TYNECASTLE STADIUM UPGRADE POTENTIAL - UEFA category 4 granted ( updated/merged )

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

I think the only thing left is the wall behind the School End stand. 

Weren’t some elements of the old main stand preserved e.g. the mosaic?
 

[SMJ_1874]

Guys relax ffs. We have a 15 bedroom hotel earmarked for the second floor of the new main stand. This will be built by JB Contracts after the year. We also have two LED screens that will be in place after the year….and we’ve also secured a new striker from Tottenham Hotspur that will be joining us in January. So what’s there not to look forward to? 

[Section Q]

Hotel...striker......?

[Cruyff]

1 hour ago, Section Q said:

Hotel...striker......?

Looking for land to build a new training ground too. 

[Section Q]

12 hours ago, Cruyff said:

Looking for land to build a new training ground too. 

Yep. Saw that...... Hotel....? Who's the Spurs striker.....?

[Jim Panzee]

27 minutes ago, Section Q said:

Yep. Saw that...... Hotel....? Who's the Spurs striker.....?

Karry Hane 

[JayTeeJnr]

6 hours ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

Weren’t some elements of the old main stand preserved e.g. the mosaic?
 

Indeed … and bricks from the old stand were reused at the turnstiles walls along with the original stand construction plaque

[Debut 4]

15 hours ago, Libertarian said:

I'm glad I am not the only one who feels like this. I have read that when Hearts moved out to Gorgie in the 1880s many supporters were unhappy as the city limit at the time was Haymarket. I love Tynecastle but the fact is that for the club to grow and fulfill it's potential we need a bigger capacity, 25,000 minimum. Did David Murray not offer to build us a 30,000 capacity stadium in his huge development to the west of the city?

You probably know but there’s been a couple of other instances where we could’ve been playing elsewhere.  In the 30s(maybe the 20s?) a move to a huge stadium in Sighthill was spoke of but fell through. 
 

Then, my Dad told me we played a trial match at Murrayfield years after to see if the club fancied a move there. 
 

 

[Stu_HMFC]

7 hours ago, SMJ_1874 said:

Guys relax ffs. We have a 15 bedroom hotel earmarked for the second floor of the new main stand. This will be built by JB Contracts after the year. We also have two LED screens that will be in place after the year….and we’ve also secured a new striker from Tottenham Hotspur that will be joining us in January. So what’s there not to look forward to? 

Jack Clarke 

[PortyBeach]

1 hour ago, Debut 4 said:

You probably know but there’s been a couple of other instances where we could’ve been playing elsewhere.  In the 30s(maybe the 20s?) a move to a huge stadium in Sighthill was spoke of but fell through. 
 

Then, my Dad told me we played a trial match at Murrayfield years after to see if the club fancied a move there. 
 

 

Yes, opportunities that sadly failed to materialise. I remember one poster providing an interesting copy of the plans for the Saughton/Sighthill stadium. 
Like you, I remember being told about a possible move to Murrayfield…

[Section Q]

14 hours ago, Jim Panzee said:

Karry Hane 

Erse......!

[gowestjambo]

4 hours ago, Debut 4 said:

You probably know but there’s been a couple of other instances where we could’ve been playing elsewhere.  In the 30s(maybe the 20s?) a move to a huge stadium in Sighthill was spoke of but fell through. 
 

Then, my Dad told me we played a trial match at Murrayfield years after to see if the club fancied a move there. 
 

 

 

My late Dad told me Hearts were offered Murrayfield, but it was turned down as it was "Thought to be too far out of Town"......

[upgotheheads]

I think  we missed an opportunity to build in development potential when we rebuilt the new stadium with the corner supports rather  than cantilevered stands. Maybe that was done with cost in mind but it's hard to see how cantilevered structures would have been more expensive. Maybe if the New main stand had been cantilevered it might have given us an opportunity again to put that right.

[PortyBeach]

22 minutes ago, gowestjambo said:

 

My late Dad told me Hearts were offered Murrayfield, but it was turned down as it was "Thought to be too far out of Town"......

It sounds plausible! I get the impression previous administrations at Tynecastle were lacking in vision and ambition.

Dave Mackay’s transfer in 1959 sums it up for me.

[Bull's-eye]

Are the corners being filled in yet ?

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

7 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

Are the corners being filled in yet ?

No, think we’re still a week or two away.

[Hesh]

21 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Imagining some decades-distant future where our fanbase grows to rival the OF and we can realistically average 35k per game, so that using Tynecastle as our main stadium somehow becomes untenable, at some point it becomes silly to not talk about ground sharing at Murrayfield. The club could keep Tynecastle as a training facility, keep the main but knock down the other stands for reserves and women's games, and have the club offices, shop, museum, and sundry there.

