North Stand Construction Discussion

Centre, including the hotel/left claw overhang.

DSC05470.jpg


DSC05471.jpg


DSC05468.jpg


DSC05469.jpg
 
Coatigan said:
Pics by High-Fi on SSC

View attachment 128082View attachment 128083

Hate to say it, but man that's disappointing, re the sails. Face fixed all over, not even edge finished. And a great potential whistle gap too, if that's how they will be fixed. Maybe some might have a lighting strip inbetween the two panels fixed together, the way that edge is left.

Wonder if they might build the brick (for the sample only) the conventional way, if the bottom setting out is anything to go by.
Click to expand...

They look exactly like the basic images in the DAS, which I always thought they would do! Pretty meh, but you don't make any money from ploughing extra into elevation treatments so I never expected anything better personally.
 
johnny crossan said:
and jrb's
Click to expand...

TBH I don’t often criticise developments or parts of developments unles there is a reason to do that.

Construction mock-ups are a a true and honest visual indicator of what’s to come.

I think the dark grey cladding looks fine on the mock-up. But the white sails, which don’t look like sails, as shown in the PA, look more like white fins, and they don’t look great close up.

They remind me of flat pack white MDF panels you get at IKEA when you take them out of the box.

In my opinion the design and look of the hotel has always been the weak point of the North stand expansion. These white fins will only make the hotel look worse.

Obviously I have no proof, and I could be wrong, which I probably am, but the fins look value engineered, and look as if City are trying to save some money on the sail facade of the hotel.

I’ll have a look at the PA again and see how the sails/fins are described.
 
Last edited:
johnny crossan said:
and jrb's
Click to expand...

And he has a point.

I have generally been anywhere between positive and reserved on this, I would say. But it is a lot worse than I expected, and my expectations were not that extraordinary.

There is of course a chance that either the club as the client, or the planners, look at that and get it changed. But as it is, imo it is disappointing.
 
supercity88 said:
They look exactly like the basic images in the DAS, which I always thought they would do! Pretty meh, but you don't make any money from ploughing extra into elevation treatments so I never expected anything better personally.
Click to expand...

I don't think they do. And it also isn't what has been approved I don't think. Would need to check the wording, but pretty sure the approvals are for 'PPC metal' sails. Not, for two laminate faced compressed-fibre boards face fixed onto a frame with colour matched rivets. Looks like Rockpanel or a similar product. The planners are well within their right to reject this, depending on their pedantry for detail. There is potential there that they warp over time, the edges fray and the fixings at scale overwhelm.

For all we know though, this could be the contractor chancing their arm here, put up a cheap way of doing it, and see if it gets through. The architects may or may not even be on board with it, that happens. If neither the client nor the planners have an issue, then this is what it will end up being. If either do, they will remake them. I know you argued these rarely change, but they do. I've known one to take 6 attempts before being agreed.

As it is, It is poor imo. At such a vast scale, where this is the main look of it, it is not an insignificant thing.
 
Coatigan said:
And he has a point.

I have generally been anywhere between positive and reserved on this, I would say. But it is a lot worse than I expected, and my expectations were not that extraordinary.

There is of course a chance that either the club as the client, or the planners, look at that and get it changed. But as it is, imo it is disappointing.
Click to expand...
Ah well
 
Coatigan said:
I don't think they do. And it also isn't what has been approved I don't think. Would need to check the wording, but pretty sure the approvals are for 'PPC metal' sails. Not, for two laminate faced compressed-fibre boards face fixed onto a frame with colour matched rivets. Looks like Rockpanel or a similar product. The planners are well within their right to reject this, depending on their pedantry for detail. There is potential there that they warp over time, the edges fray and the fixings at scale overwhelm.

For all we know though, this could be the contractor chancing their arm here, put up a cheap way of doing it, and see if it gets through. The architects may or may not even be on board with it, that happens. If neither the client nor the planners have an issue, then this is what it will end up being. If either do, they will remake them. I know you argued these rarely change, but they do. I've known one to take 6 attempts before being agreed.

As it is, It is poor imo. At such a vast scale, where this is the main look of it, it is not an insignificant thing.
Click to expand...

The planners can refuse them if they're not happy with the look and don't believe they reflect what was submitted. They're supposed to be metal so there's something to push back on. I would anticipate the change is either because of a desire to reduce costs, or a more innocent case of the architect proposing things and then, when it comes to buying the materials, there being a cheaper alternative they deem to give them same visual impression.

Ultimately there are very few people who look closely at architectural detailing. The majority pass by without noticing the details. So it can be a very effective way of reducing costs whilst retaining the general architectural style you've got planning for. In my line of work I spend 50% of my time trying to get approval for cheaper materials than were originally proposed. And I would say I get away with it 90% of the time. But this is a much more significant project than anything I work on, so don't lose hope yet!

It's a large scale project and I don't think the majority of people viewing it when finished will even notice, nor comment on the fins being a different material or how they look. People make very quick judgements on architecture. It's great or it's shit. Not many have an opinion beyond that, and it's all subjective anyway.
 
supercity88 said:
The planners can refuse them if they're not happy with the look and don't believe they reflect what was submitted. They're supposed to be metal so there's something to push back on. I would anticipate the change is either because of a desire to reduce costs, or a more innocent case of the architect proposing things and then, when it comes to buying the materials, there being a cheaper alternative they deem to give them same visual impression.

Ultimately there are very few people who look closely at architectural detailing. The majority pass by without noticing the details. So it can be a very effective way of reducing costs whilst retaining the general architectural style you've got planning for. In my line of work I spend 50% of my time trying to get approval for cheaper materials than were originally proposed. And I would say I get away with it 90% of the time. But this is a much more significant project than anything I work on, so don't lose hope yet!

It's a large scale project and I don't think the majority of people viewing it when finished will even notice, nor comment on the fins being a different material or how they look. People make very quick judgements on architecture. It's great or it's shit. Not many have an opinion beyond that, and it's all subjective anyway.
Click to expand...

Spot on with all of that, agree entirely.

Other than, maybe that 'majority of people viewing it when finished won't even notice'.

As you say, significant project, and that is where any pushbacks do happen. There is every chance the client rejects it too, on a £300m investment.

I formed my opinion before reading jrb's comment, and from the timing he would have formed his before reading mine. He has seen it in person mind, and I think his reaction is very telling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top