New Stand: Ongoing work (updated)

[jake]

5 minutes ago, TypoonJambo said:

Thanks for that, currently got them airing out in the sun. Got some funny looks from the neighbours but they seem to have perked up nicely. 

Your soil maybe contaminated .

Once certain moulds establish themselves.

Look at your soil is there little seed like things.

Give your bulbs a wee rub with alcohol.

 

Have a wee read up mate plenty natural solutions.

And you could have a wee bit alcohol with your bulbs.

Then check the neighbours looks

You really dont need chemicals btw.

 

 

 

[TyphoonJambo]

2 minutes ago, jake said:

Your soil maybe contaminated .

Once certain moulds establish themselves.

Look at your soil is there little seed like things.

Give your bulbs a wee rub with alcohol.

 

Have a wee read up mate plenty natural solutions.

And you could have a wee bit alcohol with your bulbs.

Then check the neighbours looks

You really dont need chemicals btw.

 

 

 

True story, one of my lads came to me asking for advice. Sir, he says. I think i have crabs. Who have you nailed, i asked. Manky Mandy from the village he replied. Get yourself to the med centre i advised, its no big deal. Well its worse than that he continued. How come, i asked. Well you see i have self medicated. Wtf do you mean, i asked. I've sprayed my bollox with Cyllic Bang. They've stopped moving but now it burns like hell and its all red and swollen,my Cpl said it works. 

Moral of the story, avoid dirty women, chemicals or advice from unqualified people 

[jake]

1 minute ago, TypoonJambo said:

True story, one of my lads came to me asking for advice. Sir, he says. I think i have crabs. Who have you nailed, i asked. Manky Mandy from the village he replied. Get yourself to the med centre i advised, its no big deal. Well its worse than that he continued. How come, i asked. Well you see i have self medicated. Wtf do you mean, i asked. I've sprayed my bollox with Cyllic Bang. They've stopped moving but now it burns like hell and its all red and swollen,my Cpl said it works. 

Moral of the story, avoid dirty women, chemicals or advice from unqualified people 

Dirty women I like.

 

And ignore me on soft landscaping mate.

 

Certain chemicals I do like but we wont go there?

[Blacky87]

10 minutes ago, jake said:

Dirty women I like.

 

And ignore me on soft landscaping mate.

 

Certain chemicals I do like but we wont go there?

So many levels! ?

[letsmakesomenoise]

10 hours ago, stotty said:

The wee clock is a welcome addition! 

 

Except it stops at 45 and 90 minutes! Show us the time added on ffs!!

[heartandsoul]

4 hours ago, farin said:

 

?

 

Brilliant Farin

[Enzo Chiefo]

9 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

The extra spend making sure hospitality is bang on the money will generate millions year on year for re investment in the playing side..

 

in term of the original spec large construction projects are notoriously difficult to fully estimate, becuase they take so long they are open to fluctuations in price.  For an example - see every stadium build ever! But spurs is a good one.. £400million over budget

A lot of the mistakes made in the original spec were absolutely fundamental.  The provision of toilets, with a 50/50 split male/female was ludicrous, corporate guests/rival managers having to cross the concourse pre and post match, the location of the press box, equally so. Forgetting to order seats etc. Simply replicating the Wheatfield Stand and adding the corporate facilities at the back was a mistake. Of course we are all grateful for having a new Main Stand but, it really could have been so much better. Everyone accepts delays and overspend but a lot of basic flaws could have been avoided.

[DalryJambo]

8 hours ago, Taffin said:

 

 

Right okay, you're right. Everything has been exactly as outlined, perfectly delivered on time and absolutely nothing about it has ended up a slight compromise and none of the additional spend has been to correct  flaws and rectify issues in the initial design.

 

I'm glad I'm now aware of all of that, I'll make sure to use it as a blueprint as a perfect project in future. 

 

As for my industry knowledge I'm well aware of the issues these types of builds face but that doesn't make it okay. If one of our customers had a project run 60% over budget long before it was even completed folk would be getting their arse felt for it, they wouldn't be saying "oh well, it comes with the territory, everything is absolutely perfect, what's 6 million quid anyway?"

 

...but its the customer who is choosing it to run over budget (‘budget’ is an interesting term - it’s actually running over the originally quoted cost - it seems what’s being delivered now is within a newly agreed budget). Anne Budge has taken a pragmatic approach throughout the project, as finances improved within the club, to change spec in certain areas and the costs have therefore increased. If you look at a massive hospitality suite and improve the quality of the finish throughout the cost will increase but so will the look etc of the finished product. Is that bad project management or cutting your cost accordingly? 