 

Let's get to that point before we start worrying about it, though.

Always love the way some talk about Murrayfield. It’s privately owned so not a given but would only ever be as a tenant.

 

likewise unsure why you would have a training facility with a pitch a significantly different size 

[Thomaso]

2 hours ago, gowestjambo said:

 

My late Dad told me Hearts were offered Murrayfield, but it was turned down as it was "Thought to be too far out of Town"......

that is correct 

[SUTOL]

2 hours ago, upgotheheads said:

I think  we missed an opportunity to build in development potential when we rebuilt the new stadium with the corner supports rather  than cantilevered stands. Maybe that was done with cost in mind but it's hard to see how cantilevered structures would have been more expensive. Maybe if the New main stand had been cantilevered it might have given us an opportunity again to put that right.

 

 

It's my understanding that there is not enough room behind the three 'old' stands to fit cantilever stands of a similar capacity in the space. 

 

 

[Bull's-eye]

49 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

It's my understanding that there is not enough room behind the three 'old' stands to fit cantilever stands of a similar capacity in the space. 

 

 

 

Plenty options in all seriousness, a Wembley arch would be good.

The stanchions can all be moved behind the stands although the memorial garden would suffer and for that alone I'd leave it as is.

Nothing would be cheap.

[SUTOL]

2 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

Plenty options in all seriousness, a Wembley arch would be good.

The stanchions can all be moved behind the stands although the memorial garden would suffer and for that alone I'd leave it as is.

Nothing would be cheap.

 

 

Yes plenty of options, depending on budget. I was meaning more when the stands were built.

 

Other options and techniques/technology available today. 

 

 

Moving the stanchions I think be the cheapest and least disruptive.

I'm sure the memorial garden could stay in place, even if we did fill in the corners after moving the stanchions.

 

Though the lift to a roof terrace PR seating area does sound appealing. In the summer, not so great in the middle of winter.  🥶

 

 

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

8 hours ago, JayTeeJnr said:

Indeed … and bricks from the old stand were reused at the turnstiles walls along with the original stand construction plaque

Thanks for confirming

[Lfhearts]

Am just working out on my fag packet the dimensions, yours JC.

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

20 hours ago, trotter said:

This. 

 

Back at the time I made a number of posts about the H&S issues we faced. I do this everyday as a job, oil and gas admittedly, but the same rules apply. I don't mean this as a slight to others posters, but its not quite as straightforward as it seems as to why you can allow student housing but not an increased capacity stadium. 

 

That being said, I entirely understand why people think leaving Tynecastle for a bigger stadium is abhorrent. My old man took me to my first game there, his old man did the same for him. I get it, I genuinely do. But the simple fact is, if we start competing for titles and trophies regularly and we see the need for a bigger stadium, it won't be in Gorgie. Someone on here about the time of the move said of very simply, 'I support Hearts, not Tynecastle Park'. 

Since you have opened that particular Pandora's can of worms, I think you should spill the beans...

[kingantti1874]

1 hour ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

It's my understanding that there is not enough room behind the three 'old' stands to fit cantilever stands of a similar capacity in the space. 

 

 

Lots of ways to do it. Cantilever is only one option

[Thomaso]

13 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

Lots of ways to do it. Cantilever is only one option

What are the other options?

[PortyBeach]

2 hours ago, Hesh said:

Always love the way some talk about Murrayfield. It’s privately owned so not a given but would only ever be as a tenant.

 

likewise unsure why you would have a training facility with a pitch a significantly different size 

I think the Murrayfield references here relate to a different era, and the implication is that back then, Hearts were given the opportunity to  become owners or perhaps co-owners. 
Now it may the case that what was on offer back then was only, as you suggest, a tenancy.

Any information on this?

 

[kingantti1874]

18 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

What are the other options?

cable stays. Various space savings designs possible in the existing footprint. 
 

costly of course.. but very possible from an engineering Perspective. 

Edited November 14, 2021 by kingantti1874

[Unknown user]

41 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

What are the other options?

 

There are loads of things that could be done, architects aren't unimaginative.

 

I like PSV's approach in a tight space which this street view shows well

 

[Thomaso]

7 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

There are loads of things that could be done, architects aren't unimaginative.

 

I like PSV's approach in a tight space which this street view shows well

 

Great! Now how about options our Club can afford? 🤔

[Thomaso]

42 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

cable stays. Various space savings designs possible in the existing footprint. 
 

costly of course.. but very possible from an engineering Perspective. 

Yup virtually any option is possible if you have a huge budget….

