Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:14 am  

paw81 wrote:

http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?p=16073252#p16073252 shows the phased design of Salfords new ground - clever stuff.

It's going to look good when it is finished.

Looking like your place is really taking shape now and cant wait to visit, but must admit think the site layout is very odd in that coming in from the new footbridge you will have to walk all the way arround tescos to get to the stadium

It's unfortunate. If only Saints had been rich enough to take the whole site for itself, the stadium could have been an amazing landmark. However, they weren't that rich and so Tesco get to build a lump of a building on the site AND hog all the car parking. Alas! It looks as though the stadium will be taller than Tesco so there should be something to look at from the town centre once the whole thing is completed.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sat Apr 30, 2011 10:18 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

It's going to look good when it is finished.

It's unfortunate. If only Saints had been rich enough to take the whole site for itself, the stadium could have been an amazing landmark. However, they weren't that rich and so Tesco get to build a lump of a building on the site AND hog all the car parking. Alas! It looks as though the stadium will be taller than Tesco so there should be something to look at from the town centre once the whole thing is completed.

I don't think the tesco being there will be a big problem to be honest.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:09 am  

The Chair Maker wrote:

The official main entrance for the Stadium is actually on Peasley cross lane and is not the footbridge. The footbridge is primarily to link the Tescos to the town centre, though on matchdays large numbers of RL fans are likely to use the bridge, and hence the council have played up the Saints angle.

In many respects however walking past the Tescos at Saints will be no different than walking past Asda and the retail park at Wigan, or walking past Tescos to get to Warrington. It doesnt really matter what stadium your at, you have to walk or drive round something to get to your destination.

The important thing is that the stadium is easy to get to and offers the right facilities for the fans

Touching on what the chair maker has said about facilities, I hope the town centre pubs, clubs, shops, chippies food outlets etc, embrace the "match day" concept fully, and dont see rugby league fans as an easy touch.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sat Apr 30, 2011 12:57 pm  

Going back to my comments about the terrace looking bigger than what the stated capacity in the plans is. I have looked into the official Green Guide for sports stadium safety link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... rounds.pdf This stipulates that the maximum density of people per 10meters squared of terrace is 47. By looking at the stadium plans, i can see that Saints have adopted a far lower density for the terrace. My calculations put the density at 37.6 people per 10 metres squared of terrace (please dont ask about how do you work out half a person, its merely a statistical calculation) From looking at the green guide i can see that there is something called the "S" factor in terrace capacity calculations. This is used to adjust the maximum density, based on a number of things such as a clubs proven ability to keep terrace gangways clear, and also evacuate a stadium within the required timescales. If a club has failed to show it can hit these targets, then the "s" factor is used to reduce the density. It would therefore appear to me that because the club have yet to prove they can properly steward the new terraces, that the "s " factor is less than 100% of maximum legal capacity and has infact been set at approximately 80% of maximum spectator density. This throws up the rather interesting possibility that further down the line, Saints may be able to increase the stadiums capacity, through merely being able to show good crowd management. Ive calculated that the home terrace capacity may be able to go from 3800 to 4773, while the away terrace could go from 3940 upto 4923. Please note i have not included disabled spectator capacity in these figures as they would not change. This represents an increase of 1956 If we add this onto the current stadium capacity of 17984 we arrive at a figure of 19940. Of course the flipside is that if Saints show they cant manage a crowd at the current agreed capacity of 17984, then the stadium will have its capacity cut. This happened at the Halliwell Jones in Warrington, whereby a ground projected to have a capacity of 14200 had it cut to just over 13k. This does make me wonder if Saints have learned from Wires experience, and rather than going for maximum terrace capacity from the off, they have adopted a more conservative outlook and gone for a capacity that should not cause any stadium management issues. Something else to note, is that prior to the Hillsborough disaster, it was legal to have 54 people for 10 metres squared. This would have given the new west terrace a capacity of 5485 back in the 1980's.

