continued investment improving our team/squad.
Some of us of a certain vintage can remember arguably our best player at the time being sold to fund the Martin Dobson stand then being relegated soon after.
I think we all know how long it took to climb back up the ladder.
Small steps.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:27 am

Juan, read what I posted further up about the differences in finances between now and the early 70’s.

Goody1975 · Post by **Goody1975** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:32 am

[quote="Juan Tanamera"]

But they haven't, so what is everyone seriously expecting us to do?
Think you missed my poor attempt at humour over a simple spelling mistake.

Personally, I'd rather see continued investment improving our team/squad.
The two things can be done together, we are investing in the team year on year but also turning over a nice little profit each season to boot.

Some of us of a certain vintage can remember arguably our best player at the time being sold to fund the Martin Dobson stand then being relegated soon after.
As ClaretForever has alluded to earlier, we developed the ground in the late 60's/early 70's without the correct funding streams, something that can't be aimed at us now, it was only ever going to end in tears, the changing of the gambling laws in the late 60's put paid to the grandiose design that was originally planned for the Brunshaw Road Stand, it was built on a much smaller scale and finance was needed from somewhere.

I think we all know how long it took to climb back up the ladder.
See above

Small steps.
Sensible, well thought out steps.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:52 am

Juan Tanamera wrote:Two things spring to mind here for me:
1). This is a thread about building two long overdue stands to accommodate our disabled supporters, so why people have twisted round to redeveloping the rest of the ground is a tad baffling.
2). If some of you do need to discuss redevelopment, how about we wait a few more season's of establishing ourselves before committing untold millions.
After all aren't Liverpool, arguably one of the wealthiest clubs in England/Europe only recently undergoing partial redevelopment of Enfield?

In the article on the official site it is Garlick who mentions future development (or lack of) when talking about the corner stands.

Croydon Claret · Post by **Croydon Claret** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:45 am

If the drawings are accurate then each tier seems to only consist of a single row capable of housing the disabled supporters.

Seems like a wasted opportunity to not also add a few rows of tiered seating behind them to house a few extra able bodied people

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:08 am

The more I read it, the more I’m questioning where £5m is being spent.

“viewing platforms”/“elevated platforms”?

upload images url

RammyClaret61 · Post by **RammyClaret61** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:17 am

Elevated. It just means somewhere within the stadium that is not pitch level. Platforms are just wider terraces to fit wheelchairs.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:29 am

RammyClaret61 wrote:Elevated. It just means somewhere within the stadium that is not pitch level. Platforms are just wider terraces to fit wheelchairs.

I’ve thought about that as well, and understand wheelchairs need spaces, but it suggests to me a lack of facilities other than larger toilets. When you consider the space it will take up, with no mention of moving the fan zone, and you can see where the ticket office currently is, I can imagine it being gated access ramp and platform with perhaps a disabled toilet on each level. £5m? Really?

Top Claret · Post by **Top Claret** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:37 am

Before we start ripping apart our 4 existing stands lets establish ourselves has a Premier league club. Ground re development would be a waste of money if we slipped back down into the championship and struggled once again to make ends meet.

Lot of folk on here want it all at once and are good at spending other folks brass. When the pot runs dry they will be the first to complain, and say the club have wasted the money on ground improvements.

We should all be patient and let the directors get on with the brilliant job they are doing

jedi_master · Post by **jedi_master** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:33 am

Top Claret wrote:Before we start ripping apart our 4 existing stands lets establish ourselves has a Premier league club. Ground re development would be a waste of money if we slipped back down into the championship and struggled once again to make ends meet.

Lot of folk on here want it all at once and are good at spending other folks brass. When the pot runs dry they will be the first to complain, and say the club have wasted the money on ground improvements.

We should all be patient and let the directors get on with the brilliant job they are doing

I do agree with the thought behind this post, but playing devils advocate, if we win tonight we go 4th.

