tom_widdows

I would like to clarify a few things about the sketch - I have no experience designing sports stadia. I have worked on public assembly buildings (Conference centres, wedding/ funeral venues among others), but stadiums are a specialist design category hence why the usual suspects end up designing them - Arup, Barr, Miller Partnership to name a few - 12670 is closer to 12500 which I believe was the clubs original figure. - The sketch footprint is based on a scanned OS Map used by AFC for a planning application to install temporary ticket portakabins outside the RDS which I downloaded from the ACC planning portal. It was then scanned into Autocad, scaled as closed as possible to 1:1 using visible scale bar and then traced. OS Maps are good but they are not 100% accurate and are certainly not a substitute for a proper measured survey. The original map could be out by a couple of metres and tracing over pixelated lines may have made it even less accurate. In short this sketch should not be used to accuse the club of 'lying to the fans'. The club may have appointed far more qualified people than me to look at this and were give advice without the need for any drawings. I have advised people not to proceed with building projects which would not achieve what they desired without needing to produce any drawings. Some ignored me & succeeded, but others ignored me and got their fingers burnt and their bank accounts emptied. As far as I am aware stadiums require at least 2 emergency vehicular access/ egress points. There is an existing access road/ path in that corner and I felt this would be the logical place to install it. Filling in the corner would also require structural alterations to the RDS to remove the a chunk of the windshield, perhaps even the structural lattice frame and would also result in one of my pet hates - modern stands which do not tie in with their existing neighbours- Stamford bridge, Valley Parade, The Valley, Tannadice all spring to mind. The stands I have shown are like Tyncastle compared to the shallower RDL Gradients. IMO The expense of messing around with the RDS offset against the number of seats you would gain and the final appearance does not add up. Take the two blocks you have shown and add the one immediately next to it. Those are semi detached houses = 6. The bon accord golf club house could possibly be retained but the current road access would may need to be changed. Pittodrie Street is a wide Collector/ Distributer Road (may even be classed as an arterial road) and re-routing it means you have to ensure it is no worse than existing. The new stretch would also need to comply with all the modern road regulations - sight lines, corner radiuses, drainage routes, pavement widths, pedestrian crossings. Re-routing it a few metres as you said would be pointless as in doing so you would remove the clubs argument that they could still use it as an emergency muster point. If you are going to the expense of moving a road and want a decent size main stand the whole road needs to be re-routed well clear of the existing main stand. I'd say the only way to re-route the road is as per the sketch below. This would allow for decent sized main stand plus external concourse. To prevent a hairpin bend at Merkland Lane you would need space to provide the required corner hence the loss of at least 6 houses. If the new route then turned again to reconnect with the existing Golf road junction (ie wrapping around a new main stand) it would cut a chunk off the stand (Fir Park, Rugby Park spring to mind). The other problem with this re-routing malarky is the loss of stadium car parking. I doubt the council would allow that even if the capacity was reduced. You can't park cars on a pedestrian concourse on match days The height issue comes down to the following. - Is there actually enough space within the site boundary to build as high as the RDS - Unfortunately not - Those flats being in the South West Corner mean they have been designed to get a certain level of sunlight to the windows and Garden areas based on the surrounding area - When you extend or building anything nearby the local planning regulations kick in. Increasing the depth and/or height of the existing south stand will affect the current sunlight path of those wonderful giant blocks of flats which now cover more than half the south stand (wasnt aware they had extended right up to the away support concourse). To give you some context I had to reduce the size of a small single storey rear extension to a house (4m x 6m )because it failed the 45degree sunlight path test in relation to the neighbours garden. The extension was less than 3.5m high. The South stand would need to pass both the 25degree & 45degree tests (http://www.firstinarchitecture.co.uk/designing-for-daylight-45-and-25-degree-test/). I estimate the existing one is about 18m high and I seriously doubt it would pass any of the tests if the height and or depth was increased. Building in a built up urban environment is a very different beast from a large empty field. The lack of space around Pittodrie is the ball&chain that will hold it back as you have to fit modern regulations into a constrained environment. Kingsford is a blank canvas so at the moment pretty much anything design wise is possible. There seems a belief that greenbelt land is some sort of mythical protected beast that can never be touched however it is often easier to form a case for building in such areas than it is for causing significant disruption in a predominantly urban residential area. Kingsford has less chance of utilities being accidentally cut off, roads being closed, property being damaged, residents being disturbed by the charming individuals that make up a large portion of your average building site staff. Perhaps ACC see the Kingsford move as a way of removing a potential troublesome element of society away from the city centre. (I am often ashamed to be associated with some of the people who frequent football stadiums these days.) I wish I could say the planning process is straight forward but it isn't. It is often slow, confusing & tedious and at its worst you could say is blatantly corrupt.