[Big Slim Stylee]

9 hours ago, jake said:

I still cannot get my head around what she has put in place.

It's a remarkable achievement.

 

I couldn’t agree more. It’s a head-scratcher for me the abuse she gets. 

[Whatever]

12 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

? have you ever worked on a real project.. because I sure as **** have never seen a perfect one (especially one that had to be done in a hastily before the opportunity was gone)

 

and as regards your repetitive point on overspend. if you buy a car, then add leather seats and a panoramic sunroof, and 20” all its . it’s not 60% over budget. 

 

Your counting additional spend we CHOSE to spend upgrading the whole stadium . We CHOSE to add facilities which generate additional ongoing revenue, we CHOSE to spend relaying the pitch once as a short term fix to help cathro’s team, then we CHOSE to lay the best pitch in Scotland for over £1m, We then CHOSE To rebuild the plant room and to re- do plumbing in all of the other stands, the we CHOSE to replace many of the seats and generally refurbish the other stands, now we are CHOOSING to upgrade all of the turnstiles in the other stands.. none that had nothing to do with the original £12m budget. I could go on but hopefully your starting to get the real point and stop quoting a ****ing stupid and incorrect £6m overspend. We are Choosing to spend it becuase 1. We can afford it  and 2. It will set us up better for success in future because it all needs done at some point after years of neglect. 

 

You’ll be lucky if the real overspend was between £1.5 to  £2m between 10% and 15% (not far outside the contingency budget we had set aside) and with all your experience of the industry that’s a pretty ****ing good result I’m sure you will agree. 

 

????????

11 hours ago, iainmac said:

 

Great post. Do people forget where we've come from? 

 

Even when Ann / FoH / Fans bought the club, I used to really worry about that old main stand. 

 

Now we've built a new stand, put in a museum, a Remembrance Garden and a state of the art new pitch! 

 

I personally couldn't see any of this in my wildest dreams but it's all a reality now. 

??????

11 hours ago, jake said:

I still cannot get my head around what she has put in place.

It's a remarkable achievement.

????

[HotelMikeFoxtrotCharlie]

On 27/06/2019 at 15:28, hughesie27 said:

All still going to be delivered or already delivered. Sky Lounge castle view being the exception minus the roof viewing platform. 

You are deluded.

[kingantti1874]

9 hours ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

A lot of the mistakes made in the original spec were absolutely fundamental.  The provision of toilets, with a 50/50 split male/female was ludicrous, corporate guests/rival managers having to cross the concourse pre and post match, the location of the press box, equally so. Forgetting to order seats etc. Simply replicating the Wheatfield Stand and adding the corporate facilities at the back was a mistake. Of course we are all grateful for having a new Main Stand but, it really could have been so much better. Everyone accepts delays and overspend but a lot of basic flaws could have been avoided.

 

Yep, as I’ve acknowledged of course there were some mistakes which no doubt were a factor in the ACTUAL overspend of £1.5 to £2m 

 

But we went from zero to a hundred miles an hour to get this over the line fast before the council blocked the development for all time.. that context  seems to be forgotten .

 

fact is as has been said it’s an incredible achievement, every single project of this scale has some sort of issue somewhere and the actual overspend is well within an acceptable level. 

[Midloth_Iain]

11 hours ago, letsmakesomenoise said:

 

Except it stops at 45 and 90 minutes! Show us the time added on ffs!!

 

not allowed to .....

[jambali]

They've even got corners to fill in!!

[Thomaso]

20 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

Mono-block was a stupid choice tbf. 

 

It was the best option to give future easy access to services or blocked drains, etc.

What option would you have preferred?

Edited June 30, 2019 by Thomaso

[Thomaso]

20 hours ago, kila said:

So to add to the exceptionally high window cleaning costs, there is also expensive monoblock maintenance costs

 

 

 

So you would have done away with the glass facade???

Edited June 30, 2019 by Thomaso

[davemclaren]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

So you would have done away with the glass facade???

I think he was being sarcastic. ?

[Thomaso]

13 hours ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Simply replicating the Wheatfield Stand and adding the corporate facilities at the back was a mistake. 

 

A mistake????? It’s called design continuity. There is also the small matter of connecting the new truss to the level of the existing trusses.

Tell me what design would you have gone for bearing in mind the tight programme requirements???

[Thomaso]

13 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

I think he was being sarcastic. ?

 

You can never be sure on here Dave. ?

