New roof for HSE and plan B for redevelopment

[ant]

Ralph with all due respect people keep going back to this.

That report is years old and Civil enginerring and technology has moved on since then.

I simply don't believe deep driven piles couldn't support a roof without the need to dig up the whole area

So what civil engineering technology exists that would over come this problem? Honest question does any one know?

Recent technologies in most industries, even if they are cheaper, are usually sold on at increased cost to the user when new. I'm not sure the fact it could stand up on such dodgy footings is the only consideration. I've not seen the alleged report but having talked to a number of developers over the last few years I know building regulations in our region are stringent, due to the weather we get. It would take a battering over the course of a year due to the direction if faces and the strong winds it would be exposed to.

Also, I was having a conversation the other day about the flood lights which still need sorting. I was trying to recall the cost of replacing the aging pylons which I believe was mentioned the other year. They will have to come down at some point and that is a more pressing concern than a roof over a deteriorating terrace that has a limited capacity due to no crush barriers. Without floodlights we would be unable to play games. I don't recall the figure but I remember thinking "where are we going to get that much cash", yet it was a fraction of the cost needed to build a new stand at the HSE. Let's face it a specialist roof to overcome the weak material under the HSE would probably cost almost as much as a new terrace with crush barriers, minus roof. At least we could increase ground capacity and screen off those pesky away supporters, even if we do get wet.

I would like to think we had a plan B, but it is always about cash, we don't have much so we have to think of small things for now. Keep saving your pocket money people, we might need it.

Wind turbines generating power for floodlighting.Sorted.Excess power stored in hi-tech facility for breathless nights.sorted.

[Ralph]

Ralph with all due respect people keep going back to this. That report is years old and Civil engineering and technology has moved on since then. I simply don't believe deep driven piles couldn't support a roof without the need to dig up the whole area

Yes, quite possibly, but a couple of years ago BAFC (not Moore) looked at installing some new crush barriers at the HS end, and by doing so would have allowed the number of people allowed at that end of the ground to be increased, but were told no, whatever's left under the terraces wouldn't support the installation of new crush barriers.

Driving plies deep into the ground is of course possible , but the problem remains that the fill under the terraces has settled so much, that it’s not compact enough to be able to support any extra weight, and the only solution is to remove the terraces, remove and replace the fill, and then construct new terraces.

[ant]

Well have sorted the floodlighting problem. So now give us an earth shifter/digger and will sort it with fellow fans..Next please.So easy.Whats the next part of development? no problem.Sorted.6.000 capacity stadium. Sorted.

[DaveP]

Ralph with all due respect people keep going back to this. That report is years old and Civil engineering and technology has moved on since then. I simply don't believe deep driven piles couldn't support a roof without the need to dig up the whole area

Yes, quite possibly, but a couple of years ago BAFC (not Moore) looked at installing some new crush barriers at the HS end, and by doing so would have allowed the number of people allowed at that end of the ground to be increased, but were told no, whatever's left under the terraces wouldn't support the installation of new crush barriers.

Driving plies deep into the ground is of course possible , but the problem remains that the fill under the terraces has settled so much, that it’s not compact enough to be able to support any extra weight, and the only solution is to remove the terraces, remove and replace the fill, and then construct new terraces.

I really don't know the answer but it seems a cantilever type roof can be supported by say 4 deep piles at the back without disturbing the terracing except for the small area where the piles would be dug. The entire weight would stand on the piles.

If its that unsafe why are 1000+ allowed to satnd in there for big games?

[Steelworks End]

HS Terrace....when was it built in its current format? Concrete has a life expectancy of what, 50-60 years before it deteriorates? so its probably had it?

The terrace hasn't changed since the late 1950s, and it didn't look new then! Same applies to the Popular Side terrace.

Just a thought on the roof debate; a comparison with the work done for the floodlights pylons may give an indication of what is required. The pylons have (more or less) stood the test of time - almost half a century - without falling down so they must have a substantial foundation to stand on; this being a concrete base set 12 ft underground, and the holes dug for this were 15 ft deep indicating some 3 ft thickness of concrete (they didn't use metric measures in 1963!). Much of the work was done by volunteers organised by Wilf Livingstone. This suggests that a considerable amount of work would be required for a roof such as that at Brentford illustrated in Jonty's original post.