According to Sportsound last saturday of that £750K hibs would only see about £500k as the rest would be heading to St Mirren.

Dugdale gone http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41082916

This sketch is very rough but it is my own work and has not been sanctioned by Aberdeen Football Club. It has been created using publicly available documents/ images and is for discussion only. Capacity - Approx 12,670 + whatever corporate boxes could be fitted in the Main. The pitch is the current maximum size permitted by UEFA (future proofing for when they decide to play silly buggers again) with a 3m wide grass run off and 5m wide track. The Stand gradients are the the steepest currently permitted (Tynecastle style) with the current minimum aisle (1200mm) and row (750mm) widths. I may have gone over the top with the number of disabled seats and vomitories but I have also made the assumption it would be possible to build a retaining wall strong enough to hold back the SS car park and not screw up the Flats behind so as to provide both an emergency vehicle path and a high level concourse under the stand for fans, plus that the council would continue to allow Merkland Lane/ Pittodrie street to be used as emergency dispersal areas (as they currently are) Stand heights are based on the existing stand heights (obtained by counting bricks). There may perhaps be scope to add a couple more rows to the merkland given it backs onto a car-park but it would only add about 400 seats max. Main stand would be a smaller version of Boca Junior's Admin block/ stand. For those who continue to suggest re-routing Pittodrie street, I happened to be running around the stadium last Sunday and by my estimates to do this would require the club to purchase at least 6 houses and both the Bon Accord & Caledonian Golf Club Houses. Compulsory purchase orders are very hard/ expensive to get and even harder when you are messing around with public roads. Could end up waiting 5 years just to get permission and then face the appeals process all the while putting money on the lawyers pockets. The club would perhaps have to emulate what Hearts are doing with the neighbouring Nursery, and build new club houses for the Golfers into a new stand/ admin block. Anyway I'm away to stock up on canned food, shotguns & tin hats, and dig myself a fall out shelter.

In or Oot: In, a day out for me Pre: Train most likely Faraboots: Whatever I'm given Post: David Sedaris @ the Usher Hall Prediction: 0-0 (Because I'm going) Crowd: 28,322 Would love it if the largest crowd of the weekend was Hearts Vs Aberdeen

U20s team through to the 2nd round after beating st Johnstone U20s Sevco, Tic, Dundee, Hibs, Killie all knocked out already.

The English system is certainly quicker but I have my reservations about it especially given how bad the English Building Regs are. In my experience the local council inspectors will issue a minimum of 10 queries for any warrant many of which can be taken care of with a phone call however the record I have received was 120 which was for a fairly large residential conversion. For Projects in England the most I think I had was 15 queries and I don't recall having to make any changes to the drawings (it was a very complex building too) whereas up here it is rare you will obtain a warrant without several drawing revisions. The Scottish system has helped me learn the Regs so I usually have an idea of what is possible before a line is even drawn. The English system on the other hand almost seems to treat regulations as a rough guideline allowing a lot more freedom for the designer and, in recent cases with external cladding, the specifier and contractor. I believe those newly built Edinburgh Schools which had severe problems a few years back were allowed to be passed under a self certification scheme which dented the hopes of people who want the English system brought North of the Border I will be interested to see what the review of the English system proposes and whether or not the approved inspectors will be allowed to continue without more Government control.

Its only the planning stage at the moment. They would need to obtain Building Warrant before they can legally start construction plus there is also the headache of obtaining new utilities which in itself can take up to a year. I haven't had any recent dealings with Aberdeen City Building Control but I would be surprised if they weren't struggling like every other Council in the land so I doubt the warrant would be granted quickly. For anything more complex than a small house extension it seems to be taking local council's minimum 8 months to approve a warrant (We had one which took 16 months of which 3 months was actually spent waiting for the Council's admin team to get round to issuing the documents.