[kingantti1874]

16 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

Yup virtually any option is possible if you have a huge budget….

who’s said otherwise? I don’t think I’ve ever read anyone say there is a cheap option.  But there are engineering options.. pretty simple ones from an engineering perspective 

Edited November 14, 2021 by kingantti1874

[Unknown user]

23 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

Great! Now how about options our Club can afford? 🤔

 

I'm just answering what's possible, I'm not arguing for or against anything, but it doesn't look outlandishly expensive compared to any other option. It's all pipe dream this thread isn't it?

 

 

[Cruyff]

34 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

There are loads of things that could be done, architects aren't unimaginative.

 

I like PSV's approach in a tight space which this street view shows well

 

That is a cantilever mate. 👍

[Unknown user]

Just now, Cruyff said:

That is a cantilever mate. 👍

Yes

[Thomaso]

32 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

who’s said otherwise? I don’t think I’ve ever read anyone say there is a cheap option.  But there are engineering options.. pretty simple ones from an engineering perspective 

What’s the point giving options that can never be afforded? 🤷‍♂️

[Thomaso]

24 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

I'm just answering what's possible, I'm not arguing for or against anything, but it doesn't look outlandishly expensive compared to any other option. It's all pipe dream this thread isn't it?

 

 

It sure is!

[Unknown user]

AZ's stadium, although this is the one where the roof collapsed in bad weather!

 

[kingantti1874]

18 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

What’s the point giving options that can never be afforded? 🤷‍♂️

who says it can never be afforded? I just said it was expensive.. 

 

remove the roof, build support, replace the roof.. it a while since I finished my engineering degree but no concrete involved.. I’d guess anywhere between £8-£13million

[upgotheheads]

4 hours ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

It's my understanding that there is not enough room behind the three 'old' stands to fit cantilever stands of a similar capacity in the space. 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

Yes plenty of options, depending on budget. I was meaning more when the stands were built.

 

Other options and techniques/technology available today. 

 

 

Moving the stanchions I think be the cheapest and least disruptive.

I'm sure the memorial garden could stay in place, even if we did fill in the corners after moving the stanchions.

 

Though the lift to a roof terrace PR seating area does sound appealing. In the summer, not so great in the middle of winter.  🥶

 

 

 

Thanks for that. It has bothered me for years why that design was used and that might be the answer. A look at google earth suggests that there's not much scope for moving the stanchions backwards in the corner between the Gorgi and new stand, although the other corners look ok , or an asymmetric design might be possible.

Another approach might be an imaginative redevelopment of the Wheatfield stand. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

6 hours ago, Hesh said:

Always love the way some talk about Murrayfield. It’s privately owned so not a given but would only ever be as a tenant.

 

likewise unsure why you would have a training facility with a pitch a significantly different size 

 

By the time we'd be at a point where we should be considering it, the current stadium will likely be old enough so as to need replaced or significantly upfitted.

 

Again, all this is silly idle talk. We're not moving from a stadium that's ATM perfect for our size any time soon.

[tynietigers]

How many seats are we actually going to get in a corner 🤔 and how much would each corner cost 😕 and the big one, how often would those corners be filled.

Edited November 14, 2021 by tynietigers

[PortyBeach]

12 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

By the time we'd be at a point where we should be considering it, the current stadium will likely be old enough so as to need replaced or significantly upfitted.

 

Again, all this is silly idle talk. We're not moving from a stadium that's ATM perfect for our size any time soon.

The thread’s theme is about upgrading the current stadium: no more, no less.

 I don’t think anyone has been advocating a move from Tynecastle. 

[Mysterion]

5 hours ago, Smithee said:

 

There are loads of things that could be done, architects aren't unimaginative.

 

I like PSV's approach in a tight space which this street view shows well

 

Albeit with money - this shows that things are possible if willing to find a way.

[trotter]

8 hours ago, King Of The Cat Cafe said:

Since you have opened that particular Pandora's can of worms, I think you should spill the beans...

Very quick and dirty (again, not a slight, but it's an extremely complicated subject) risk is basically defined by frequency x consequence. In other words, what is the chance of something bad happening multiplied by whatever bad things it would cause if it did.  

 

Simply looking at the population numbers and omitting every other variable, you have a student population of what, say 500? (I don't know how much it holds) who will be there, call it 45 weeks of the year, that gives you 7,560 hours. Assuming they are at uni for 8 hours a day (again assuming 7 days a week just to make the maths simple) that leaves 500 people at risk for 4,989 hours per year. If we define the worst case of a massive explosion that will kill everyone 500 x 4,989 = 2,494,800 per year. Doing an equivalent equation for Tynecastle as it sits is 20,000 people for, say 3 hours, for 38 games a season (half of one and half of another) 38 x 3 x 20,000 = 2,280,000 per year. 

