Stadium updates .......

[Nero]

On 03/02/2023 at 20:41, rockerlad said:

What reserve grade and youth sides do town have that can use the stadium? reds have all that in place and are paying to use sites like st benedicts at whitehaven

Reds Ladies play their matches at Derwent Park, as do Town Ladies.

[rockerlad]

8 minutes ago, Nero said:

Reds Ladies play their matches at Derwent Park, as do Town Ladies.

yes which in my opinion is ridiculous reds Ladies should be at BP, but with 20 league games, pre season games and Cup games the pitch likely can't handle the extra games. our reserves, Ladies and youthsides should all be under one roof.

[Jacksonville]

6 hours ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

No pal, the money has come from the government's levelling up fund (£5.5 million) with a further £1,000,000 from Allerdale for phase 1 to benefit both professional clubs in Workington. 

The FA may possibly be putting some money in, but certainly nothing notable to date that's been made public.

My guess is, Sport England/FA would be more likely to fund the all weather/running track part of the scheme as it has a higher community value than the stadium. The FA like to fund all weather pitches but they build a caveat in that local junior football gets priority sessions for an agreed number of hours per week as part of the funding agreement. 

In regards to gate splits, I'm sure it was set out at the start of this proposal that each club would keep their own revenue with a percentage, presumably linked to attendance put aside for ground maintenance, insurance etc. So in that respect both clubs would be better off, as maintenance costs will be a lot less on a modern stadium plus they are paying for the upkeep of one, not 2 stadiums.  

It will be interesting to see what plans are submitted for the planning application, I've read the comments on here about 'one new grandstand and the rest to stay as it is etc', but that doesn't add up to me as I can't see why they would release even sketches at this late stage unless that is at least the footprint of the new stadium, as the second smaller athletics/all-weather pitch runs adjacent to the goal end of the ground, which to me indicates the new grandstand will run parallel to Allerdale House (the Derwent End), and that surely means the pitch will be rotated 90 degrees!

So taking that into consideration, the Reds would only be able to play at Borough Park whilst some of the site groundworks work were being carried out as all the other terracing will be removed.

But as I said in an earlier post, the plans are open to interpretation and it could be me whose got it completely wrong !!

Also the stuff about Reds having a bigger shareholding that Town - here's the link to Companies House. I've just had a  quick look through and as far as I can see both Town and Reds have equal shareholding and voting rights. 

If you don't understand how companies are set up I wouldn't comment - but the shareholding splits are shown as 50 shares each. 

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14004950/filing-history 

It is to be the redevelopment of Borough Park on the same footprint, so that sketch has no significance other than showing two pitches side by side. 

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

3 minutes ago, Jacksonville said:

It is to be the redevelopment of Borough Park on the same footprint, so that sketch has no significance other than showing two pitches side by side. 

how do you know that?

 

[bobg]

24 minutes ago, Jacksonville said:

It is to be the redevelopment of Borough Park on the same footprint, so that sketch has no significance other than showing two pitches side by side. 

If it is the same foot print then BP is too small for RL.

[rockerlad]

35 minutes ago, Jacksonville said:

It is to be the redevelopment of Borough Park on the same footprint, so that sketch has no significance other than showing two pitches side by side. 

how do you know this?

[Jacksonville]

1 hour ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

how do you know that?

 

The sports village website.

[Derwent Parker]

1 hour ago, rockerlad said:

yes which in my opinion is ridiculous reds Ladies should be at BP, but with 20 league games, pre season games and Cup games the pitch likely can't handle the extra games. our reserves, Ladies and youthsides should all be under one roof.

The Ladies will like it better at DP - much better ground

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

26 minutes ago, Jacksonville said:

The sports village website.

I’m sick of second guessing so as saying nowt else until the plans are submitted

[Jacksonville]

24 minutes ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

I’m sick of second guessing so as saying nowt else until the plans are submitted

 

24 minutes ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

I’m sick of second guessing so as saying nowt else until the plans are submitted

You needn't second guess, just hope it's a decent grandstand in place of the old one.

[rockerlad]

54 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

The Ladies will like it better at DP - much better ground

They will like it in the new ground even better  

[Derwent Parker]

On 05/02/2023 at 15:07, rockerlad said:

I didnt/don't have a clue what the SL requirements are, I was just stating what the requirements for national league are as I know what they are. I 2000 seats are required for super league as you state then derwent park doesn't meet that standard either as someone said above there is 1100 seats. 

and new stand on one side of bp with say 1500 seats on would take the total in BP over the 2000 mark. 

and yes I agree voting rights should be 50/50. why don't you submit a question about this via the website? 

 

also I pay my money to watch town and sponsor a game every season with work mates, so you are way off the mark saying I don't care about town.

Hang on a mo, had to come back to this [penny just dropped]

Firstly I agree a 1500 seat stand on site of the roofless stand would be ok. Low level still @@@@ tho.

BUT you say added to what you have now 500 ? = 2000??

Does that mean the luxurious seating area you have now is being kept?? and that is what is hidden under the curved roof on the cartoon stadium "VISION" Phase 1 cos they didnt!show a view of that!

