The Grandstand plans - a PAS Board update

I openly question the PASB over this for being "in" on this.

Tgwu wrote:

My source said It was a set up, give them something to complain and out of his magic hat a new stand appeared, the person said the plan is going to planning in April and they would not have time to change the foot print of the overall development if they did not have the new plans already The clue is in the first drawing of the stand.
Do not take your eye off the plan for the road because he is trying to keep it out of the public domain.

If the new stand is worthy of being called 'Grand', I don't think Brent would get too mush opposition as regards the road.

If he still tries to fob us off with 4,500, then the whole development really needs to be derailed by any means possible, and the road access could prove to be the hot potato.

I remain completely unconvinced. I demand more than a 4.5k capacity two tier stand. We're still left with a woefully inadequate capacity going forward which massiveley hinders any hope of progression post the brent era. A brent free Argyle may again be in a position start climbing back up the greasy pole and will need extra capacity and there is no chance in hell we can add seats at a later date - that's total bollocks. We have one chance to get this right and one chance only. 7-8K CAPACITY TWO TIER STAND IS NOT MUCH TO ASK FOR FFS!

It would be interesting to know how much more the new proposal is going to cost. 1 million, 2 million, 5 million, more? Either way it's not a sum of money even a property developer finds down the back of the sofa. Not unless it was there all the time.

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced.

Actually, I'm coming round to the idea that one tier may be just right. But I demand it is like this...



















































































[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced. I demand more than a 4.5k capacity two tier stand. We're still left with a woefully inadequate capacity going forward which massiveley hinders any hope of progression post the brent era. A brent free Argyle may again be in a position start climbing back up the greasy pole and will need extra capacity and there is no chance in hell we can add seats at a later date - that's total bollocks. We have one chance to get this right and one chance only. 7-8K CAPACITY TWO TIER STAND IS NOT MUCH TO ASK FOR FFS!

Freathers always gives me a bit of a giggle although his lack of any kind of grasp on reality mirrors plenty of others on this one.

The cost of building such a stand would be somewhere between £1500 and £2000 per seat, probably the lower end as the site is not a bitch, the extra 4000 empty seats he thinks is the right of the football club he doesn't even follow would come in conservatively at £6,000,000, that's a feck load of extra pasties you boys will have to shovel down, something the Porcine one will be able to help with.

Of course that etch a sketch they released wasn't the real plan, as it happens our trained monkeys went the other way to shut us up, they released some lovely drawings of what was supposed to be the new Sid James only to sit on their fat expense accounts for two years doing absolutely sweet FA, now they will not even talk about development, you muppets should be having a wild J Arthur based on the fact that it looks like you are going to get something you could never have afforded from your own efforts.

One tier, two tiers, 4k, 8k, just clap your flippers, guzzle down the fish and stop looking like a bunch of spoiled kids.

Czarcasm wrote:

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced.

Actually, I'm coming round to the idea that one tier may be just right. But I demand it is like this...


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

One tier is fine if you are not more interested in creating extra space for your enabling development, two tier means smaller footprint which in turn leaves more room for the real development.

ps. Nice of you to post a picture of a fan owned club's ground.

Mr Brent bandwagon moves on to the Theatre Royal on Thursday and would like the mass off Plymouth rate payers to attend.

A Yes or No did anybody spot his advert for this event in Mondays Herald

Czarcasm wrote:

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced.

Actually, I'm coming round to the idea that one tier may be just right. But I demand it is like this..




[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

That would be fine if it was 8,500 seater

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced. I demand more than a 4.5k capacity two tier stand. We're still left with a woefully inadequate capacity going forward which massiveley hinders any hope of progression post the brent era. A brent free Argyle may again be in a position start climbing back up the greasy pole and will need extra capacity and there is no chance in hell we can add seats at a later date - that's total bollocks. We have one chance to get this right and one chance only. 7-8K CAPACITY TWO TIER STAND IS NOT MUCH TO ASK FOR FFS!

For the new stand to take us forward it has to be bigger and better than what we had before. And before we could get around 7000 in the grandstand and on the Mayflower terrace.