[Thomaso]

4 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

Yep, as I’ve acknowledged of course there were some mistakes which no doubt were a factor in the ACTUAL overspend of £1.5 to £2m 

 

But we went from zero to a hundred miles an hour to get this over the line fast before the council blocked the development for all time.. that context  seems to be forgotten .

 

fact is as has been said it’s an incredible achievement, every single project of this scale has some sort of issue somewhere and the actual overspend is well within an acceptable level. 

 

Nailed it mate! ?

Some on here are absolutely clueless!

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

You can never be sure on here Dave. ?

Very true. ?

[Enzo Chiefo]

25 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

A mistake????? It’s called design continuity. There is also the small matter of connecting the new truss to the level of the existing trusses.

Tell me what design would you have gone for bearing in mind the tight programme requirements???

If you are simply building a stand, I agree. No point replicating something when you need to incorporate corporate facilities, dressing rooms, a press box etc. I accept that we were pushed for time etc but, in retrospect,  I think we should have bitten the bullet and moved out for a year, to allow a bespoke stand to be built without such a tight deadline. Again, I'm not privvy to the costs involved etc and, of course, we are all grateful to AB for the stand that we have now.

[davemclaren]

1 minute ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

If you are simply building a stand, I agree. No point replicating something when you need to incorporate corporate facilities, dressing rooms, a press box etc. I accept that we were pushed for time etc but, in retrospect,  I think we should have bitten the bullet and moved out for a year, to allow a bespoke stand to be built without such a tight deadline. Again, I'm not privvy to the costs involved etc and, of course, we are all grateful to AB for the stand that we have now.

I think the biggest challenge to the timescale was the council planning to rebuild the nursery. It was clearly rushed which caused a few issues. Things like not having directors sitting with the plebs seem an obvious issue though. 

[Dunks]

29 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Nailed it mate! ?

Some on here are absolutely clueless!

 

[luckydug]

6 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

I think the biggest challenge to the timescale was the council planning to rebuild the nursery. It was clearly rushed which caused a few issues. Things like not having directors sitting with the plebs seem an obvious issue though. 

Why shouldn't the directors sit with the plebs ?

There's security everywhere at football matches these days.

The plebs would be safe enough☺

[davemclaren]

2 minutes ago, luckydug said:

Why shouldn't the directors sit with the plebs ?

There's security everywhere at football matches these days.

The plebs would be safe enough☺

??

[Independence]

1 hour ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Nailed it mate! ?

Some on here are absolutely clueless!

This.

[Independence]

1 hour ago, luckydug said:

Why shouldn't the directors sit with the plebs ?

There's security everywhere at football matches these days.

The plebs would be safe enough☺

If you saw the abuse a few fans gave our directors/owner at last seasons Partick v Hearst cup tie you would understand. It was embarrassing and made feel ashamed we had such ejects in our support!!!

 

[Independence]

On 29/06/2019 at 13:04, Mid Calder Jambo said:

 

I am well aware of the fact that financial mismanagement nearly cost us the club, and as financal supporters the Foundation aims to ensure that ir will never happen again. You have seen the annual accounts since AB took over, as i have, and i don't see any signs of financial mismanagement now.  Yes £6m on the playing staff would have great, but would it won us anything in an era when Septic are absolutly dominant, i think not. This was a major and evolving construction project and it is very nearly the norm that they over run on cost. 

 

So my advice to those griping about the cost is; One, suck it up and enjoy the new facilities or Two, remove those in chrge when the Foundation takes over. I will enjoy the new facilities.

SPOT ON !!!!

[luckydug]

1 hour ago, Independence said:

If you saw the abuse a few fans gave our directors/owner at last seasons Partick v Hearst cup tie you would understand. It was embarrassing and made feel ashamed we had such ejects in our support!!!

 

Yes I agree I was being flippant ☺

That directors area at Firhill is very exposed. 

I was at that game although I wasn't near the directors but some of the behaviour was atrocious especially that song the young team were singing about Mrs Budge ruining the club.

Some Hearts fans are behaving like spoilt brats these days.

I have no idea where this sense of entitlement is coming from tbh.

[Bridge of Djoum]

23 hours ago, kila said:

 

A friend had someone clean their double monoblock drive for £100. That's probably around £1k-2k for Hearts. Per year.

 

Another main stand cockup, could've knocked 5p off every pie for that.

 

 

You kidding, mate?

 

I'd say the annual cleaning bill would be around 300k, easy. 