Going back to my comments about the terrace looking bigger than what the stated capacity in the plans is. I have looked into the official Green Guide for sports stadium safety link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... rounds.pdf This stipulates that the maximum density of people per 10meters squared of terrace is 47. By looking at the stadium plans, i can see that Saints have adopted a far lower density for the terrace. My calculations put the density at 37.6 people per 10 metres squared of terrace (please dont ask about how do you work out half a person, its merely a statistical calculation) From looking at the green guide i can see that there is something called the "S" factor in terrace capacity calculations. This is used to adjust the maximum density, based on a number of things such as a clubs proven ability to keep terrace gangways clear, and also evacuate a stadium within the required timescales. If a club has failed to show it can hit these targets, then the "s" factor is used to reduce the density. It would therefore appear to me that because the club have yet to prove they can properly steward the new terraces, that the "s " factor is less than 100% of maximum legal capacity and has infact been set at approximately 80% of maximum spectator density. This throws up the rather interesting possibility that further down the line, Saints may be able to increase the stadiums capacity, through merely being able to show good crowd management. Ive calculated that the home terrace capacity may be able to go from 3800 to 4773, while the away terrace could go from 3940 upto 4923. Please note i have not included disabled spectator capacity in these figures as they would not change. This represents an increase of 1956 If we add this onto the current stadium capacity of 17984 we arrive at a figure of 19940. Of course the flipside is that if Saints show they cant manage a crowd at the current agreed capacity of 17984, then the stadium will have its capacity cut. This happened at the Halliwell Jones in Warrington, whereby a ground projected to have a capacity of 14200 had it cut to just over 13k. This does make me wonder if Saints have learned from Wires experience, and rather than going for maximum terrace capacity from the off, they have adopted a more conservative outlook and gone for a capacity that should not cause any stadium management issues. Something else to note, is that prior to the Hillsborough disaster, it was legal to have 54 people for 10 metres squared. This would have given the new west terrace a capacity of 5485 back in the 1980's.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:12 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote: Going back to my comments about the terrace looking bigger than what the stated capacity in the plans is. I have looked into the official Green Guide for sports stadium safety link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... rounds.pdf This stipulates that the maximum density of people per 10meters squared of terrace is 47. By looking at the stadium plans, i can see that Saints have adopted a far lower density for the terrace. My calculations put the density at 37.6 people per 10 metres squared of terrace (please dont ask about how do you work out half a person, its merely a statistical calculation) From looking at the green guide i can see that there is something called the "S" factor in terrace capacity calculations. This is used to adjust the maximum density, based on a number of things such as a clubs proven ability to keep terrace gangways clear, and also evacuate a stadium within the required timescales. If a club has failed to show it can hit these targets, then the "s" factor is used to reduce the density. It would therefore appear to me that because the club have yet to prove they can properly steward the new terraces, that the "s " factor is less than 100% of maximum legal capacity and has infact been set at approximately 80% of maximum spectator density. This throws up the rather interesting possibility that further down the line, Saints may be able to increase the stadiums capacity, through merely being able to show good crowd management. Ive calculated that the home terrace capacity may be able to go from 3800 to 4773, while the away terrace could go from 3940 upto 4923. Please note i have not included disabled spectator capacity in these figures as they would not change. This represents an increase of 1956 If we add this onto the current stadium capacity of 17984 we arrive at a figure of 19940. Of course the flipside is that if Saints show they cant manage a crowd at the current agreed capacity of 17984, then the stadium will have its capacity cut. This happened at the Halliwell Jones in Warrington, whereby a ground projected to have a capacity of 14200 had it cut to just over 13k. This does make me wonder if Saints have learned from Wires experience, and rather than going for maximum terrace capacity from the off, they have adopted a more conservative outlook and gone for a capacity that should not cause any stadium management issues. Something else to note, is that prior to the Hillsborough disaster, it was legal to have 54 people for 10 metres squared. This would have given the new west terrace a capacity of 5485 back in the 1980's. Erm, how do you work out half a person? Love the pitctures by the way, good work.