At some point the ground needs to be redeveloped, all four stands are dated at this point (the 'new' stands are 21 years old) and the two much older stands, whatever people thing of how comfy the seats are or the history of them etc need replacing massively if we are to improve our clubs image (inkeeping with the work done with the training ground/academy/club shop) and solidify ourselves as a progressive, modern club that provides great prospects to new signings (and managers, when SD leaves). In life you have to strike whilst the iron is hot, move on to a better job when your in demand etc etc, the same applies to infrastructure. Whilst it can be afforded without being a burden on the club (it's one off payments, upkeep would probably be minimal on modern stands compared to the constant barrel scraping concourse re-do's we seem to do every 5 years for the BL and CF Stands meaning that it won't affect the club financially after the good times end).

If we don't do this whilst we are raking it in (and we really, really are) then I have to say I can see Burnley having the Cricket Field and Bob Lord stands still standing looking very much the same when I am coming to the end of my days watching (and I am 31 in a matter of days...).

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:34 am

I don’t think you’re right, Top Claret. You talk about other people’s money, but I’d say that’s as much the fans money as the directors. They are merely custodians of our club I’d suggest, despite likely taking bonuses from profits, which I understand. Is it that investment in the ground affect the bonuses paid, so that’s what is putting them off? I’m not accusing, I’m asking. I also realise they can’t do it all at once, but a blind man on a galloping horse can see the state of the Bob Lord stand, for example, so to suggest no more investment for 5 years brings up questions, especially when they continually mention capacity, when most fans haven’t.

When we went down last time I was proud of the fact we were using the money correctly, investing in our training facility. IF we go down it would be nice to see the ground having been improved with the money too, rather than all going in player’s pockets. I don’t think, and correct me if I’m wrong, that £1-2m on a facelift of the older stands would impact the playing budget when we are making up to £30m profit at the moment?

Would £30m impact that when it would take 2 years from now before they would be able to start any improvements, therefore making more and more profits? I’m not sure it would, or should.

4:20 · Post by **4:20** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:54 am

Our European Cup win next season will pay for the ground refurbishments, even just being in it will pay for the lick of paint to the Bob Lord. Dare To Steam (the paint off)

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:12 am

Logic would say that in 10 years time we are likely to face a decade in the second or third tier, given the wealth that bigger clubs’ owners have. Look at Rovers, Wigan, Bolton, Preston etc.

More and more young Burnley fans and a % of the fanbase will move away from the town - that seems inevitable. More of our fanbase will be fair weather Premier League lures from the UK or overseas, who need to be retained.

We will need decent crowds to sustain us then and to give us a real chance again. Decent crowds will demand decent facilities. That means getting the cricket ground bought (a price they cannot refuse), a new CFS, a fanzone on that way in so fans walk through it on their way from the town. The club need to think big but not to build a big white elephant that has too large a capacity.

I’m all for establishing ourselves too, but we are probably as established now as we ever will be without the ground. We have the league position, manager, training facilities and fanbase. We now need the ground.

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:13 am

Really pleased with this development. (Can you feel a but coming?)

Just one thought...the wheelchair users currently sit by the pitch side and they are clearly going to be moved 30 or 40 feet away from the pitch. Are they happy with that? Maybe binoculars will be a good Christmas present?

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:14 am

You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time

John Lydgate

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:17 am

jedi_master wrote:I do agree with the thought behind this post, but playing devils advocate, if we win tonight we go 4th.

At some point the ground needs to be redeveloped, all four stands are dated at this point (the 'new' stands are 21 years old) ...

"dated" isn't a bad thing. My house is 200 years old, but I'm not planning to replace it with something made of plastic and steel. If there are actual problems with the stands then fair enough, but looking dated isn't one of them.

fatboy47 · Post by **fatboy47** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:22 am

LoveCurryPies wrote:Really pleased with this development. (Can you feel a but coming?)

