Pre-match drinking - all change next season

[pauliewalnuts]

I wasn't aware that Aston Hall & the church were scheduled for demolition and Aston Park was being built on.

That will be the only area with any character around the ground by the time the Planners have finished.
I would not hold your breath because the park will be built on before long. Pretty green areas are Planners favourites's.

They've just spent a fortune creating a brand new park in the city centre.

[Jimbo]

It isn't just local pubs. We're discussing this one because it's a building used by Villa fans. Many also wanted to keep at least the facade of the Trinity Road stand, but apparently it was no more architecturally important than your average late Victorian town hall.

That's what the world's foremost expert in the field says, so if you want to make sarcastic comments I'd suggest you take it up with him.

If the world's foremost expert in the field said that, then there was nothing sarcastic at all about my comment. It was a statement of fact. I'd love to discuss the merits of football architecture with him. If we'd retained some of ours, we might have been able to retain more of our identity, because that's all we have to cling to these days.

And about the Sky banners, Paulie, it wasn't me who decided to mention them in a discussion about a building demolition. In fact, to do so in the first place was a little bit silly, perhaps sarcastic and rather irrelevant to the issue in hand.

I'm sure you and Mr Inglis would have a great deal in common.

The Sky banners are perfectly relevant. If you're so keen on preserving the look of an old building surely you would agree that a plastic banner and a Sky dish are somewhat at odds with its architectural merit. 

I'm keen on preserving the building, first and foremost. What the former or current owner decided to emblazon the place with is beside the point. I can still see the architectural merits of the King Edward beyond a few banners. Besides, you can remove banners in the same way you can give a dirty dog a bath - you don't have to resort to a lethal injection.

And about your first comment, I know nothing about Mr Inglis, would you care to tell me the things we may have in common should such a meeting take place?

[dave.woodhall]

This, for a start. www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/may/14/newsstory.sport8

And if you're able to "see beyond a few banners" where do you end? There's already a satellite dish on this outstanding example of Edwardian architecture. What else would you allow?

[Jimbo]

This, for a start. www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/may/14/newsstory.sport8

And if you're able to "see beyond a few banners" where do you end? There's already a satellite dish on this outstanding example of Edwardian architecture. What else would you allow?

Isn't that a different question? We're talking about the difference between a building being there, or not being there. If it meant they had to hang a Birmingham City flag on it for a couple of years, I'd rather have that than a demolished building. Ownership means you can hang what you like on a building, but with an older building there's a sense that it also belongs to the community that use it, or live(d) around it, because it's played a part in so many people's lives and is part of the local landscape. Satellite dishes come and go, but once you demolish a building it's gone forever.

So myself and Simon Inglis share a sadness that the old stand has gone? Do you not feel the same way?

[dave.woodhall]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

[Pete3206]

Here's a question. What will happen with The Tavern now. Hasn't the work already started?

[Jimbo]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

But you're talking merely in practical terms. Towns and cities are about more than mere function, otherwise we'd all be living in some concrete Soviet hellhole. You're saying, if it has to go, it has to go. I'm asking, does it really have to go? In this case we've seen that, despite the stupidity of some councillors, we may yet save the King Edward. And it doesn't necessarily have to be used as a pub, although that would be preferable - after all, it's still a going concern.

Demolition in the name of progress is so 1960s. We have to approach our city planning more creatively if we are to learn from the shameful 'mistakes' of the past, and succeed in the 21st century and beyond. All of us have a huge debt to pay to old Birmingham, all I ask is we think a little more carefully before we tear it down.

[Lee]

Never use them much anyway. Eddies is best of the bunch pre-match, but rarely go there. The Social charge too much to get in and the Addys is great after games.

Shame that they are going though.

[myf]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

Its not vacant though is it?  It's in use.  The point in all this is that an attractive community building is being demolished for road widening works to service employment land which could lie empty for years, even decades.  Plan around it and everyone's a winner.

[pauliewalnuts]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

Its not vacant though is it?  It's in use.  The point in all this is that an attractive community building is being demolished for road widening works to service employment land which could lie empty for years, even decades.  Plan around it and everyone's a winner.

It isn't even being demolished, mind.

[MonsXI]

I got worried when i saw this thread title! I thought the police were going to start patrolling Aston park and stop our pre match special brew sessions.

[PeterWithe]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

But you're talking merely in practical terms. Towns and cities are about more than mere function, otherwise we'd all be living in some concrete Soviet hellhole. You're saying, if it has to go, it has to go. I'm asking, does it really have to go? In this case we've seen that, despite the stupidity of some councillors, we may yet save the King Edward. And it doesn't necessarily have to be used as a pub, although that would be preferable - after all, it's still a going concern.

Demolition in the name of progress is so 1960s. We have to approach our city planning more creatively if we are to learn from the shameful 'mistakes' of the past, and succeed in the 21st century and beyond. All of us have a huge debt to pay to old Birmingham, all I ask is we think a little more carefully before we tear it down.

Couldn't agree more, church attendances have been falling dramatically for years but it will be a sad day to see  them being pulled down as local people aren't using them.

[danlanza]

I wasn't aware that Aston Hall & the church were scheduled for demolition and Aston Park was being built on.

That will be the only area with any character around the ground by the time the Planners have finished.
I would not hold your breath because the park will be built on before long. Pretty green areas are Planners favourites's.

They've just spent a fortune creating a brand new park in the city centre.

Is that not due to an EU directive that states that all city centres have to have a certain percentage of ''Green'' land ?
I thought that was the case.

[myf]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

Its not vacant though is it?  It's in use.  The point in all this is that an attractive community building is being demolished for road widening works to service employment land which could lie empty for years, even decades.  Plan around it and everyone's a winner.

It isn't even being demolished, mind.

The decision has been deferred, not refused.  A decision could be taken to demolish when it comes back to Committee after a further round of consultation.  I expect it will still go.

[Jimbo]

Except - and this is the point - the community that used the KE has predominantly gone. Very few people live close to it and there are many less      working nearby than in the past. Yes, it's a nice enough old building, but of a type there are many of in Birmingham. If it has to go in the name of progress, then so be it. The same could be said for the Trinity Road stand. It looked very nice but it was not fit for the 21st century.   

But you're talking merely in practical terms. Towns and cities are about more than mere function, otherwise we'd all be living in some concrete Soviet hellhole. You're saying, if it has to go, it has to go. I'm asking, does it really have to go? In this case we've seen that, despite the stupidity of some councillors, we may yet save the King Edward. And it doesn't necessarily have to be used as a pub, although that would be preferable - after all, it's still a going concern.

Demolition in the name of progress is so 1960s. We have to approach our city planning more creatively if we are to learn from the shameful 'mistakes' of the past, and succeed in the 21st century and beyond. All of us have a huge debt to pay to old Birmingham, all I ask is we think a little more carefully before we tear it down.

Couldn't agree more, church attendances have been falling dramatically for years but it will be a sad day to see  them being pulled down as local people aren't using them.

Absolutely agree. You don't have to believe in God to appreciate the beauty of a church. Likewise, you don't have to be an old soak to understand that there's history, cultural heritage and aesthetic value in most old pubs. But it helps.