The Chair Maker wrote: Going back to my comments about the terrace looking bigger than what the stated capacity in the plans is. I have looked into the official Green Guide for sports stadium safety link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... rounds.pdf This stipulates that the maximum density of people per 10meters squared of terrace is 47. By looking at the stadium plans, i can see that Saints have adopted a far lower density for the terrace. My calculations put the density at 37.6 people per 10 metres squared of terrace (please dont ask about how do you work out half a person, its merely a statistical calculation) From looking at the green guide i can see that there is something called the "S" factor in terrace capacity calculations. This is used to adjust the maximum density, based on a number of things such as a clubs proven ability to keep terrace gangways clear, and also evacuate a stadium within the required timescales. If a club has failed to show it can hit these targets, then the "s" factor is used to reduce the density. It would therefore appear to me that because the club have yet to prove they can properly steward the new terraces, that the "s " factor is less than 100% of maximum legal capacity and has infact been set at approximately 80% of maximum spectator density. This throws up the rather interesting possibility that further down the line, Saints may be able to increase the stadiums capacity, through merely being able to show good crowd management. Ive calculated that the home terrace capacity may be able to go from 3800 to 4773, while the away terrace could go from 3940 upto 4923. Please note i have not included disabled spectator capacity in these figures as they would not change. This represents an increase of 1956 If we add this onto the current stadium capacity of 17984 we arrive at a figure of 19940. Of course the flipside is that if Saints show they cant manage a crowd at the current agreed capacity of 17984, then the stadium will have its capacity cut. This happened at the Halliwell Jones in Warrington, whereby a ground projected to have a capacity of 14200 had it cut to just over 13k. This does make me wonder if Saints have learned from Wires experience, and rather than going for maximum terrace capacity from the off, they have adopted a more conservative outlook and gone for a capacity that should not cause any stadium management issues. Something else to note, is that prior to the Hillsborough disaster, it was legal to have 54 people for 10 metres squared. This would have given the new west terrace a capacity of 5485 back in the 1980's. Erm, how do you work out half a person? Love the pitctures by the way, good work.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sun May 01, 2011 5:35 am  

BackrowSaint wrote:

Erm, how do you work out half a person?
.

As there's no stadia with only 10SqM of terracing Elf n Safety take the maximum safe amount of people over a known large terraced area for similar type of arena/sport & divide that number into the overall area.
Hence in this instance The Chair Maker gave a calculation of 3800 capacity at 3.76 fans per 1SqM (or 37.6/10sqM) which roughly gives you a terraced area of 1010.6 SqM for the home supporters.

If you then applied the maximum 4.7 fans per sqm this equates to a potential allowable on the terrace of 4750, that would still be pretty safe IMO given if you look at the old Threepenny stand at Hull and many other older stadia where fans would pack in regardless at the 'Kop' end with no barriers in place. You'd get a 'wave' of people & they'd be literally shoulder to shoulder which is what the later guidelines wanted to avoid especially at very large kops like at many of the bigger football stadia which were often quite steep too.

As it happens the maximum capacity for the rugby at the KC is reduced from that of the soccer for safety reasons.

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sun May 01, 2011 12:23 pm  

Time for this weeks Piccys

THE FLOODLIGHT GANTRY ON THE SOUTH STAND



THE EAST STAND NEXT TO PEASLEY CROSS ROAD



THE EAST STAND AND DRAINAGE WORKS



EAST STAND AND PRESUMABLY THE TANK FOR RAINWATER



NORTH STAND NEAREST THE TOWN CENTRE



THE SOUTH AND WEST STANDS



SOUTH STAND SHOWING THE FLOODLIGHT GANTRIES



SOUTH STAND SHOWING THE FLOORS GOING IN

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sun May 01, 2011 12:26 pm  

MORE SOUTH STAND





WEST STAND SHOWING THE CRUSH BARRIERS IN PLACE



AND A RATHER PRETTY VIEW FROM PX



VIEWS FROM THE RETAIL PARK

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Sun May 01, 2011 12:29 pm  

BLIMEY!!! It only feels like about a month since I went to Saints shopping and criticised he new stadium because it was taking ages! I stand corrected!

Re: Stadium Site pictures : Mon May 02, 2011 11:05 am  

Our shiny new stadium looked great this morning, the speed the frame is going up is phenominal, i imagine fitting it out will take a little longer