Main Stand

[Basha73]

Trying to get civil servants to all agree and pass things takes 800 meetings, which must include inclusivity and diversity managers and loads of cake. Add into that the fact they have been 'working' from home and voila, fuck all gets done.

The can't even fix the potholes, never mind rubber stamp a complex erection. Ooh, that reminds me.

Oh dear.

You do realise that potholes are the remit of local councils and not civil servants in the sense you are talking about? The same for planning permission…?

Beyond that, you may be right about senior civil servants and meetings but overall you just continue to display your complete ignorance of both the civil service and home working.

Unless you would like to produce some evidence about productivity of home workers and specifically civil servant home workers…?

 

[radfordinlondon]

Sad to say but I think that's the end of the idea of a new main stand and other much needed ground improvements. Instead of welcoming the project with open arms Rushcliffe Borough Council have obstructed the proposals from the start and the club have finally given up. " it's been like wading through treacle" the phrase used by Nick Randall says it all. They should hang their heads in shame.

I agree. What a disgrace. If we get promoted, might see renewed pressure to approve.

Massive wasted opportunity

 

[Strett]

Oh dear.

You do realise that potholes are the remit of local councils and not civil servants in the sense you are talking about? The same for planning permission…?

Beyond that, you may be right about senior civil servants and meetings but overall you just continue to display your complete ignorance of both the civil service and home working.

Unless you would like to produce some evidence about productivity of home workers and specifically civil servant home workers…?

You see. Always someone else's job. Scousers would be perfect for this profession.

"That's their job, not ours; look we can talk about it next Tuesday, when I'll join the MS Teams meeting about 10:30 after I've taken my dog for a walk"

 

[Basha73]

You see. Always someone else's job. Scousers would be perfect for this profession.

"That's their job, not ours; look we can talk about it next Tuesday, when I'll join the MS Teams meeting about 10:30 after I've taken my dog for a walk"

You are the one spouting bollocks about civil servants and homeworkers so up to you to prove it.

Bearing in mind my job brings me into close contact with business owners and the self-employed, I could easily make generalisations albeit with more evidence to back it up. But I don’t.

Scousers, however… They are all see you next Tuesdays so go for it…

 

[sherwood]

The additional costs origianlly demanded by the City and County Councils according to the Athletic article are unbelievable - bridge maintenance, bus stops, contrbution to the new foot bridge over the Trent, £700k towards schools, park and ride, extra buses, pedestrain crossing improvements, subsidising bus travel etc etc.

Thw Athletic says the City Council have dropped their demands but no reply from the County.

I am sure there are reasonable contributions the club would make but the Councils have been taking the piss.

You would hope for better support for a venture enjoed by many and one whoch creates revenue across lots of areas. FFS Derby Council were looking at buying P Park...

MIssed a massive trick here what a fucking shambles.

Is this standard stuff for all clubs when improving their facilities?

 

[Basha73]

The additional costs origianlly demanded by the City and County Councils according to the Athletic article are unbelievable - bridge maintenance, bus stops, contrbution to the new foot bridge over the Trent, £700k towards schools, park and ride, extra buses, pedestrain crossing improvements, subsidising bus travel etc etc.

Thw Athletic says the City Council have dropped their demands but no reply from the County.

I am sure there are reasonable contributions the club would make but the Councils have been taking the piss.

You would hope for better support for a venture enjoed by many and one whoch creates revenue across lots of areas. FFS Derby Council were looking at buying P Park...

MIssed a massive trick here what a fucking shambles.

Is this standard stuff for all clubs when improving their facilities?

There will always be ‘negotiations’ but most Councils are pretty reasonable and are just looking for a sweetener that helps them out a bit. Others are greedy bastards though and everyone ends up losing.

 

[Trickytreesreds]

The additional costs origianlly demanded by the City and County Councils according to the Athletic article are unbelievable - bridge maintenance, bus stops, contrbution to the new foot bridge over the Trent, £700k towards schools, park and ride, extra buses, pedestrain crossing improvements, subsidising bus travel etc etc.

Thw Athletic says the City Council have dropped their demands but no reply from the County.

I am sure there are reasonable contributions the club would make but the Councils have been taking the piss.

You would hope for better support for a venture enjoed by many and one whoch creates revenue across lots of areas. FFS Derby Council were looking at buying P Park...

MIssed a massive trick here what a fucking shambles.

Is this standard stuff for all clubs when improving their facilities?

When you have useless councils like ours, that have made more fuck ups and wasting rate payers money like water. Then you can understand them trying to hijack cash from somewhere.
From failed Energy companies, to Rainbow coloured crossings.
That isn't NFFC's fault though, blame the voters electing these ass holes.

 

[finbar70]

There will always be ‘negotiations’ but most Councils are pretty reasonable and are just looking for a sweetener that helps them out a bit. Others are greedy bastards though and everyone ends up losing.

