diegomarahenry Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 why!? The upgrade needed done in general and not just for the 18 Saturdays there would be slightly more traffic. There may have been no legal reason for SAC not to pass the plans for the ground where as they could argue town center protection against the retail outlet, the surefire way to strangle the life out of the project would be to make stipulations that would push the cost up, effectively to make it look like they past the plans while killing it at the same time. I'n not saying thats what SAC did, it is just what it looks like they did. Barr construction had the majority of Government contracts pre devolution but very few after, I believe they also got stiffed on a few Stadiums down south when ITV digital folded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Ayr 1910 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The upgrade needed done in general and not just for the 18 Saturdays there would be slightly more traffic. There may have been no legal reason for SAC not to pass the plans for the ground where as they could argue town center protection against the retail outlet, the surefire way to strangle the life out of the project would be to make stipulations that would push the cost up, effectively to make it look like they past the plans while killing it at the same time. I'n not saying thats what SAC did, it is just what it looks like they did. Barr construction had the majority of Government contracts pre devolution but very few after, I believe they also got stiffed on a few Stadiums down south when ITV digital folded. you really know your shizz. What about the old steel works down northfield way. Could there be any chance of a move there? I mean its literally across the road from somerset road. I know the original plans were only across lochside road from there but, I think as its not too far away from the old stadium, traffic and stuff shouldnt be a plobrem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidkennedyshand Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The upgrade needed done in general and not just for the 18 Saturdays there would be slightly more traffic. There may have been no legal reason for SAC not to pass the plans for the ground where as they could argue town center protection against the retail outlet, the surefire way to strangle the life out of the project would be to make stipulations that would push the cost up, effectively to make it look like they past the plans while killing it at the same time. If i remember the council passed the stadium and retail outlets at the public meeting knowing full well the government would call it in as it went against their local plan.(one of the councillors even said we'd been handed a poisoned chalice) I remember Barr saying at the meeting we'd pay for the roundabout etc if everyone else with retail outlets chipped in their fair share. Of course now we have Asda etc all out there and Waitrose and Sainsburys to be built.Against the local plan.Thats ok though they're supermarkets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diegomarahenry Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 you really know your shizz. What about the old steel works down northfield way. Could there be any chance of a move there? I mean its literally across the road from somerset road. I know the original plans were only across lochside road from there but, I think as its not too far away from the old stadium, traffic and stuff shouldnt be a plobrem. Any new ground is likely to be on either Somerset Road or the land purchased at Heathfield because any construction would have to be financed by the sale of the other, unless they were gifted suitable land and could sell both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The terracing needs work to remain safe each year. If we were building something new I'd much prefer safe standing to regular seating. Safe standing is a vastly less socially friendly system than terracing. You're given a slot to stand in and you're expected to stay there. No weans running around, no idle blethering between the barriers. Fine if you're Borussia Dortmund, but utterly inappropriate for a Scottish club who could still rarely if ever sell the stadium out if they were transported to the top of the Premiership. The cost to the club of dealing with damage to concrete terracing over the course of a season should be utterly minimal. Were it not, then every lower-league club would be scrambling to install cheap shitty plastic seating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 If i remember the council passed the stadium and retail outlets at the public meeting knowing full well the government would call it in as it went against their local plan.(one of the councillors even said we'd been handed a poisoned chalice) I remember Barr saying at the meeting we'd pay for the roundabout etc if everyone else with retail outlets chipped in their fair share. Of course now we have Asda etc all out there and Waitrose and Sainsburys to be built.Against the local plan.Thats ok though they're supermarkets. They passed the stadium, but referred the retail element to the Scottish Executive(as was) as it went against the tri council local plan. It was weird being there that night in the Citadel. There were no objections other than the owners of the existing Heathfield Retail Park. Everyone cheered(There was more in the hall that night than we get at home games these days) not realising that it was being referred to the Scottish Executive. And then the realisation that we were no further forward. Think the inquiry that followed lasted over a year. Cost us a fortune, and all for bugger all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wills31 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 They passed the stadium, but referred the retail element to the Scottish Executive(as was) as it went against the tri council local plan. It was weird being there that night in the Citadel. There were no objections other than the owners of the existing Heathfield Retail Park. Everyone cheered(There was more in the hall that night than we get at home games these days) not realising that it was being referred to the Scottish Executive. And then the realisation that we were no further forward. Think the inquiry that followed lasted over a year. Cost us a fortune, and all for bugger all. And here we are again still no further forward nothing from the chairman for about 6 months doing patch work repairs on our ground and all lamenting on what could have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
