[Albion] Amex expansion.

[Easy 10]

The plan says "seating tier" on it.

Whatever.

A handful of seats sticking out in front of a lounge doesn't constitute an actual 2nd tier in a football stadium to me. But if thats what you want to refer to it as, go for gold. Doesn't particularly matter, in the great scheme of things.

 

[BNthree]

Whatever.

A handful of seats sticking out in front of a lounge doesn't constitute an actual 2nd tier in a football stadium to me. But if thats what you want to refer to it as, go for gold. Doesn't particularly matter, in the great scheme of things.

It's just the club submitted a planning application that has the words "seating tier" on, that got approved, then Barber gaslights us by saying speculation of another tier in the North stand is nonsense.

 

[MattBackHome]

Just popped by to say that a few rows of seats is categorically not a tier, whatever it says on your little forms. C ya

 

[Bold Seagull]

It's just the club submitted a planning application that has the words "seating tier" on, that got approved, then Barber gaslights us by saying speculation of another tier in the North stand is nonsense.

That is the controversy, it is in black and white the club has permission and has explored expanding the North Stand - then says it’s nonsense and didn’t happen - it’s a public record, we can see it!?

Why not say it’s not viable at this time, or too difficult etc. why effectively lie that it’s just fan speculation

Someone has dropped a bollock on this one.

 

[brighton_tom]

Is the box in the north east corner also cancelled or was that a myth as well? That would at least help the stadium look more complete.

 

[chaileyjem]

That is the controversy, it is in black and white the club has permission and has explored expanding the North Stand - then says it’s nonsense and didn’t happen - it’s a public record, we can see it!?

Why not say it’s not viable at this time, or too difficult etc. why effectively lie that it’s just fan speculation

Someone has dropped a bollock on this one.

Blimey. He only said two things.
"Contrary to social media speculation, these plans do not include a second tier of seating in the North Stand – as nice as this would be, it isn’t physically possible! "
well fair enough. Plenty of people have often talked about this. Someone even mocked up what it might look like on a thread on here once. He's obviously talking about a North Stand Upper here and Barber jokingly says it can't happen.

"And neither do our plans include a new hospitality lounge above the current North Stand seating."
Ok. So this were the plans , agreed in the planning , to add a few hundred seats in front of a lounge (called "tier" in the planning confusingly but then so what) - which presumably are no longer viable, and they've changed their mind and they're doing something else instead.. Again er, so what. Is this really "gaslighting" or "dropping one" or insulting fans or controversy. What a nonsensical fuss.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Blimey. He only said two things.
"Contrary to social media speculation, these plans do not include a second tier of seating in the North Stand – as nice as this would be, it isn’t physically possible! "
well fair enough. Plenty of people have often talked about this. Someone even mocked up what it might look like on a thread on here once. He's obviously talking about a North Stand Upper here and Barber jokingly says it can't happen.

"And neither do our plans include a new hospitality lounge above the current North Stand seating."
Ok. So this were the plans , agreed in the planning , to add a few hundred seats in front of a lounge (called "tier" in the planning confusingly but then so what) - which presumably are no longer viable, and they've changed their mind and they're doing something else instead.. Again er, so what. Is this really "gaslighting" or "dropping one" or insulting fans or controversy. What a nonsensical fuss.

You'd get a job at RT

 

[chaileyjem]

You'd get a job at RT

I'm providing some context to a trivial debate here about some extra seats in a football ground.
Apart from the fact you know nothing about what i'm like iRL , this upping the ante personal stuff is not necessary.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

I'm providing some context to a trivial debate here about some extra seats in a football ground.
Apart from the fact you know nothing about what i'm like iRL , this upping the ante personal stuff is not necessary.

My apologies - tongue in cheek comment.

I'm very pleased PB is our Vice Chairman - he has done, and continues to do a great job.

BUT - he, and the club occasionally get (and say) things wrong.

IMO toeing the club line on absolutely everything, even when it's clear they are just spinning information is wrong.

 

[BNthree]

 

[chaileyjem]

My apologies - tongue in cheek comment.

I'm very pleased PB is our Vice Chairman - he has done, and continues to do a great job.

BUT - he, and the club occasionally get (and say) things wrong.

IMO toeing the club line on absolutely everything, even when it's clear they are just spinning information is wrong.

Apology accepted.
Of course they do things I don’t like.
I don’t like the seats now being closer together, flasks being banned, not being able to use the lift in the west stand, no non alcoholic drinks being available, think the sharing scheme is a faff - and think there’s more that can do helping fans with transport options/flexibility for rescheduled games. But I actually love going to the Albion, it’s something I really value, it brings me closer to my family and friends and id argue that’s the mainstream view of fans not often heard as much as it should on NSC . So not quite.
But this is a lot of fuss over nothing.