This is the bare minimum in terms of capacity that we should be prepared to accept and I don't give two hoots for how many tiers it will have. That is just a distraction.

Tgwu wrote:

Mr Brent bandwagon moves on to the Theatre Royal on Thursday and would like the mass off Plymouth rate payers to attend.

A Yes or No did anybody spot his advert for this event in Mondays Herald

It was hid away on page 36 between car spares and personal phone chat lines.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced. I demand more than a 4.5k capacity two tier stand. We're still left with a woefully inadequate capacity going forward which massiveley hinders any hope of progression post the brent era. A brent free Argyle may again be in a position start climbing back up the greasy pole and will need extra capacity and there is no chance in hell we can add seats at a later date - that's total bollocks. We have one chance to get this right and one chance only. 7-8K CAPACITY TWO TIER STAND IS NOT MUCH TO ASK FOR FFS!

For the new stand to take us forward it has to be bigger and better than what we had before. And before we could get around 7000 in the grandstand and on the Mayflower terrace.

This is the bare minimum in terms of capacity that we should be prepared to accept and I don't give two hoots for how many tiers it will have. That is just a distraction.

I absolutely agree. Although I have a preference for a 2 tier stand, purely for asthetics, by far the most important issue is the capacity. It must be 7k minimum. Anything less is a massive retrograde step.

Tgwu wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Mr Brent bandwagon moves on to the Theatre Royal on Thursday and would like the mass off Plymouth rate payers to attend.

A Yes or No did anybody spot his advert for this event in Mondays Herald

It was hid away on page 36 between car spares and personal phone chat lines.

Really.

Budget to add an extra tier doesn't stretch to a prominent add in the sports pages.

Tgwu wrote:

My source said It was a set up, give them something to complain and out of his magic hat a new stand appeared, the person said the plan is going to planning in April and they would not have time to change the foot print of the overall development if they did not have the new plans already The clue is in the first drawing of the stand.
Do not take your eye off the plan for the road because he is trying to keep it out of the public domain.

The road. How wide will it need to be? Where exactly is it going to go?

It can't go between the conker trees because it is too narrow so it will have to go either immediately next to the Lyndhurst, on the existing field with the football pitch on it or the trees will need to be cut down.

Wherever it goes it will effectively slice that field away from the rest of the park which must mean that that field is going to be development land too because it'll be useless as park land.

Dougie wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Mr Brent bandwagon moves on to the Theatre Royal on Thursday and would like the mass off Plymouth rate payers to attend.

A Yes or No did anybody spot his advert for this event in Mondays Herald

It was hid away on page 36 between car spares and personal phone chat lines.

Really.

Budget to add an extra tier doesn't stretch to a prominent add in the sports pages.

This is something of a problem for him. As Argyle fans we all, well most of us, want the best and biggest stand we can get. That means less land for the rest of the project and it is the rest that will generate more reliable profit streams for him than Argyle is ever likely to. But the big prize is getting the project through at all. Once the extent of the plan becomes more widely known the people of Plymouth are likely to be quite hostile to such a build in Central Park.

Would that field be a good site for a studio school?

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced.

Actually, I'm coming round to the idea that one tier may be just right. But I demand it is like this...


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

One tier is fine if you are not more interested in creating extra space for your enabling development, two tier means smaller footprint which in turn leaves more room for the real development.

ps. Nice of you to post a picture of a fan owned club's ground.

No problem. The parallels with Exeter City and Borussia Dortmund are uncanny aren't they....

Dougie wrote:

I don't usually buy conspiracy theories but this one totally fits the bill. It makes heroes of Brent and his PASB.

Release crap picture. Even Brents proxy director is taken by surprise. It was two. Its changed 36 times already. Get involved in the consultation. The board will listen. Crap picture dissaapears from Higher Home Park website. Where coincidently every other part of the development has always been available in full computerised colourful CGI glory. Brents PASB has a quiet chat and tete a tit. Suddenly extra tier added. Money found. Design found. Seats found.

Stupid games if you ask me.

