Blackwell capacity

[super_les_mcjannet]

The pipe is the other end is it not i.e. to the left hand side of the tin shed?

Can't remember the exact position but it was on the planning application, I think the pipe goes right across the pitch.

[SwansQuaker83]

I thought it was behind the other goal, which is where the tin shed was going to go but it was moved to the position it's in now

[SwansQuaker83]

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/1 ... xt_season/

As per this article?

[super_les_mcjannet]

From memory it comes from the open end (which was to be tin shed) but goes under the pitch then comes out (can't remember which side), then heads over the fields where the kids pitches out the back are.

Looking at the docs on Darlo council site but not found it yet.

[super_les_mcjannet]

Water pipe and the 13 metre easement space it needs starts to the left of the goal at the open end and comes out of the pitch in between the tin shed and the new seating area.

Doesn't give any big specific areas to build on but the plans do have another 220 seats or so added on to the new seating area, taking it to 518 which is required for next level.

So something can still be added behind the goal open end but only about 1/2 and edged all the way over the side with the new seats.

[super_les_mcjannet]

This is the document on the council website, should launch the PDF.

http://msp.darlington.gov.uk/Planning/S ... nt=obj.pdf

[SwansQuaker83]

Cheers, I'll have a butchers...

[SwansQuaker83]

Plenty of space to play with... A terrace the size of the one at Bishop but maybe deeper is possible set to one side...

[feethams]

People moaning about the size/depth of the tinshed should really look at the plans. The wooden face behind the shed is at an angle which means where the turnstiles are due to be, there is no room behind it whatsoever.

One thing I would like to know is if its possible to build terracing / seating infront of the club house ? Also, wouldn't it be worthwhile putting the dugouts on the far side over the area where the pipe leaves the pitch seen as we cannot build on this?

[Undercovered]

We have to bare in mind that we are only tenants at BM and any future construction will have to be approved by DRFC also.

Dugouts must be either side of the halfway line, 3m apart

It has been suggested by the board that the temporary seating from HP could be situated on the pipe on the far side. It wouldn't up the capacity by a huge amount and also wouldn't contribute to the extra seating needed at conference level but would provide extra seating if necessarry.

The main priority will be the pitch which must be relaid this summer regardless of which league we're playing in.

The next priority will be increasing the capacity and adding additional seating. We need to find an additional 200 covered seats - the cheapest way to do this is to extend the seated stand towards the West end and use what we can from the temporary seats at HP and turn it into a permanent structure. As others have alluded to, a terraced stand at the West end which runs from the South side across to as far as the edge of the North side penalty area would be the way to go. This could achieve the required capacity of 4,000.

The drawback is that you're probably looking for at least £300K to complete all 3 elements. Fortunately additional FSIF funding would be available should we gain a further promotion so the amount that we as fans might have to raise could be reduced to around half should all of the work be eligible.

[feethams]

We have to bare in mind that we are only tenants at BM and any future construction will have to be approved by DRFC also.

Dugouts must be either side of the halfway line, 3m apart

Presumably that's a new rule? As they weren't at Feethams.

[Undercovered]

We have to bare in mind that we are only tenants at BM and any future construction will have to be approved by DRFC also.

Dugouts must be either side of the halfway line, 3m apart

Presumably that's a new rule? As they weren't at Feethams.

Yes, a number of extra stipulations exist when your building a new ground rather than playing at an existing ground.

[spen666]

....

It has been suggested by the board that the temporary seating from HP could be situated on the pipe on the far side. It wouldn't up the capacity by a huge amount and also wouldn't contribute to the extra seating needed at conference level but would provide extra seating if necessarry.

....

I thought that:

1. The temporary stand was being left at Bishop
2. That a temporary stand could not be included in calculations of ground (or seating) capacity ( Not sure how this fits fully with Gillingham, or even West Ham at London Stadium where lower tier of ground is temporary seating)
3. That no construction could be built over pipeline

[feethams]

....

It has been suggested by the board that the temporary seating from HP could be situated on the pipe on the far side. It wouldn't up the capacity by a huge amount and also wouldn't contribute to the extra seating needed at conference level but would provide extra seating if necessarry.

....

I thought that:

1. The temporary stand was being left at Bishop
2. That a temporary stand could not be included in calculations of ground (or seating) capacity ( Not sure how this fits fully with Gillingham, or even West Ham at London Stadium where lower tier of ground is temporary seating)
3. That no construction could be built over pipeline

I would presume that Gillingham & West Ham (someone also mentioned Bristol Rovers) are not forced in to counting the temporary seats as part of their overall capacity, as they have already reached the minimum level required?