And it’s boring being accused of being a propagandist or being insulted for suggesting that it is. But yep no worries.

 

[chaileyjem]

It's just the club submitted a planning application that has the words "seating tier" on, that got approved, then Barber gaslights us by saying speculation of another tier in the North stand is nonsense.

He didn't say it was nonsense. He said it was not what they had planned and its not structurally possible although some fans, on social media unspecified, have discussed it, at some point unspecified . Which they have. A North Stand Upper is something that occasionally comes up on NSC from time to time. He also said that the actual North Stand plans - rows of seats in front of a lounge weren't now happening.
Thats really not gaslighting by any stretch, and its really nothing to do with fighting the Iraq war, even in jest.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Blimey. He only said two things.
"Contrary to social media speculation, these plans do not include a second tier of seating in the North Stand – as nice as this would be, it isn’t physically possible! "
well fair enough. Plenty of people have often talked about this. Someone even mocked up what it might look like on a thread on here once. He's obviously talking about a North Stand Upper here and Barber jokingly says it can't happen.

"And neither do our plans include a new hospitality lounge above the current North Stand seating."
Ok. So this were the plans , agreed in the planning , to add a few hundred seats in front of a lounge (called "tier" in the planning confusingly but then so what) - which presumably are no longer viable, and they've changed their mind and they're doing something else instead.. Again er, so what. Is this really "gaslighting" or "dropping one" or insulting fans or controversy. What a nonsensical fuss.

I thought you might be interested in how our home might evolve in the future. Clearly not, but some people were. Nothing sinister, no outrageous speculation, just going on the planning register and having a look at what the club has submitted.

Now, let's clear up this 'few hundred seats' – the latest application that was approved 1 year ago was for 1750 additional seats. I've posted an extract from the planning statement which is quite specific in those seats being provided in: a North East box to match the East South box, some extra seats squeezed into rows, which I believe has been done, and the additional seats then in a North tier with a lounge attached.

I don't know how many seats are in that South East Box, but let's say it's 200, and 50 seats were squeezed in, that leaves 1500 to be provided in seating above the North Stand with attached lounge.

We have approx. 28 seats per row between North stand blocks, so if this new tier was 3 blocks wide say, 84 seats per row, 1500 seats would be 17 or 18 rows. 4 blocks would be 12 or 13 rows Which is interesting right?

A lot of information, updated economic and travel reports, planning statements etc. were all supported for actually something that is now physically not possible. Odd that you'd go that far without asking the engineer, 'is this possible?'.

I don't disagree that once planning was achieved, maybe more detailed costings, structural implications were looked at and the proposal is no longer viable - so why not say 'we did look at expanding the capacity in the North Stand, but it isn't viable at this time' - why kind of blame social media speculation, or suggest there never were plans for this?

Maybe it's fine to brush things off. Maybe PB and his team are allowed to be, let's say, elaborate with their presentation of things. Breaks a little bit of trust though don't you think?

 

[chaileyjem]

Maybe PB and his team are allowed to be, let's say, elaborate with their presentation of things.

Yes. And nearly all those seats have already been put in. The capacity is now 31,800 because we're all sitting a bit closer to each other . .
Those extra seats , in front of a new lounge in the North Stand - those plans are now not happening because presumably they are no longer economically viable or they've changed their mind or Covid or Bloom's finances. I don't know. If they're not physically possible then he didn't say that in his notes. He just said a 2nd tier "West Stand Upper" wasn't possible. They really are two separate things.

Of course if you want more detail on the fan zone and why they ditched the lounge then i'm sure you know how to get a 1000 word explanation in great detail explaining why and how and when.. .

 

[Worthing exile]

Apology accepted.
Of course they do things I don’t like.
I don’t like the seats now being closer together, flasks being banned, not being able to use the lift in the west stand, no non alcoholic drinks being available, think the sharing scheme is a faff - and think there’s more that can do helping fans with transport options/flexibility for rescheduled games. But I actually love going to the Albion, it’s something I really value, it brings me closer to my family and friends and id argue that’s the mainstream view of fans not often heard as much as it should on NSC . So not quite.
But this is a lot of fuss over nothing.

And it’s boring being accused of being a propagandist or being insulted for suggesting that it is. But yep no worries.

I hate the seats being closer together. It is really uncomfortable now when everyone wears extra layers. What a pity PB didn't lead by example and move the Directors box seats closer as well. From East Upper it doesn't look like 1901 have been touched either so it is just us plebs that draw the short straw.