Just one thought...the wheelchair users currently sit by the pitch side and they are clearly going to be moved 30 or 40 feet away from the pitch. Are they happy with that? Maybe binoculars will be a good Christmas present?

There's a difference between providing adequate facilities for a minority group, and pandering to the never-happys.

jedi_master · Post by **jedi_master** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:25 am

dsr wrote:"dated" isn't a bad thing. My house is 200 years old, but I'm not planning to replace it with something made of plastic and steel. If there are actual problems with the stands then fair enough, but looking dated isn't one of them.

Dated in facilities, concourse, turnstiles, commercial benefits etc etc - it's not just appearance (although in my mind, that is also a consideration. The Bob Lord looks an absolute dump on Harry Pott's Way at this point). An old looking house and an old looking football ground are totally different considerations.

Inchy · Post by **Inchy** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:35 am

Is the CFS going to last another 10/20 years? Maybe we should invest while we have cash because in a decade we could be skint again

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:37 am

fatboy47 wrote:There's a difference between providing adequate facilities for a minority group, and pandering to the never-happys.

Don't think it is fair to call wheel chair users 'never-happys'. My experience having met a few of them is they are a very happy, positive bunch.

Longside4evr · Post by **Longside4evr** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:15 am

On ground redevelopment when we arrived back in the top league in 2009 we had quite a bit of work to do to bring up our ground to scratch with the premier league criteria and with out too much destruction got it done
And so on when we have entered this league with pitch size and new flood lighting tunnel press boxes etc.
I am sure if we get into Europe that we would have to do more work to bring the ground up to European criteria.
If we as a club are thinking not just to cement our status in this league but to aim higher we surely must be in a prime position to be announcing plans to unveil at least a new stand in our planning now which i could only think with least disruption the Bob Lord as capacity in that stand is the least.
Come on Burnley Football Club now is the time to bring this club to the party UTC

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:54 pm

dsr wrote:"dated" isn't a bad thing. My house is 200 years old, but I'm not planning to replace it with something made of plastic and steel. If there are actual problems with the stands then fair enough, but looking dated isn't one of them.

Dated isn’t a bad thing, you’re right, but I’d bet any money that your 200 year old house needs regular upkeep, renovations from time to time to ensure it’s still habitable? Replacement cladding and signage on the Bob Lord, and maybe replacement roof cladding, is just like slate replacements, new windows, or painting the outside of your house. It adds to the kerb appeal, and you do it not just for yourself but for those who visit. It’s about being proud of what you have.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:59 pm

Is it possible to build a stand/stadium where the roof keeps spectators dry on the front rows?

There are plenty of times at the Etihad for example where they are wearing ponchos to keep themselves dry. And I'm not even sure you would be protected at Wembley when it rains hard and the wind is swirling around.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:07 pm

Spijed wrote:Is it possible to build a stand/stadium where the roof keeps spectators dry on the front rows?

Yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Stadium" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; but thats not really a viable option for Turf Moor... or is it...???

piston broke · Post by **piston broke** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:08 pm

To purchase the CF build a new stands with a fanzone and a multistorey car park behind it would be a massive improvement. The car park alone would soon pay for itself but as the club have said whilst we are only selling out 4 matches a year a total waste of money.
We must build slowly, starting with the team, so we don't find ourselves in the Bolton, Wigan, Pompey, Wovers, Bradford C., Swindon, Charlton, et al., model

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:27 pm

Rick_Muller wrote:Yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Stadium" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; but thats not really a viable option for Turf Moor... or is it...???

But it proves that unless you have a completely covered stadium that no normal roof on a stand can possibly keep the front row spectators dry.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:42 pm

Claretforever wrote:Dated isn’t a bad thing, you’re right, but I’d bet any money that your 200 year old house needs regular upkeep, renovations from time to time to ensure it’s still habitable? Replacement cladding and signage on the Bob Lord, and maybe replacement roof cladding, is just like slate replacements, new windows, or painting the outside of your house. It adds to the kerb appeal, and you do it not just for yourself but for those who visit. It’s about being proud of what you have.