[Thomaso]

2 hours ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

If you are simply building a stand, I agree. No point replicating something when you need to incorporate corporate facilities, dressing rooms, a press box etc. I accept that we were pushed for time etc but, in retrospect,  I think we should have bitten the bullet and moved out for a year, to allow a bespoke stand to be built without such a tight deadline. Again, I'm not privvy to the costs involved etc and, of course, we are all grateful to AB for the stand that we have now.

 

We could not have moved it back a year! We had to build the stand so we could incorporate the nursery to meet the tight deadline set by the council - with respect this point has been made ad naseum!

[kingantti1874]

7 minutes ago, Bridge of Djoum said:

You kidding, mate?

 

I'd say the annual cleaning bill would be around 300k, easy. 

 

?

[colinmaroon]

1 hour ago, Bridge of Djoum said:

You kidding, mate?

 

I'd say the annual cleaning bill would be around 300k, easy. 

 

 

 

I'm doing it for £1/17/6d

 

 

[Mid Calder Jambo]

47 minutes ago, colinmaroon said:

 

 

 

I'm doing it for £1/17/6d

 

 

 

Paid in half crowns I hope.

[Independence]

3 hours ago, luckydug said:

Yes I agree I was being flippant ☺

That directors area at Firhill is very exposed. 

I was at that game although I wasn't near the directors but some of the behaviour was atrocious especially that song the young team were singing about Mrs Budge ruining the club.

Some Hearts fans are behaving like spoilt brats these days.

I have no idea where this sense of entitlement is coming from tbh.

totally agree. It was shocking behaviour from 'so called' Hearts fans who really should be at Ibrox.

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

3 hours ago, luckydug said:

Yes I agree I was being flippant ☺

That directors area at Firhill is very exposed. 

I was at that game although I wasn't near the directors but some of the behaviour was atrocious especially that song the young team were singing about Mrs Budge ruining the club.

Some Hearts fans are behaving like spoilt brats these days.

I have no idea where this sense of entitlement is coming from tbh.

Totally agree 

[Chaps]

3 hours ago, luckydug said:

Yes I agree I was being flippant ☺

That directors area at Firhill is very exposed. 

I was at that game although I wasn't near the directors but some of the behaviour was atrocious especially that song the young team were singing about Mrs Budge ruining the club.

Some Hearts fans are behaving like spoilt brats these days.

I have no idea where this sense of entitlement is coming from tbh.

 

All started from the championship season imo.

[J.T.F.Robertson]

21 minutes ago, Chaps said:

 

All started from the Romanov seasons imo.

 

 (only kinda joking)

 

[DETTY29]

4 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

We could not have moved it back a year! We had to build the stand so we could incorporate the nursery to meet the tight deadline set by the council - with respect this point has been made ad naseum!

But if you live in a fantasay world of no constraints, everything is possible.

[Toggie88]

5 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

We could not have moved it back a year! We had to build the stand so we could incorporate the nursery to meet the tight deadline set by the council - with respect this point has been made ad naseum!

 

While this is somewhat true, the reality is there was numerous workarounds with the council. The 'tight deadline' could've been a lot less tight, had the club simply asked. There was also other options available with regards to the nursery and land elsewhere. These were also discussed on this thread at a certain point. 

[Thomaso]

2 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

While this is somewhat true, the reality is there was numerous workarounds with the council. The 'tight deadline' could've been a lot less tight, had the club simply asked. There was also other options available with regards to the nursery and land elsewhere. These were also discussed on this thread at a certain point. 

 

Frankly that is nonsense. Hearts only gained planning permission for the new stand on the basis that the nursery would be ready within the timeframe promised to the parents for the new nursery that was planned on the existing site.

There was no other council land or option in the vicinity of the existing nursery “elsewhere” that was viable for the parents or council.

[Toggie88]

2 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Frankly that is nonsense. Hearts only gained planning permission for the new stand on the basis that the nursery would be ready within the timeframe promised to the parents for the new nursery that was planned on the existing site.

There was no other council land or option in the vicinity of the existing nursery “elsewhere” that was viable for the parents or council.

 

Yes, there was a stipulation on timeline. It didn't need to be what it was. The club has a lot of friends within the council, there was a lot of wiggle room and the assumption that it was now or never, isn't 100% honest imo. The council's flexibility was clearly evident when it came to inspections and issues with power. 

 

With regards to land, a trade for the nursery grounds and land owned by the club on Wheatfield St (the temporary site for the nursery), isn't something I believe was investigated but would've solved any timeline issues and mutually benefited both parties. 

 

Again, this has been covered in this thread before. 

