Villa Park Redevelopment

[Ads]

I'm all for keeping Villa Park at Villa Park, and having it look like Villa Park, but if we were to move then there's no point building an ersatz Victorian theme park.

A new site would mean projecting into the future and building a big MonsterBastardDome out of the bones of the vanquished.

A triumphal arch with a sculpture of Heck defiling the holiest of Holtes, carrying off the plunder of the mid-10s mosaics to fund the MonsterBastardDome Colosseum.

[paul_e]

I'm all for keeping Villa Park at Villa Park, and having it look like Villa Park, but if we were to move then there's no point building an ersatz Victorian theme park.

A new site would mean projecting into the future and building a big MonsterBastardDome out of the bones of the vanquished.

I wouldn't go as far as a "victorian theme park" but I'd love it to be a hybrid of red brick and glass, I just think it looks fantastic and would be instantly iconic.

AI fun:


Maybe not so much mess around the roof but something leaning towards that.

[Dante Lavelli]

I was against a move when this debate started but now, in order, my preferences are:

1. Move to city centre location - ground that’s a year round venue/attraction,
2. Redevelop villa park with all its quirks.
3. NEC
4. New ground at villa park - I struggle to see the benefits of this. All the costs without the location for gigs etc.

[olaftab]

Lol, agreed, common sense you come to expect from posters called Lee plus surname initial.

(google's to check if name can be changed to LeeA, to gain much needed posting credibility)

[chrisw1]

If we could create a 60.000 Victorian Hybrid with 4 stands with sweeping staircases ornate gables and  balconies 

nearby that would be great

If they build a new 60k stadium, I can guarantee you it won't be 4 stands with Victorian style gables.

[paul_e]

I was against a move when this debate started but now, in order, my preferences are:

1. Move to city centre location - ground that’s a year round venue/attraction,
2. Redevelop villa park with all its quirks.
3. NEC
4. New ground at villa park - I struggle to see the benefits of this. All the costs without the location for gigs etc.

I'd swap the last 2 because I see absolutely no value in going to the NEC but otherwise I agree. City Centre needs some definition though.

[Sexual Ealing]

I'm all for keeping Villa Park at Villa Park, and having it look like Villa Park, but if we were to move then there's no point building an ersatz Victorian theme park.

A new site would mean projecting into the future and building a big MonsterBastardDome out of the bones of the vanquished.

A triumphal arch with a sculpture of Heck defiling the holiest of Holtes, carrying off the plunder of the mid-10s mosaics to fund the MonsterBastardDome Colosseum.

More or less, although perhaps the sculpture could be of someone less divisive than Heck. Maybe Steve Hodge or Gil Merrick.

[eamonn]

Should we really be worrying about a new Villa Park for the next 150 years? A.I. and Global Warming are gonna team-tag humanoids out of existence by the end of the century. You may as well stop having children now, it won't be fair on them.

[LeeS]

Should we really be worrying about a new Villa Park for the next 150 years? A.I. and Global Warming are gonna team-tag humanoids out of existence by the end of the century. You may as well stop having children now, it won't be fair on them.

Those sentient AI bots will be the next generation of paying fans. Probably wont need beer or pies though.

[Risso]

so where did the 50,500 that they stated come from?

As it sounds good. Why you wouldn't just design it to breach 50k I do not know. But 19 sell outs a season would have left an average of 49,500 and change. Which would bug the life out of me.

It would also be tricky to wrap the Witton upper with the new North Upper like Risso suggested, as there is/was a structural roof support that runs diagonally down, starting outside of the Witton's foot print and tapering into the block R area. Such is/was the size of the Upper North, you'd have to have an absolute huge Witton to link too. That requires the removal of Witton Lane to build. Phase II would have posed huge challenges.

£100m to box yourself into a project that doesnt achive what we need. So let's build a new ground.

It's all possible though, and has been done many times to other grounds around the country. So to me it's a choice between having a capacity of 50,000 in two years and then 60,000 in 4-5 years, for say £250m total cost or a new 60,000 stadium somewhere else so far unidentified in 10 ten years + for £1bn plus. In terms of boosting revenue sooner rather than later, and also total cost I can't see why they'd go for the second option.