This. ^

Czarcasm wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Freathy wrote:

I remain completely unconvinced.

Actually, I'm coming round to the idea that one tier may be just right. But I demand it is like this...


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

One tier is fine if you are not more interested in creating extra space for your enabling development, two tier means smaller footprint which in turn leaves more room for the real development.

ps. Nice of you to post a picture of a fan owned club's ground.

No problem. The parallels with Exeter City and Borussia Dortmund are uncanny aren't they....

>>>>>>Sniggers<<<<<<

When the 'revised' (non)grand stand plans are finally unveiled (including the capacity which I'm now convinced will still only be 4,500 - hence why the club is being very quiet on it) there needs to be at least as much outcry as there was when that single tier abomination was unveiled the other day. As far as I'm concerned NOTHING has changed!

BRENT OUT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Person Of Interest wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

No problem. The parallels with Exeter City and Borussia Dortmund are uncanny aren't they....

>>>>>>Sniggers<<<<<<

I had a swift snigger myself, I was already halfway there though after I read the righteous indignation expressed by some who feel it would be a slight if the new stand didn't hold a minimum of 8k.

8k ?

That would leave you an average of 1500 empty green plastic seats in that one stand per game, not to mention 13,000 empty green plastic seats in the rest of your council paid for ground which itself surrounds on three sides the pitch you never paid for at all.

Beggars belief innit ?

Dougie wrote:

I don't usually buy conspiracy theories but this one totally fits the bill. It makes heroes of Brent and his PASB.

Release crap picture. Even Brents proxy director is taken by surprise. It was two. Its changed 36 times already. Get involved in the consultation. The board will listen. Crap picture dissaapears from Higher Home Park website. Where coincidently every other part of the development has always been available in full computerised colourful CGI glory. Brents PASB has a quiet chat and tete a tit. Suddenly extra tier added. Money found. Design found. Seats found.

Stupid games if you ask me.

This, but I think the proxy director is well aware.

Greenskin wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

Still no actual numbers though.

Exactly.Don't know if you've seen the poll on PASOTI but two of the options to be voted for are for a structure of between 4501-8000.Now that could be very easily and cynically spun as "Argyle fans vote for 4600 seater" when that would be far from the truth.Or am i being too cynical? Maybe best to wait until the plans and precise numbers are revealed but come what may,nothing less than something that will give us a definite capacity of 20000 minimum will do.

Looks like 5000 then.How surprising.

BRENT OUT-NOW!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

John_Doe says

Quote :

I've just seen the plans, and guess what - a 2 tier stand with a capacity of 4,800. The top tier is tiny!

Overall, I really appreciate what Brent is doing, I know that this grandstand won't cost PAFC, but the plans are ok at best. I want something to fill me with pride, not something that when I take my friends I feel like saying 'Looks a bit weird doesnt it'

The whole point of two tiers is a majestic structure that instills awe and pride. The plans I saw today do none of this.

The total capacity will be about 18,000.

There'll be lots of disappointed and angry people here over the next few days. I suggest that as well as venting frustration on here, you write to the club and express your feelings (in a constructive way of course :-) )

If the above is accurate Brent can take his hotel, ice rink & imax and fook off.

As predicted. Show them absolute crap and they'll settle for crap. So Argyle. So village. This was 'always' the plan

John_Doe
Post subject: Re: The Grandstand development - a PAS Board update (2 tier)Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:57 pm



Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Somewhere in SE Cornwall
I've just seen the plans, and guess what - a 2 tier stand with a capacity of 4,800. The top tier is tiny!

Overall, I really appreciate what Brent is doing, I know that this grandstand won't cost PAFC, but the plans are ok at best. I want something to fill me with pride, not something that when I take my friends I feel like saying 'Looks a bit weird doesnt it'

The whole point of two tiers is a majestic structure that instills awe and pride. The plans I saw today do none of this.

The total capacity will be about 18,000.

There'll be lots of disappointed and angry people here over the next few days. I suggest that as well as venting frustration on here, you write to the club and express your feelings (in a constructive way of course )