Whether the existing terracing can support additional crush barriers beneath such a roof is a different issue.

[Steeley]

Why dont we get a loads of tarpaulins like.

Or just a massive bus shelter.

[saltcellar]

Yes, quite possibly, but a couple of years ago BAFC (not Moore) looked at installing some new crush barriers at the HS end, and by doing so would have allowed the number of people allowed at that end of the ground to be increased, but were told no, whatever's left under the terraces wouldn't support the installation of new crush barriers.

Driving plies deep into the ground is of course possible , but the problem remains that the fill under the terraces has settled so much, that it’s not compact enough to be able to support any extra weight, and the only solution is to remove the terraces, remove and replace the fill, and then construct new terraces.

I really don't know the answer but it seems a cantilever type roof can be supported by say 4 deep piles at the back without disturbing the terracing except for the small area where the piles would be dug. The entire weight would stand on the piles.

If its that unsafe why are 1000+ allowed to satnd in there for big games?

If it is that unsafe, why is a housing estate being allowed across the road, between the ground and the railway line?

[The Tomahawk Kid]

After reading through the posts on this thread, some of them - obviously forwarded by people with knowledge of the Construction Industry - I'm beginning to get the feeling that either we've all been duped OR have been told 'Porkies' by the BOD.

[K_BFC]

...

...
If its that unsafe why are 1000+ allowed to satnd in there for big games?

If it is that unsafe, why is a housing estate being allowed across the road, between the ground and the railway line?

I remember the capacity of the Holker Street end being mentioned a long time ago when the ground capacity was lowered. When the capacity was raised again due to satisfying Health & Safety, it was mentioned that the HSE capacity could not be raised much due to lack of crush barriers. A figure of just over the 1000 mark was the limit put on it, if I recall. Someone else might know the exact figure, but 1000 or just over is what I remember.

The new housing estate across the road does not look like it is being built on cinders like the HSE. I think if anyone wants to know what is meant by these cinders that keep getting mentioned. Take a look at the ground between the Wilke stand and the toilets behind them. I remember years ago (20+) walking up there every game thinking what are these crunchy stones I'm walking on, it's was everywhere. If you walk up that stretch today I think it is mostly compacted and covered over. I gain the impression they built the ground out of it, obviously not the concrete terrace itself, I can just imagine it piled up under the HSE.

This also raises the question, did they run into similar problems when the roof was put up or when the barriers where put in on the Wilke side? If they did, how did they overcome them and what is different with the HSE?

What ever we do in the HSE (if Plan A fails), it needs an increase in capacity well over what the HSE is currently allowed to hold. That will help keep the away fans in the corner at big games and allow home fans behind the goal. It also needs the option to have a roof put on it at the time it is redeveloped, or at a latter date when funds are available. Keep talking and we'll sort it out!

[spirit of 1990]

This also raises the question, did they run into similar problems when the roof was put up or when the barriers where put in on the Wilke side? If they did, how did they overcome them and what is different with the HSE?

I would think that the H&S law's would of changed ten fold even since the Ray Wilkie stand was erected, also the HSE is a big built up area (look at how tall it is from Holker St) probably quite different to the pop side which seems to be more built into the land that would of been there previously.

[olbarrafancumbak]

i would like to think that when the HSE was built, they woud have prepared the ground it was being built upon i.e they surely would have dug some kind of founds that would be suffice to hold the tonnes of concrete that was used to form the terrace? even though it would not meet current building regs.

I was there when they were building the new prom at Blackpool (yes its not football) and the methods they used were fantastic, prepare the ground (lets face it, its gonna be soft sand) with hardcore and then crane the sections in one by one.....simple yet brilliant at the same time!

it enabled the prom thing to be installed quickly and without worry about the incoming tides, they didnt even get there feet wet!!

That is how most modern stadia is built, cad drawings and calcs are sent to the concrete people and also the ground works peeps in tandem and then it all comes together like a jigsaw.

I would love to know the current costs of bringing something like this to the HSE, Im even sure that some, if not most of the old terrace may get crushed and re used in the build?

I would like to see the BoD stand and watch the games along with the hardcore few that stand there rain or shine just to get an understanding of why we moan about the roof (or lack of) and possibly the reason why some fans choose not to even come to HS any more.

