Stadium Expansion

I think the location of our "ancestral seat" depends on when you began to attend matches at the Vic. For me this was 1970 and the Rookery was and always will be our "home end" (despite the fact that it has been denied to us at various time over the years).

 

He's right you know!

 

I feel that the Vic Rd end was Cassiobury Estate, Rickmansworth, Chorleywood Bushey and Nascot Wood, whilst the Rookery was more Lower High St, Meriden, West Watford, Oxhey Estate and Carpenders Park

 

It has been. It's now the away bar ...

 

The old rookery was a design classic with the widest ever steps and shallowest ever rake, shame could have been much more if it was built better....

 

I got bored and ended up drawing another stand. I need to get out more.

SEJ Stand Extension, on Flickr

I've basically just copied the current design style but extended the stand back to Occupation Road, with a slight increase in slope to help with sightlines.

Very roughly I think this would give us 5,400 seats in the SEJ, excluding the corner (which is 450 odd I think?). Worked out by: (current 3,700 seats / 24 rows) x 35 rows. I believe we have planning permission for 5,000 but I doubt the residents behind would like the 7m increase in height.

 

That's alright up to a point, but why didn't you get Carlos to help you?

 

I tried but he's fully booked for the next 6 months

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Good work but I think we're gonna need to buy the whole of Liverpool Street to get that passed ... IMO I'd say that reducing the rake and adding a tier wouldn't need to be higher than your new plan. And why no cantilevered roof? it could reduce obstructed light significantly.

 

I agree about getting it passed, a resident complained about the first phase of construction. A council inspector had to go and check the new height wasn't greater than the approved plans.

Not sure what you mean in the second part, that is a cantilever roof?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

It really isn't unless you've left the important details off. Think of a crane but instead of using huge weights as a counterbalance we'd use some kind of outriggers and straps (see pic).

 

I'm not sure you know what a cantilever is... It simply means just supported at one end (or a propped cantilever, which is supported more than once but sticks out at the end). What I have drawn is clearly a cantilever.

However, you are correct in suggesting it'd need better support. The current cantilever roof works with just the truss because the moment induced through the connection with the column does not exceed its capacity. As the roof would now span 8m more, this would likely increase the moment such that the more traditional approach I've copied isn't feasible.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Well I never! you have actually got me there as I've always assumed they were always counterbalanced as the included 'lever' would suggest. I'll obviously have to be more careful next time .... Mind you the fulcrum is obvious so in a way I suppose it is.

 

The trick is the moment connection, essentially a very rigid joint which moves the moment (torque) into the column. The longer the unsupported end of the beam, the more torque acts on the joint, and therefore the column. So the current SEJ can get away with just using a very rigid connection, with quite large columns capable of coping with the load. But the 8m extension will massively increase the moment, and therefore I doubt the current columns and joints would work - so the counter balance / stays approach is probably right.

But I'm a pedant.

 

I've always found skyhooks to be most useful in these situations, maybe the club should order some

 

I think they had some holding the old East Stand up for that long

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Don't want to tread on anybody's toes here as the amount I know about construction can be written on a postage stamp - but Abso's earlier post (#2433) states that the council planning office have approved permission for a larger SEJ to be built, and that one of the images for this is the one I posted on here a while back (http://wfcforums.com/index.php?threads/stadium-expansion.48315/page-66#post-2544647). In that picture - assuming it's fairly accurate if it's one that the council have (actual plans I'm sure, not the artists impression) - then you can see that they've used the propped cantilever (just learnt that from you) design. Also - it appears much higher than your excellent drawing, so therefore the extra height has also presumably been approved by the council??

And had a look at your Vic Road stand pictures on Flickr - excellent stuff.

 

...and TBF aren't the builders of the SEJ specialists in "temporary" sports stands - and isn't that how the SEJ was first described?

 

I'd like to join in this debate cos I've had a few moment connections with a very rigid joint - but they had nothing to do with buildings.