This doesn’t take 3 years though. 3 months max for normal, intelligent business people.

as some have said on here, and despite the 3m in fees and feasibility studies paid to date, we might as well look for a new location and build new now. If fucking Brentford can build their ground in the middle of that urban sprawl, then building 1 and a quarter stands (Bridgford extension) should have been completed by now

absolute joke

 

[jbacsta]

lol jbcasta will love me repeating for approaching 3 years that it would take 3 years to get the go ahead. I think that's 3 years would be this summer so could line up perfectly with our promotion. Maybe that was the plan all along :)

What a visionary post that has turned out to be. The club wanted this development as fast as it could have been done. You were completely wrong. It has been scuppered by a mixture of bungling and ineptitude by typical local authority and government quango jobs worths.

 

[ZedRed]

What a visionary post that has turned out to be. The club wanted this development as fast as it could have been done. You were completely wrong. It has been scuppered by a mixture of bungling and ineptitude by typical local authority and government quango jobs worths.

I think it's high time EM made them an offer they can't refuse.

 

[jbacsta]

Just as a matter of interest for those of you that sit in the main stand. The industry standard for the life of asbestos sheeting is 50 years. It then starts to decompose and shed fibres. The main stand roof and claddings are all largely asbestos.

 

[Trickytreesreds]

Just as a matter of interest for those of you that sit in the main stand. The industry standard for the life of asbestos sheeting is 50 years. It then starts to decompose and shed fibres. The main stand roof and claddings are all largely asbestos.

That is a very good point.

A defunct material now and highly carcinogenic.
Its time is up and I'm amazed this hasn't been raised by someone else regarding H&S

 

[jbacsta]

The phrase ignorance is bliss comes to mind. Actually the RICS rates the life expectancy of an asbestos cement roof to be between 25 and 40 years, 50 years is pushing it a bit. The main stand in its current form is 54 years old. What do you think is the easiest option for the local authority if this matter comes up " in committee"? Close that section of the ground or let the club do something constructive by way of a solution?

 

[radfordinlondon]

The additional costs origianlly demanded by the City and County Councils according to the Athletic article are unbelievable - bridge maintenance, bus stops, contrbution to the new foot bridge over the Trent, £700k towards schools, park and ride, extra buses, pedestrain crossing improvements, subsidising bus travel etc etc.

Thw Athletic says the City Council have dropped their demands but no reply from the County.

I am sure there are reasonable contributions the club would make but the Councils have been taking the piss.

You would hope for better support for a venture enjoed by many and one whoch creates revenue across lots of areas. FFS Derby Council were looking at buying P Park...

MIssed a massive trick here what a fucking shambles.

Is this standard stuff for all clubs when improving their facilities?

The spuds redevelopment was the other way around, club threatend to go to the Olympic park if they didnt get a tube stop from tfl. Levy got his supermarket in the end but no tube stop. Feels like they see forest as a cash cow to milk, rather than a driver of investment to be welcomed. Joke.

 

[radfordinlondon]

This doesn’t take 3 years though. 3 months max for normal, intelligent business people.

as some have said on here, and despite the 3m in fees and feasibility studies paid to date, we might as well look for a new location and build new now. If fucking Brentford can build their ground in the middle of that urban sprawl, then building 1 and a quarter stands (Bridgford extension) should have been completed by now

absolute joke

3 years is closer than 3 months but yes, far too long in this case.

 

[ZedRed]

The phrase ignorance is bliss comes to mind. Actually the RICS rates the life expectancy of an asbestos cement roof to be between 25 and 40 years, 50 years is pushing it a bit. The main stand in its current form is 54 years old. What do you think is the easiest option for the local authority if this matter comes up " in committee"? Close that section of the ground or let the club do something constructive by way of a solution?

The council should shut the City Ground as it obviously has no value to them.

It is only a health hazard.

 

[jbacsta]

The spuds redevelopment was the other way around, club threatend to go to the Olympic park if they didnt get a tube stop from tfl. Levy got his supermarket in the end but no tube stop. Feels like they see forest as a cash cow to milk, rather than a driver of investment to be welcomed. Joke.

Yes I agree with you. Actually if you read all the published documents relating to the proposal as I have from the start( yes I am a sad bastard) The club have agreed to most of the demands being made. It is true however that they have told them to do one on others.

 

[paz1967]

What a visionary post that has turned out to be. The club wanted this development as fast as it could have been done. You were completely wrong. It has been scuppered by a mixture of bungling and ineptitude by typical local authority and government quango jobs worths.

lmfao, no I was completely right, how can you even say that without going red? The brexit/covid and local traffic wardens on the councils was exactly my argument from the start, its never been questioned as to whether the boss wanted to invest, it was simply and obviously going to take several years, you wanted it done the following week, sure, me too but I live in the real world

 

[Pope John XXIII]

Just as a matter of interest for those of you that sit in the main stand. The industry standard for the life of asbestos sheeting is 50 years. It then starts to decompose and shed fibres. The main stand roof and claddings are all largely asbestos.

My understanding is that the fire of the 1960s burned the stand but not the roof. They rebuilt the stand (IE terrace) under the roof, leaving the existing structure more or less intact. In that case, the roof of the main stand is a LOT older than 50

 

[jbacsta]

My understanding is that the fire of the 1960s burned the stand but not the roof. They rebuilt the stand (IE terrace) under the roof, leaving the existing structure more or less intact. In that case, the roof of the main stand is a LOT older than 50

I may be wrong but I think the stand was completely rebuilt with concrete terracing the only major deviation from the original design.