Also, with regards the pipeline, surely some structure (temporary or not) must be allowed over part of the line, otherwise how on earth do we go on building everywhere else in towns/cities? Surely not every major pipeline in the country is left undeveloped directly above it?

[spen666]

...

Also, with regards the pipeline, surely some structure (temporary or not) must be allowed over part of the line, otherwise how on earth do we go on building everywhere else in towns/cities? Surely not every major pipeline in the country is left undeveloped directly above it?

I have been wondering this point. It seems to me that Darlington RFC and Darlington FC have been treated differently to others in this respect...

If its the case that the other buildings were there before the pipe was installed under them, then it seems to negate the objection about needing unfettered access to the pipeline and therefore preventing building thereon

[Yarblockos]

Just looking at the latest pictures, it seems there is quite a distance between the goalposts and the tinshed, at least nowhere near as close as they are at Bishop. Would be a shame if there was a big gap between the fans and the pitch. I know Rugby posts are 100 yards apart with an "in goal" area behind the goal, so I'm guessing that the posts might be a bit further back for football. I believe 100 yards is the minimum and 130 the maximum. Anyone know how long the Feethams or Arena pitch was?

[feethams]

Just looking at the latest pictures, it seems there is quite a distance between the goalposts and the tinshed, at least nowhere near as close as they are at Bishop. Would be a shame if there was a big gap between the fans and the pitch. I know Rugby posts are 100 yards apart with an "in goal" area behind the goal, so I'm guessing that the posts might be a bit further back for football. I believe 100 yards is the minimum and 130 the maximum. Anyone know how long the Feethams or Arena pitch was?

I think the rugby posts are further forward than football goals will be placed.

The Arena front row of seats was a long way back from the pitch. There was a fair size track that ran around the pitch.

[Robbie Painter]

Just looking at the latest pictures, it seems there is quite a distance between the goalposts and the tinshed, at least nowhere near as close as they are at Bishop. Would be a shame if there was a big gap between the fans and the pitch. I know Rugby posts are 100 yards apart with an "in goal" area behind the goal, so I'm guessing that the posts might be a bit further back for football. I believe 100 yards is the minimum and 130 the maximum. Anyone know how long the Feethams or Arena pitch was?

I've been thinking the same thing & your post prompted me to take a look online.

I measured the Arena pitch & BM pitch on google maps (Gmaps latest update is from 2009 so HP isn't available). Both measure 100m from end to end & approx 66m width.

The premier league official pitch size is 105m x 68m (not all comply due to space available, but only vary by a few m).

FA rules say pitch length can be 90m - 120m & width 50m-100m.

Rugby pitch maximum in play area length (from post to post) is 100m, width 70m.

So the pitch length could be extended at BM by a few metres but not sure how feasible that would be in reality as rugby pitch couldn't be extended past 100m.

One of the worst things about the Arena (& conversely one of the best at HP) was the distance from the pitch. It'll be disappointing if there is a large distance from pitch around the perimeter at Blackwell Meadows.

[H1987]

The bit that strikes me about those plans is thus:

The seated area, we've only built about half of it? So getting more seats, certainly to above 500 is not too much of a problem. I do wonder, should that stand have been built deeper though? Even an extra row or two...

The terrace at the opposite end is probably going to run to the edge of the 6 yard area on the clubhouse side as a maximum.

Obvious extras? Adding some uncovered terracing on the side nearest the tinshed beyond the pipe? I honestly think there should have been serious consideration paid to moving the pitch 20-30 yards towards the town, which would have left the pipe in a much less problematic area of the pitch. I can see how we can potentially get up to 4,000 with another small terrace at the other end of the pitch and expanded seating, but how on earth any more than that is achieved is somewhat beyond me. It probably have to be making the seating at the clubhouse side relevant. I don't know how achievable that is, and there is obviously the issue that it must be agreed with the Rugby club.

[Undercovered]

There are plans in place to bring the ground up to conference standard albeit we'll need to raise funding. Realistically under the current model that will be as far as we can progress.

[Yarblockos]

There are plans in place to bring the ground up to conference standard albeit we'll need to raise funding. Realistically under the current model that will be as far as we can progress.

In the long-term, the only option is to demolish the existing clubhouse and replace it with a large all seated stand. Might take a few million of course. But as you say, whether we could raise that kind of money under the current model is doubtful.

[Darlo1235]

Can anyone put a picture in or a link for the extra plans if we get to the conference premier haven't seen them.

[super_les_mcjannet]

Can anyone put a picture in or a link for the extra plans if we get to the conference premier haven't seen them.

They haven't been announced as yet, at the forum it was advised that the board had plans for further development.