 

As it's just the Liverpool Street residents that would be affected by a higher structure, couldn't the club offer the 12 or so home owners affected a one time payment to prevent any objections with the proviso that all agreed?
Trying to buy homes won't work as there's usually one who won't sell at any price.

 

Agreed. Yes. Where is the man with his wacky, tumbledown stadia suggestions?

 

A bribe. Yes. The government just did it ...

 

I lived in Africa where they prefer to call such payments a gratuity, or a dash, or a 'present', or even, if it's our government, foreign aid.
It's how the continent works.

But yes, a bribe ...

 

I've had a look around the planning portal and can only find extensions of the planning permission granted in 2008, for a 5,000 stand. I'm not sure what the height of the application was, but I'd expect it's quite strict as there was a resident complaining about the height of the current stand during construction. Fortunately after the consultation period.

And thank you, I'm not sure I'll do this stand in as much detail. Although I am half-tempted to model the entire stadium, if I get really bored!

 

Sounds like they need you in the construction team, your experience may be useful during erection.

 

Unfortunately the great artiste* has been censored by "The Man".


*Pisse-

 

Or you could call it "compensation", which the affected party could either take or leave. And if anyone chose not to take it, the compensation/bribe would have to be upped until everyone was happy. If no amount of compensation/bribe would satisfy one of the householders, the scheme wouldn't happen. Seems reasonable to me.

 

This is an appalling development cramping/compromising the style of the lovable scamp with the Tate gallery touch ...

 

I could be wrong.. but i think the term "propped cantilever" actually refers to a non fully cantilevered roof, one that has some form of prop forward of the attaching point. Like the Revie stand at Elland Road among others..



This form of cantilevering being less common these days but you will see it when cost saving is a concern.
The external cantilever in that rendering is just another form of cantilevering.. presumably full cantilevering with no support struts.

Actually thinking about it the current EJ stand roof is also an external cantilever.. with exposed underneath steel work. As youve probably noticed more often than not the cantilever steel work is on the upper side of the roof and frequently with protruding struts.
Im not sure if there is a specific term for that type of extended cantilevering. Anyone?

 

Yes.. well "semi permanent"
There was a bit of confusement about this to begin with and some Watford fans thought we were going to get some flimsy plastic seats attached to some scaffolding poles!
The company that built the stand.. GL events.. taylor their builds to the customers needs with modular grandstands ranging from those you see at Golfing events for just a few days.. to semi permanent football stands like ours or the one at Blackpool (now i sound like a salesman!)

I think by semi permanent they mean they are erected with view to either being a cheaper short term solution or that the stand will form the basis of an easily extended future stand. Ideal for clubs who havent decided fully on how they will develop their stadiums.

More here.. http://www.glevents.co.uk/products/stadium-construction/

 

When they were announced I went with another fan straight to "The Hive" (Barnet's ground) to see what a GLE "temporary" stadium looked like (the only experience was what Sarries used to use at Copthall).

 

Assuming the authorities find it acceptable for said compensation/bribe to be given for a written legally binding declaration of not objecting to a higher SEJ stand, then the greed of man factor will kick in.
If 11 households agree to a certain figure but the 12th doesn't, then the 11 would put pressure on their neighbour to accept the money.

Personally I would have faith in Gino's ability to negotiate, and if that failed, the persuasive skills of the heavies on this forum could swing into action

 

I bow to yours and scummybear's construction knowledge - I'm just pleased that the Vic looks - imo - amazing now, and sounds like in the near future will look even better.

Regarding other recent chat here re. houses in Liverpool Road/height restrictions etc - remember the quote from Scott Duxbury that I posted above where he stated that they've had planning permission approved for whatever type of SEJ extension they've decided on. Therefore, I don't think we need to worry about height/light/compensation etc as it's either all taken care of or wasn't necessary.

My guess would be that they'll make a start at the end of the coming season (but will probably be proved totally wrong on this).

 

Planning permissions are time limited. I hope they do start at the end of this season ...

 

They are but if plans remain unchanged it's relatively easy to extend the time period with a renewed application.