 

On the face of it, and again ignoring all other variables, we have roughly the same level of risk. The fun and games start when you add the variables, things like: blast proofing of buildings, ways to get out the buildings, wind direction, other structures in the way that can deflect blast overpressures, etc. etc. That makes a marked effect on said calculations. Before you laugh, the consequences modeling software I use to do these calculations (DNV PHAST if you want to look it up) takes all these things into account. So like I said, it's not a simple exercise. It's not as simple as saying well the students are there all the time, why can't we add another 10,000 capacity.

 

Hopefully that answers your question, more than happy to talk about it further 👍

 

EDIT: One other thing, NBD stores ethanol. Whilst very flammable indeed, it isn't explosive. You might have an initial small blast if the tanks caught fire internally but nothing that would affect the stadium or the students as it's not stored under pressure. I'm more concerned about what they keep next door at MacFarlan Smith. They have genuinely nasty shit there. I've been on both sites and I know which one scares me most. 

Edited November 15, 2021 by trotter

[Watt-Zeefuik]

2 hours ago, trotter said:

Very quick and dirty (again, not a slight, but it's an extremely complicated subject) risk is basically defined by frequency x consequence. In other words, what is the chance of something bad happening multiplied by whatever bad things it would cause if it did.  

 

Simply looking at the population numbers and omitting every other variable, you have a student population of what, say 500? (I don't know how much it holds) who will be there, call it 45 weeks of the year, that gives you 7,560 hours. Assuming they are at uni for 8 hours a day (again assuming 7 days a week just to make the maths simple) that leaves 500 people at risk for 4,989 hours per year. If we define the worst case of a massive explosion that will kill everyone 500 x 4,989 = 2,494,800 per year. Doing an equivalent equation for Tynecastle as it sits is 20,000 people for, say 3 hours, for 38 games a season (half of one and half of another) 38 x 3 x 20,000 = 2,280,000 per year. 

 

On the face of it, and again ignoring all other variables, we have roughly the same level of risk. The fun and games start when you add the variables, things like: blast proofing of buildings, ways to get out the buildings, wind direction, other structures in the way that can deflect blast overpressures, etc. etc. That makes a marked effect on said calculations. Before you laugh, the consequences modeling software I use to do these calculations (DNV PHAST if you want to look it up) takes all these things into account. So like I said, it's not a simple exercise. It's not as simple as saying well the students are there all the time, why can't we add another 10,000 capacity.

 

Hopefully that answers your question, more than happy to talk about it further 👍

 

EDIT: One other thing, NBD stores ethanol. Whilst very flammable indeed, it isn't explosive. You might have an initial small blast if the tanks caught fire internally but nothing that would affect the stadium or the students as it's not stored under pressure. I'm more concerned about what they keep next door at MacFarlan Smith. They have genuinely nasty shit there. I've been on both sites and I know which one scares me most. 

 

Thank you for doing being much more precise with this than I was. You're right, I shouldn't have said "exploding." I think the main concern was a major fire in one of the high concentration tanks, and the fumes that could result from that fire.

 

Back when we were planning the main stand, I sat down and read the whole Tynecastle COMAH report. It's probably still available online somewhere but my takeaway was 1) H&S have drawn a red line as to the maximum capacity they'll allow Tynecastle to be under current circumstances, and we're pretty much at that point, and 2) there are definitely mitigations that could be done on site to change that, but NBDC aren't going to undertake them out of the kindness of their hearts and positive feelings for Hearts.

 

I also thought I remembered evacuation speed being a major concern listed, but I may have that wrong. My day job these days is software and data processing for emergency managers calling evacuations, so I may just have evacuations on the brain. 🙃

[Nobreath]

10 hours ago, trotter said:

I'm more concerned about what they keep next door at MacFarlan Smith. They have genuinely nasty shit there. I've been on both sites and I know which one scares me most. 

 

The level of security to get in there does hint at that.

[davemclaren]

On 14/11/2021 at 12:01, gowestjambo said:

 

My late Dad told me Hearts were offered Murrayfield, but it was turned down as it was "Thought to be too far out of Town"......

My old boy told me that Hearts rejected it due to the fact that Murrayfield regularly flooded in those days. 

[SUTOL]

12 hours ago, trotter said:

Very quick and dirty (again, not a slight, but it's an extremely complicated subject) risk is basically defined by frequency x consequence. In other words, what is the chance of something bad happening multiplied by whatever bad things it would cause if it did.  

 

Good interesting post.

 

One thing you didn't mention is that the students would be inside their accommodation.

At Tynecastle the 20,000 are outside.

I'm sure that would change the risk profile.

[Jambo dans les Pyrenees]

I've checked and there's no explosives in the corners, so we are all good.