 

[BNthree]

He didn't say it was nonsense. He said it was not what they had planned and its not structurally possible although some fans, on social media unspecified, have discussed it, at some point unspecified . Which they have. A North Stand Upper is something that occasionally comes up on NSC from time to time. He also said that the actual North Stand plans - rows of seats in front of a lounge weren't now happening.
Thats really not gaslighting by any stretch, and its really nothing to do with fighting the Iraq war, even in jest.

You're doing an admirable job, keep it up.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes. And nearly all those seats have already been put in. The capacity is now 31,800 because we're all sitting a bit closer to each other . .
Those extra seats , in front of a new lounge in the North Stand - those plans are now not happening because presumably they are no longer economically viable or they've changed their mind or Covid or Bloom's finances. I don't know. If they're not physically possible then he didn't say that in his notes. He just said a 2nd tier "West Stand Upper" wasn't possible. They really are two separate things.

Of course if you want more detail on the fan zone and why they ditched the lounge then i'm sure you know how to get a 1000 word explanation in great detail explaining why and how and when.. .

Even in our discourse, you are choosing to say "those plans are now not happening" - because that is how most people would word something that was being looked at, but is no longer happening. It's semantics, but I don't think it's accidental. But I don't brush it off as meaningless or nonsensical because it has been thought about.

Now this is speculation on my part, but my suspicion would be is that they presented a case to planning that gave a comfortable impression of 1750 seats being added with physical changes such as a North Stand tier/shelf and a North East box with 'some' additional squeezed in seats, because stating you were going to squeeze in 1050 seats just in existing rows may not have gone down well. None of the physical changes would be be deemed 'development' under planning as it's inside the stadium, so once granted for the capacity to 32500, up to the club how they provided those seats, and they have managed as it's turned out to fit 1050 new seats through this squeezing in.

Will be interesting to see if they find a way of getting the other 700 in they have permission for at some point.

 

[chaileyjem]

Even in our discourse, you are choosing to say "those plans are now not happening" - because that is how most people would word something that was being looked at, but is no longer happening. It's semantics, but I don't think it's accidental. But I don't brush it off as meaningless or nonsensical because it has been thought about.

Now this is speculation on my part, but my suspicion would be is that they presented a case to planning that gave a comfortable impression of 1750 seats being added with physical changes such as a North Stand tier/shelf and a North East box with 'some' additional squeezed in seats, because stating you were going to squeeze in 1050 seats just in existing rows may not have gone down well. None of the physical changes would be be deemed 'development' under planning as it's inside the stadium, so once granted for the capacity to 32500, up to the club how they provided those seats, and they have managed as it's turned out to fit 1050 new seats through this squeezing in.

Will be interesting to see if they find a way of getting the other 700 in they have permission for at some point.

As I said. Ask PB. He will tell you. In great detail I suspect. But the seats to take it up to 31,800 - filling in gaps or sitting closer together - was part of the original planning docs.
They haven’t denied they’ve done this at all - i'd rather they hand't because i liked the extra room but hey - Barber talked about it at the last fan forum .
https://www.brightonandhovealbion.com/news/2464114/fans-forum-the-main-talking-points

 

[studio150]

I hate the seats being closer together. It is really uncomfortable now when everyone wears extra layers. What a pity PB didn't lead by example and move the Directors box seats closer as well. From East Upper it doesn't look like 1901 have been touched either so it is just us plebs that draw the short straw.

Surprised one of those ambulance chasing legal teams haven't taken out a full page advert in the home programme.
Seating in an inferior seat with less space than before, but no reduction in ST cost, ring our freephone number you may be entitled to compensation, we can help you.

 

[Bold Seagull]

As I said. Ask PB. He will tell you. In great detail I suspect. But the seats to take it up to 31,800 - filling in gaps or sitting closer together - was part of the original planning docs.
They haven’t denied they’ve done this at all - Barber talked about it at the last fan forum .

The filling in gaps and such was in the Planning Application in 2013 ref: BH2013/01356 which gained permission to take the capacity from 22,500 to 30,750 - which I think we can agree was achieved and implemented. No further application was made to increase the capacity until the 2020 application ref: BH2020/00769 which increased it by 1750 to 32,500 by describing the North Stand tier, a North East box and some additional seats. I don't think these were in the original planning docs - unless you know different?

I've not said they have denied it, I've speculated they made a presentable case for 32,500 being mostly new elements to avoid any questions of where these 1050 would be squeezed in, whether to avoid awkward questions from planners or fans ahead of doing it. Once done, of course he's going to state it - they're there.