I'm not arguing that the Bob Lord Stand doesn't need upkeep; just that it doesn't need replacing. At least, if it does need replacing it isn't because it looks old-fashioned..

Maybe they're skimping on renovations because they've got plans?

PS - the stone isn't painted, the 34-year old windows from sadly-lamented Nelson Glass are still perfect, and the 200 year old roof touch wood is not currently leaking. All's well!

Mala591 · Post by **Mala591** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:39 pm

Better to increase capacity in the Bob Lord stand and asign a section for the disabled.

----------------------------------------------
New Bob Lord extension for non-disabled fans
(2000 extra seats)
----------------------------------------------

Left hand
side section
of current
stand for
disabled
fans

_______________________________________________

clarethomer · Post by **clarethomer** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:17 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:Should we be spending a similar amount as to the last build dsr, seeing as you brought it into the conversation?

Let's bring the £6.5m spend up by inflation - I'm getting £11.88m based upon the date the old Longside came down.

11,880,000/14000 = spend of £848. 57 per head.

848.57 x 156 = £132,377

Are you saying we should be spending £132k for the disabled fans?

Wow.

Just one problem with your calculation and assumptions. Nobody values an increase in building costs by inflation.....

A good move by the club to do something for the disabled fans. I don't see why this has got into a full ground redevelopment debate?

One way I have looked at it is that most level headed fans would have been happy finishing 16th this season? If we finish top half, Im pretty sure this development would have been paid for by money not planned or expected.

The club are moving in the right direction and we must continue to trust their vision and plans as its proving very fruitful at the moment.

Claretforever · Post by **Claretforever** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:23 pm

My Vision

If it was money is no object (sort of), but we were to do things right, I’d start by removing seats!

I would remove the front 5-6 rows of the Longside lower for a start. That way all spectators in that stand would be sat above pitch level, giving them a decent view and likely keep them dry in the main. I’d also do the same with the Jimmy Mac Lower for the same reasons. At the end of each upper tier concourse I would have acces to the lower tier concourse to alleviate the crowding issues and take advantage of the larger lower tier space.

I would then move the pitch over about 5 metres, meaning the pitch would be aligned centrally with the Jimmy Mac, because the OCD in me goes mad when I see it not aligned. See below:

I’d then rebuild the Bob Lord AND Cricket Field Stand as an L shaped wrap around, going fursther back than the Bob Lord does now. The away fans would have 1,000 seats in the corner wedge, and 2,000 safe standing rail seat spaces at the Bob Lord side of the Cricket Field. The home fans would have around 3,000 similar spaces at the Longside end behind the goals.

It would probably hold around 24,000 in total, so not much more than it now does, allowing more away fans and SLIGHTLY more home fans, but I think it would look great and take advantage of what space we have.

Cost? £30m gets you an entire ground at Leicester a few years ago, so maybe £40m? If the viewing platforms are anything to go by it would cost £1 billion.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:01 am

Goody1975 wrote:In a lot of people's eyes Development = Capacity Increase and they can't see past that, they are blinkered by it (Including the Chairman if the fans forum is anything to go by.)

Development = Facility improvements, if that also means a modest increase in capacity then so be it but first and foremost the ground needs to catch up the 30 or so years it has lost to other clubs since the late 80's, this was a time when our ground was the envy of the majority of clubs outside the topflight and some in it.

If you mean like a wider seat for me and more pie stands then I'm in!

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:25 am

You build a new stand, you HAVE to have plastic seats. And it's impossible to make plastic as comfortable as wooden ones, unless you put padding on every seat, similar to the Emirates. But at a stadium like that it's impossible to generate any atmosphere.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Mon Mar 12, 2018 4:38 pm

Has building work started yet on the new stands, or the ticket office extension?