[Vodka_Vic]

There are plans in place to bring the ground up to conference standard albeit we'll need to raise funding. Realistically under the current model that will be as far as we can progress.

If we were to get up to the Conference, not only would we need 4,000 minimum capacity, but we would have to demonstrate how we could build up to 5,000 including 1,000 seats, so I assume that BM would be able to be built up to 5,000. Therefore to progress we need to not only think about raising money for the 4,000 capacity, but designs for the theoretical 5,000 too.

[H1987]

Just because there has to be demonstrable ability to expand doesn't mean we actually have to do it though, in theory...

I'd imagine you could redevelop in front of the clubhouse, albeit at great expense. Gotta remember though, whatever was done would have to be ok'd by the Rugby club. After all, it's their home. I think more realistic would be to revitalise the existing seats at the clubhouse side and extend them along. Barnet have a small seated stand in front of a building which could serve as a model for how it could be done.

[lo36789]

As has been said I think there is plenty of room for theoretical expansion. Funding it would be a different matter entirely. Looking at pictures there is loads of room still behind the tin shed. You basically have a plan drawn doubling the depth of that and fill in all the corners.

[Vodka_Vic]

Just because there has to be demonstrable ability to expand doesn't mean we actually have to do it though, in theory...

I'd imagine you could redevelop in front of the clubhouse, albeit at great expense. Gotta remember though, whatever was done would have to be ok'd by the Rugby club. After all, it's their home. I think more realistic would be to revitalise the existing seats at the clubhouse side and extend them along. Barnet have a small seated stand in front of a building which could serve as a model for how it could be done.

True, but on the Ground Grading website there is no small print showing what 'demonstrable' is. At the very least (and I am assuming here. Someone in the know might know the regulations) I would think you would have to show some plans to the officials. Whether you have to demonstrate how you would achieve it financially I'm not sure.

As long as we can do this then we would be able to reach the Conference. As you say though, pretty sure we wouldn't need those plans in reality as we probably wouldn't have a chance of getting in the EFL until the (hopeful) restructuring at the very least in 2019-20 when Division 5 could open up a few more places. Just don't tell Martin Gray my last point.

Edit:This is copied from the FA ground grading website for Category A

"The stadium must have a minimum capacity of 4,000 spectators, including the seated spectators, as certified by the local authority or calculated by a competent person, in accordance with the “Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds”, (Green Guide) current edition at the time of inspection, with the potential to achieve a capacity of 5,000 in the future. The Football Association and the Football Conference reserve the right to appoint a suitably qualified person to review and, if found necessary, amend the capacity figure.

Final planning permission together with a business strategy plan with realistic timescales must be available to achieve the 5,000 capacity."

So it appears that to get promotion this year by March 31st next year we would have to have a 4,000 capacity and also be 'Ready to go' with the 5,000 even though we wouldn't have to fund it there and then. I'm sure this will have been discussed already.

[feethams]

As has been said I think there is plenty of room for theoretical expansion. Funding it would be a different matter entirely. Looking at pictures there is loads of room still behind the tin shed. You basically have a plan drawn doubling the depth of that and fill in all the corners.

I'm not sure about this - there is plenty of room at one end, but according to the official plans, the wooden fence is at an angle moving in towards the club house, at the side where the turnstiles are, there is due to be hardly any room behind it at all.

[feethams]

Just because there has to be demonstrable ability to expand doesn't mean we actually have to do it though, in theory...

I'd imagine you could redevelop in front of the clubhouse, albeit at great expense. Gotta remember though, whatever was done would have to be ok'd by the Rugby club. After all, it's their home. I think more realistic would be to revitalise the existing seats at the clubhouse side and extend them along. Barnet have a small seated stand in front of a building which could serve as a model for how it could be done.

I think this would be a really good option. If you look at the club house, you could probably build 10-12 rows of seats up to the balcony height.

Obviously - depends on the Rugby Club permission etc...

[super_les_mcjannet]

As has been said I think there is plenty of room for theoretical expansion. Funding it would be a different matter entirely. Looking at pictures there is loads of room still behind the tin shed. You basically have a plan drawn doubling the depth of that and fill in all the corners.

I'm not sure about this - there is plenty of room at one end, but according to the official plans, the wooden fence is at an angle moving in towards the club house, at the side where the turnstiles are, there is due to be hardly any room behind it at all.

Looking the other day and I didn't go all the way over but it did seem plenty of room even at the club house end. In theory the fence could possibly be moved back also as behind the fence is just trees and plenty of room before you get to the kids pitches, unless the trees are protected.

However it was clearly stated that the tin shed is as it is and it would need knocking down and rebuild to increase size now. So we need to move on from trying to make this bigger certainly in the short term.