[Risso]

If we could create a 60.000 Victorian Hybrid with 4 stands with sweeping staircases ornate gables and  balconies 

nearby that would be great

If they build a new 60k stadium, I can guarantee you it won't be 4 stands with Victorian style gables.

All this talk about four separate stands ignore the fact that for a very long time, Villa Park looked like this:

[Pat Mustard]

I dont want to turn this into a discussion about Heck, but I think you're quick to judgment there calling him a fraud. He's not by any definition of the word. He's abrasive for sure; somebody posted an article about roughing up the New Jersey York Red Bulls fans. He's ruffled feathers a plenty here by redelivering the Lerner badge with some minor alterations. That badge wasn't popular already, the manner of its rebirth isn't going to ameliorate that.

But there's also been articles on the 76ers etc about making money, more than we make in 8 years and from Americas working class sport. Can he ride roughshod over fans? He shouldn't, but I think he can given Purslow's greatest achievement was to remove any elasticity from the supply of tickets. Supporting us now is unique in that 150 year history. We are all SeattleVillain now.

A major event has taken place with de facto Comcast buying a chunk of NWSE and by virtue now owning a chunk of Villa Park. You don't see plans, I don't see coincidences. Comcast are here because of Heck and strategically NWSE are obviously satisfied with the strategic change to give up a piece of the pie.

If we don't think Swaris in particular hasn't a handle on it, then we're perhaps ignoring his booting of Gerrard, pursuit of Emery, throat clearing at the Adidas board meeting etc. Swaris is a hands on chap.

A new ground on a different site, around the area where the old Albion at Aston is (derelict sites and old factory mixed with [cheaply!] built newer units, some early 20th student housing, the abandoned Office wearhouse, the Old BRMB unit, gas works- fundamentally around Chester Street. That's what I'd do. Maintain the highest possible attendance and build afresh adjacent to the city centre- New Street the station of choice; A38, A45 all easy reach. I think that's being considered (the new build, not my suggested location).

Great post. I'd love to stay at VP forever and I'd love it to remain as a romantic link to football grounds of old. But Aston Villa Football Club needs to thrive for another 150 years. We should make the difficult decisions that give us the best chance of staying at the top. I'd say it probably needs outsiders who don't have our sentimental attachment to make those hard choices.

Having said that, if they move us to the NEC I'll be livid.

If we think extending Witton Lane because of the houses is a non-starter then I don't know how we would even begin to get that site within the next 20 years.  There are loads of existing businesses that would be affected/demolished, council offices, hotels, houses and even a travellers site - logistically and politically this would be an absolute nightmare to pull off.

I'm not against the idea of a new stadium if it is achievable in a realistic timeframe, but I would maintain the only realistic site within a few miles of where we are now is at Birmingham Wheels i.e. next door to The Sty.  The land is being cleared and the council are desperate to get money in the coffers.  Any other places where there is sufficient space to build an enormo-dome are going to be further from the city centre than we are now, and with transport links far worse than we have at VP - it's one of  the problems of living in the largest sity in Europe that doesn't have a proper metro or light-rail system.

[Sexual Ealing]

I'm all for keeping Villa Park at Villa Park, and having it look like Villa Park, but if we were to move then there's no point building an ersatz Victorian theme park.

A new site would mean projecting into the future and building a big MonsterBastardDome out of the bones of the vanquished.

I wouldn't go as far as a "victorian theme park" but I'd love it to be a hybrid of red brick and glass, I just think it looks fantastic and would be instantly iconic.

AI fun:


Maybe not so much mess around the roof but something leaning towards that.

That does look pretty good. We'd just need to add a few tyre fires at the walk-up to the away end. And a moat and a couple of iron trebuchets next to the burger vans.

[Des Little]

There’s plenty of tyres lying in front gardens around the ground, as well as sofas, fridges etc. Sorted.

[Chris Smith]

I was against a move when this debate started but now, in order, my preferences are:

1. Move to city centre location - ground that’s a year round venue/attraction,
2. Redevelop villa park with all its quirks.
3. NEC
4. New ground at villa park - I struggle to see the benefits of this. All the costs without the location for gigs etc.

I really think the City Centre is a non starter.