United1973 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well someone started the post !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wills31 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 Well someone started the post !!! Yes I did and not without cause we were never be the largest team in the country but we do have the potential to be a SPL team but the last few years of crap on the park has eroded our support. Hamilton has maintained SPL status with crowds of under 3000 last season.We just need the push and drive put back into the club we need someone to take us forward off the park because i think we have the right manager to do it on the park. This goes out to the chairman we need a update not every 6 months and the left in the dark details are not that important just tell us something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
United1973 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Yes I did and not without cause we were never be the largest team in the country but we do have the potential to be a SPL team but the last few years of crap on the park has eroded our support. Hamilton has maintained SPL status with crowds of under 3000 last season.We just need the push and drive put back into the club we need someone to take us forward off the park because i think we have the right manager to do it on the park. This goes out to the chairman we need a update not every 6 months and the left in the dark details are not that important just tell us something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 It's not as if the new signings are getting poached from Barcelona. They were mostly playing for buttons at such powerhouses as Stenhousemuir and Airdrie. As for takeover talk, nobody is stupid enough to think there's a shortcut to making money in Scottish football these days. If you get a decent manager and you don't do something stupid like sell your ground to someone and rent it back off them, you can make a bit of cash in the Championship with a meagre budget as the current set of part-timers are showing. That's pretty much the only sensible business plan. I'm intrigued, how much cash are the part timers in the Championship making? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazka6 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 it's not really for the council to be going out of their way to help Ayr United. They are just another business that the council should be treating the same way as every other business. What do you expect the council to do for Ayr United? Wholeheartedly disagree, Ayr United are and can be so much more to the local community than the first 11. AUFA springs to mind. There's so much potential from a social and commercial point of view, the club should always be considered by SAC for development. Something along the lines of Hamilton Accies would be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Why give up the great place we have now for an L shaped stadium with a temporary stand and a bus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Wholeheartedly disagree, Ayr United are and can be so much more to the local community than the first 11. AUFA springs to mind. There's so much potential from a social and commercial point of view, the club should always be considered by SAC for development. Something along the lines of Hamilton Accies would be good. Ayr United Football Academy Limited, is not Ayr United Football and Athletic Club Limited. AUFA has charitable status and yes the council should be involved in that, because of what it promote, and indeed they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazka6 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Regardless of their legal status surely you can't completely separate the two. Surely an ambitious football club would benefit the community, the Academy and vice versa. Without Ayr Utd Academy players would have to go to other Ayrshire senior clubs or the juniors, seems awfy blinkered to me to say United is 'just another business' est 1910. Christ we must be mugs, cos God knows we don't get much 'product' for our money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Regardless of their legal status surely you can't completely separate the two. Surely an ambitious football club would benefit the community, the Academy and vice versa. Without Ayr Utd Academy players would have to go to other Ayrshire senior clubs or the juniors, seems awfy blinkered to me to say United is 'just another business' est 1910. Christ we must be mugs, cos God knows we don't get much 'product' for our money. To the local council we are just another business. That's the way it is and rightly so. If Ayr United were to offer something back to the whole community then I am sure the council would get involved and support any such initiative. An ambitious club would only be a benefit to the community if it offered something to the community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.