Give me a couple of weeks till I get back from holiday. (Knowing my luck the club will beat me to it)

Approx £200k in fees Option 1 Somehow Relocate a publicly owned road so that it doesn't affect existing surrounding private property and still provide enough space for a new football stand meeting all modern regulations including the external emergency evacuation area/ concourse = Loss of existing stadium car park. Existing situation made worse ergo immediately in trouble with planning & building control Option 2 Somehow buy public owned road = Purchase price + additional cost of improving surrounding roads to make up for loss of main arterial access/ unobstructed emergency vehicle access + compensation to existing residents/ businesses. Blocking light for the flats behind is a minor concern compared to providing -Emergency vehicle access route behind stand + modern terracing construction and seating/ circulation space requirements + emergency concourse break out area. South stand is a former terrace which was never actually designed to be seated hence the bad views, terrible circulation and also the high capacity Planning regs do not allow half assed solutions such as that. Gaining additional height would require the same method as gaining additional width. Buy the flats and demolish them. No compulsory purchase orders for such a development so its market price + whatever the residents demand. Would me finishing off a couple of simple cad cross sections cutting through the 3 new stands and showing a new pitch plus a very basic seating plan help as given the way this thread keeps bouncing back with the same arguments I am willing to give it a go and post it?

(Manc gets in ahead of me) I don't find it bizarre because I earlier this year I spent several hours sketching out a cad model of 3 redeveloped stands the pittodrie site and concluded the 12000 figure was about right. My cad model was only based on providing the seating areas in stands modern concourses & fire exits, and I gave up even trying to start playing around with adding UEFA compliant media, changing, medical facilities, or corporate boxes, Club Admin areas, supporters bar/ cafes etc. Even when Manc pointed out my pitch track size could be reduced it didn't make much difference as the capacity was still the 12-13k mark Do you seriously want the club for fork out Architects, Engineers, Planning Consultant fees for a fully detailed stadium design (not a simple cad model like I did) conclusively proving a renovated Pittodrie will only have a 12-13k? I get the impression that even if they did that there are some people who wouldn't accept it and demand a '2nd opinion' because 'surely there are modern construction techniques that must make it possible'

The oldest living race of humans on the planet summed up in a way that could have been taken straight from the colonial invaders whilst they carried out their mass genocide. Could you not think of anything relevant to the topic in hand or is the sort of stuff you usually pedal as you make your merry way to the stack of Daily Mails?

So pretty much the same experience you get from leaving pittodrie (if requiring a bus)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/40921924 BBC actually tags this 'Warning: Some people may consider some scenes to be offensive'

Off the ball read out an email from a hibs fan which went on about how great they were and finished by claiming their biggest problem at the moment was Easter Road not being big enough, the evidence seemingly being their 17,634 opening day crowd against Thistle (about 2800 empty seats) Cosgrove & co then prolonged this and even added fuel to it but all parties handily forgot the 8,135 home crowd from the midweek cup game (about 12300 empty seats). I'd like to think the fan had their tongue firmly in their cheek but I suspect not

Seems its been deleted

what about 'Young Lust' and 'Hey You'?

Take it there are no 'non-red tv' clips of the goal?

What are the 4 songs? (Presume Comfortably numb is one of them?)

Strikers: Storey 1 Midfielders: Christie 2 Mackay-Steven 1 Mclean 1 Stewart 1 Shinnie 1 Defenders: O'Connor 1

The Rhinestone Cowboy just rode out aged 81 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40870474

FFS Manc get yer finger out New season! Rules: 1. One name per points tally for the season, first come first served! 2. Allowed to change guess at any point as along as it is to an empty tally 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 - EdmontonDandy 81 80 - Ten Caat 79 78 - Rico 77 76 75 74 73 72 - Elgindon 71 70 69 68 - Tom Widdows 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 -------- Previous Champions: 2009-10: Dave_min (41 points) 2010-11: BigAl (38 points) 2011-12: Snapper (41 points) 2012-13: Tyrant (48 points) 2013-14: 2014-15: Dandy (75 points) 2015-16: Dandy (retained due to no correct scorer) 2016-17: Rico (76 points - Flawless Victory. Nothing questionable about it at all)

Ice Hockey Style. Would certainly stop this 'The keeper wasn't on the line' or 'they stopped before kicking it' bullshit

Strikers: Storey 1 Midfielders: Christie 2 Mackay-Steven 1 Stewart 1 Shinnie 1 Defenders: O'Connor 1