For a club our size, 9 million is just stupid and un realistic! Most of the ground is usable and acceptable for us and what we need, it just needs a little tlc but the HSE does need sorting.

[K_BFC]

I would think that the H&S law's would of changed ten fold even since the Ray Wilkie stand was erected, also the HSE is a big built up area (look at how tall it is from Holker St) probably quite different to the pop side which seems to be more built into the land that would of been there previously.

Good point about H&S, but I was thinking in general. Did they run into any problems due to the lay of the land at the time. I recall that the barriers they put in were not straight forward. I'm going from memory here but I recall there being talk of a modification to the barriers which would not normally have been done.

Not sure if it is related but when they put the barriers in why did they dig channels down the terracing between each barrier? (See photo, channels run left to right down the terracing between all the barrier supports) Are the barriers attached to something that runs underneath the terracing and is this needed because the popular (Wilke) side is similar to the HSE? I've always wondered why they dug up the terracing in such a way to put them in.

Barriers under the Wilke Stand, I took this sometime in 1998 I think?

S_Bars.jpg (62.89 KiB) Viewed 2540 times

I could be wrong of course, but I think the Wilke Stand is built on similar material to the HSE and required a lot of work under old H&S to make safe, which lets face it is nothing compared to what is required these days. The fact the popular side is built up so high but is rather large and spread out, probably allowed the work to go ahead back then. The HSE is by comparison a small space built up quiet high against Holker Street (just look at how high the wall is from the Holker St side). I can imagine why the report say it is unsafe to build on if all that embankment contains is cinders (as a filler).

i would like to think that when the HSE was built, they woud have prepared the ground it was being built upon i.e they surely would have dug some kind of founds that would be suffice to hold the tonnes of concrete that was used to form the terrace? even though it would not meet current building regs.

I also would like to think they built it with such preparation, we may have to live it and stand on it for sometime to come.

[olbarrafancumbak]

I would imagine the channels were dug to allow for the way the barriers were formed i.e they will have more steel on a right angle to what you see above ground, meaning you have the strength of the steel plus the weight of the concrete too. There may well have been some huge bolts chemically fixed also?

I think the attitude from many is that there are too many problems, I was taught to find solutions and problems were always surmountable.

I think if we were allowed to take on our own research of the HSE, Im sure we could find all the answers and solutions we need

As much as people hate the discussions about it, the problem always remains and will do till something gets done about it.

If the plan A development is NOT happening lets get our heads together with the board and do something about it.

[Mike Wilson]

Good thread this.
Anything is possible if you work damn hard at it.

Could the Holker St end be upgraded 1 section at a time ? Hear me out here please, Start at 1 end say 12 / 14 foot section at a time, not ideal I know but doable, dig out and reuse the spoil, old concrete & exterior brick wall as refill (where possible) do foundation and re-concrete with any roofing structure pre planned already.

This could be done during the season, As it could be safely sectioned off or during Pre-season, it would be more affordable to the club to pay for it this way, We could slowly increase the capacity as each section is completed with the extra barriers etc, When they begin the next section they will already have the expansion joint in place then do the next bit & so on, A Smaller company could do the work (hopefully a BAFC friendly local firm who may be more open to working along side Volunteering supporters who know their stuff .
Funding would be easier as its an ongoing thing,IMO the fans could raise anywhere around 30,000 per season if (Example) Plans were drawn up (ie) Vision for the future type plan) A few hundred fans paying a pound or 2 per week & a few more wealthier fans & some business paying a bit more should draw 500 weekly =24 Grand per year, add a few fundraising nights & interest on the savings then 30G per year could be a reasonable target, Add the club adding say approx a third of any Cup winnings they have not budgeted for & any Grants adding their share.

Yes there will be holes in this 10 min idea but i've worked in engineering & construction and piecemeal working like this does work.

The Rugby have done similar & it worked out rather well.

[DaveC]

I love the ideas on here, but it occurs to me, like most great ideas us fans have, that they are a complete waste of our energies and focus.
The board are the ones that have the final say on any ground, and as such anything we come up with will be disregarded. At the moment we have the 'ground development' trump card still being played.

I love the fact that fans have put serious thought into this and come up with some really great problem solving skills. You lot bloody well rock!