[Thomaso]

11 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

Yes, there was a stipulation on timeline. It didn't need to be what it was. The club has a lot of friends within the council, there was a lot of wiggle room and the assumption that it was now or never, isn't 100% honest imo. The council's flexibility was clearly evident when it came to inspections and issues with power. 

 

With regards to land, a trade for the nursery grounds and land owned by the club on Wheatfield St (the temporary site for the nursery), isn't something I believe was investigated but would've solved any timeline issues and mutually benefited both parties. 

 

Again, this has been covered in this thread before. 

 

Youre not listening are you! My information is based on being involved in the pre-planning and construction of the new stand.

The timeline for the integrated nursery WAS a planning stipulation for the new stand.

The small plot of land in the Wheatfield yard was rightly not deemed to be suitable for the nursery - it would never have been accepted by the council or the parents as a “trade”.

I cannot remember if this was covered in the thread previously - if it had been it would have well and truly been put to bed!

[Heartsofgold]

5 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Youre not listening are you! My information is based on being involved in the pre-planning and construction of the new stand.

The timeline for the integrated nursery WAS a planning stipulation for the new stand.

The small plot of land in the Wheatfield yard was rightly not deemed to be suitable for the nursery - it would never have been accepted by the council or the parents as a “trade”.

I cannot remember if this was covered in the thread previously - if it had been it would have well and truly been put to bed!

 

This 100%. We had NO wiggle room in the timeline at all. That’s why we were rushing to complete the nursery to hand over on a specific date last year. As for having those friends on the council, had they even thought about intervening then they would open themselves up to corruption allegations and possible charges. 

[corryjambo]

33 minutes ago, Toggie88 said:

 

Yes, there was a stipulation on timeline. It didn't need to be what it was. The club has a lot of friends within the council, there was a lot of wiggle room and the assumption that it was now or never, isn't 100% honest imo. The council's flexibility was clearly evident when it came to inspections and issues with power. 

 

With regards to land, a trade for the nursery grounds and land owned by the club on Wheatfield St (the temporary site for the nursery), isn't something I believe was investigated but would've solved any timeline issues and mutually benefited both parties. 

 

Again, this has been covered in this thread before. 

 

That may be your opinion but your opinion is factually wrong.

 

Abject nonsense, I know nothing about building but I do know that this site would never have been accepted by the Education Department of the City Council as a site for the new nursery.

[Toggie88]

49 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Youre not listening are you! My information is based on being involved in the pre-planning and construction of the new stand.

The timeline for the integrated nursery WAS a planning stipulation for the new stand.

The small plot of land in the Wheatfield yard was rightly not deemed to be suitable for the nursery - it would never have been accepted by the council or the parents as a “trade”.

I cannot remember if this was covered in the thread previously - if it had been it would have well and truly been put to bed!

 

It was a planning stipulation put in place by the planning department at the council. My information is coming from that end. 

 

Also, when was the plot of land not deemed suitable for the nursery? And why was it then subsequently used for the nursery for the entire construction period? Your premise that it wouldn't have been accepted by the council or parents is based on nothing. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2019 by Toggie88

[Toggie88]

21 minutes ago, corryjambo said:

 

That may be your opinion but your opinion is factually wrong.

 

Abject nonsense, I know nothing about building but I do know that this site would never have been accepted by the Education Department of the City Council as a site for the new nursery.

 

Must have been my imagination it being there for over a year then... 

[Thomaso]

1 hour ago, Toggie88 said:

 

It was a planning stipulation put in place by the planning department at the council. My information is coming from that end. 

 

Also, when was the plot of land not deemed suitable for the nursery? And why was it then subsequently used for the nursery for the entire construction period? Your premise that it wouldn't have been accepted by the council or parents is based on nothing. 

 

 

 

Yes it was a planning stipulation put in place by the Council planning dept - just as I said previously FFS!

The Wheatfield yard area was deemed suitable for the temporary nursery not the permanent nursery - inadequate floor space, limited access, etc.

My “premise” is based on pre-planning and construction meetings I attended with Ann Budge and the design team - yours looks to be based on an uniformed grump!

[Toggie88]

8 hours ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

 

Yes it was a planning stipulation put in place by the Council planning dept - just as I said previously FFS!

The Wheatfield yard area was deemed suitable for the temporary nursery not the permanent nursery - inadequate floor space, limited access, etc.

My “premise” is based on pre-planning and construction meetings I attended with Ann Budge and the design team - yours looks to be based on an uniformed grump!

My information comes from the council end, not the club but fill yer boots. I'm not going to lose any sleep over the fact someone on the internet is wrong.