Villa Park Redevelopment

[The Edge]

Being a pedant, but isn’t the consensus that the view is great from the North Stand but the concourses are shite?  I think that is being addressed by the removal of offices.

Otherwise I kinda agree.  Typically corporate types want to be on the halfway line, however the north stand offered parking and space to offer proper restaurant style facilities.  Most the other stands are compromised for space one reason or another.

I've only sat in the NS upper a handful of times. I recall it being very steep with a fantastic view. However the legroom is appalling if you're more than 5ft 5in tall.

[FatSam]

Knocking the whole thing down and building a big brand new stand would be proper balls out. Keeping the central core of a stand that's widely regarded as unfit for purpose just feels a bit Doug.

All that is being retained of the existing stand is the concrete frame. A team of professional consultants have clearly advised that this is fit for purpose, or they wouldn’t be re-using it. There are definitely some compromises in re-using this, in terms of restrictions on layout, how it connects to its neighbours, and capacity, but presumably these are all outweighed by the benefits in terms of not having to divert below ground utilities, build period, and presumably cost. Getting to the higher capacity faster also allows the club to test demand I. A way they can’t at the moment,

[The Edge]

Knocking the whole thing down and building a big brand new stand would be proper balls out. Keeping the central core of a stand that's widely regarded as unfit for purpose just feels a bit Doug.

All that is being retained of the existing stand is the concrete frame. A team of professional consultants have clearly advised that this is fit for purpose, or they wouldn’t be re-using it. There are definitely some compromises in re-using this, in terms of restrictions on layout, how it connects to its neighbours, and capacity, but presumably these are all outweighed by the benefits in terms of not having to divert below ground utilities, build period, and presumably cost. Getting to the higher capacity faster also allows the club to test demand I. A way they can’t at the moment,

Are the concrete steps that the seats are currently fitted to being retained? I hope not because that means the legroom isn't going to be improved. That's the second biggest complaint about the NS. The first is the tiny concourses but that's going to be addressed.

[FatSam]

Are the concrete steps that the seats are currently fitted to being retained? I hope not because that means the legroom isn't going to be improved. That's the second biggest complaint about the NS. The first is the tiny concourses but that's going to be addressed.

I assume so, and yes, that would be another compromise.

[Dante Lavelli]

Knocking the whole thing down and building a big brand new stand would be proper balls out. Keeping the central core of a stand that's widely regarded as unfit for purpose just feels a bit Doug.

All that is being retained of the existing stand is the concrete frame. A team of professional consultants have clearly advised that this is fit for purpose, or they wouldn’t be re-using it. There are definitely some compromises in re-using this, in terms of restrictions on layout, how it connects to its neighbours, and capacity, but presumably these are all outweighed by the benefits in terms of not having to divert below ground utilities, build period, and presumably cost. Getting to the higher capacity faster also allows the club to test demand I. A way they can’t at the moment,

Are the concrete steps that the seats are currently fitted to being retained? I hope not because that means the legroom isn't going to be improved. That's the second biggest complaint about the NS. The first is the tiny concourses but that's going to be addressed.

My guess is yes and they’d provide part of the structural integrity of the whole frame.