I think you know more than you say

Mind you - phase 2 is only a new glass entrance and a couple of banners/flags by training pitch!

Phase 3 looks better - but we will never get funding for that so Phase 2 it is forever 

[dkw]

1 hour ago, Jacksonville said:

The sports village website.

All the images on that site show the pitch rotated 90 degrees, grandstands along 2 different sides than they are now.

[Derwent Parker]

31 minutes ago, dkw said:

All the images on that site show the pitch rotated 90 degrees, grandstands along 2 different sides than they are now.

Just saying Rocker lad made it sound like they were keeping their existing seats and cant do that if they spin it?

[rockerlad]

1 hour ago, Derwent Parker said:

Hang on a mo, had to come back to this [penny just dropped]

Firstly I agree a 1500 seat stand on site of the roofless stand would be ok. Low level still @@@@ tho.

BUT you say added to what you have now 500 ? = 2000??

Does that mean the luxurious seating area you have now is being kept?? and that is what is hidden under the curved roof on the cartoon stadium "VISION" Phase 1 cos they didnt!show a view of that!

I think you know more than you say

Mind you - phase 2 is only a new glass entrance and a couple of banners/flags by training pitch!

Phase 3 looks better - but we will never get funding for that so Phase 2 it is forever 

I haven't got a clue, I was using that as an example, I've seen the same plans you have which is a grand total of zero.

 

do you know more than you are letting on stating we won't get funding for stage 3? what do you base that assumption on?

Edited February 7, 2023 by rockerlad

[rockerlad]

6 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Just saying Rocker lad made it sound like they were keeping their existing seats and cant do that if they spin it?

have you submitted any questions via the CSV website? 

[Derwent Parker]

20 minutes ago, rockerlad said:

I haven't got a clue, I was using that as an example, I've seen the same plans you have which is a grand total of zero.

 

do you know more than you are letting on stating we won't get funding for stage 3? what do you base that assumption on?

Neither club have done any building works lately just maintenance?

We have only got £6. odd Million now for phase 1 and £5M of that was a gift from Boris so unless there is another gift coming - i dont know where the cash is coming from - Phase 2 is low in comparison a glass box and flags so we could sort that but i guess that's it? - 

 

 

 

[townie88]

Phase 1 would be an improvement on both existing facilities as they currently are. Shouldn't get bogged down in having the all singing all dancing stadium that was initially bragged about. We should instead be focusing on freeing ourselves of the burden these stadiums have BOTH become over the last 20 years to BOTH clubs. We all love and hold memories of one or both but S the saying goes, beggers can't be choosers

 

[Derwent Parker]

21 minutes ago, townie88 said:

Phase 1 would be an improvement on both existing facilities as they currently are. Shouldn't get bogged down in having the all singing all dancing stadium that was initially bragged about. We should instead be focusing on freeing ourselves of the burden these stadiums have BOTH become over the last 20 years to BOTH clubs. We all love and hold memories of one or both but S the saying goes, beggers can't be choosers

 

Sorry but that's rubbish DP held World cup matches a few year ago - something BP couldn't do 8k

DP is a far better place for watching rugby - The new stadium should be better than what we have now - Phase 1 is not.

Phase 3 might be wait and see - but doubt it

[Jacksonville]

2 hours ago, dkw said:

All the images on that site show the pitch rotated 90 degrees, grandstands along 2 different sides than they are now.

I think it's just a sketch to keep fans quiet who think we're getting a new stadium.

[Mr Frisky]

7 hours ago, rockerlad said:

yes which in my opinion is ridiculous reds Ladies should be at BP, but with 20 league games, pre season games and Cup games the pitch likely can't handle the extra games. our reserves, Ladies and youthsides should all be under one roof.

But DP is a far better stadium for them - you really should look after your ladies team so well done giving them a decent stadium to play in.

[rockerlad]

3 minutes ago, Mr Frisky said:

But DP is a far better stadium for them - you really should look after your ladies team so well done giving them a decent stadium to play in.

arguing over which is the better stadium is like arguing over 2 terds, both are well past the use by date.

[Jacksonville]

5 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Hang on a mo, had to come back to this [penny just dropped]

Firstly I agree a 1500 seat stand on site of the roofless stand would be ok. Low level still @@@@ tho.

BUT you say added to what you have now 500 ? = 2000??

Does that mean the luxurious seating area you have now is being kept?? and that is what is hidden under the curved roof on the cartoon stadium "VISION" Phase 1 cos they didnt!show a view of that!

I think you know more than you say

Mind you - phase 2 is only a new glass entrance and a couple of banners/flags by training pitch!

Phase 3 looks better - but we will never get funding for that so Phase 2 it is forever 

When we have a new stand l hope those seats are removed and it goes back to a terrace.

[Davo5]

11 hours ago, rockerlad said:

have you submitted any questions via the CSV website? 

Going by his posts obviously not.

[dkw]

10 hours ago, Jacksonville said:

I think it's just a sketch to keep fans quiet who think we're getting a new stadium.

So you dont know then, goodo.