North Stand Construction Discussion

Think we should have gone synerytcal with the south stand. The detail where it interfaces with the west and east is poor.
 
Worsleyweb said:
Think we should have gone synerytcal with the south stand. The detail where it interfaces with the west and east is poor.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree. I like that the north stand is unique and looks different - it gives the stand its own character. Otherwise we’d end up with something very similar to arsenals ground.
 
Worsleyweb said:
Think we should have gone synerytcal with the south stand. The detail where it interfaces with the west and east is poor.
Click to expand...

But then the south stand interfaces with west and east stands internally much much worse because of the corner fudge job.

The new North Stand looks much more complete and solid within the bowl without those corner structures.
 
Worsleyweb said:
Think we should have gone synerytcal with the south stand. The detail where it interfaces with the west and east is poor.
Click to expand...
Hopefully, eventually, the South Stand top tier runs both ways down each side of the Colin Bell and East Stands making those three stands congruous, with the North Stand being the unique stand that is the home vocal end.
 
.db. said:
Hopefully, eventually, the South Stand top tier runs both ways down each side of the Colin Bell and East Stands making those three stands congruous, with the North Stand being the unique stand that is the home vocal end.
Click to expand...

I can’t see it mate - at least ten tears away and a lot can happen in that time
 
Myself and I think, one or two others, called the standard of brick laying as poor from drone footage posted on here about three or four weeks ago.

Seeing it now, close up and ‘in the flesh’ it’s even worse than I initially feared.

Make no bones doubt about it, it is a shoddy job
and I can’t think of any firm who would be happy to put their name to that.

It’s ‘plop and drop’ at its finest, or worst, whichever way you went to look at it.

Quite clearly the works is subbied, but my question to Sisk would be, why was the work left to go on for so long when quite clearly it was so bad.

The wholes thing needs knocking down and starting again. Ideally replaced with something more sympathetic to the overall ‘look’ of the stand and the stadium as a whole.

Hopefully common sense will prevail.
 
Last edited:
warpig said:
Myself and I think, one or two others, called the standard of brick laying as poor from drone footage posted on here about three or four weeks ago.

Seeing it now, close up and ‘in the flesh’ it’s even worse than I initially feared.

Make no bones doubt about it, it is a shoddy job
and I can’t think of any firm who would be happy to put their name to that.

It’s ‘plop and drop’ at its finest, or worst, whichever way you went to look at it.

Quite clearly the works is subbied, but my question to Sisk would be, why was the work left to go on for so long when quite clearly it was so bad.

The wholes thing needs knocking down and starting again. Ideally replaced with something more sympathetic to the overall ‘look’ of the stand and the stadium as a whole.

Hopefully common sense will prevail.
Click to expand...

Just fyi previous comments were also based on ground level closer up photos and were pointed out by people seeing it in person on match days. Rather than drone footage.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
Took this outside entrance B today. That bricklaying is an ironic joke isn’t it? Surely no tradesman can do that on purpose.

View attachment 170668
Click to expand...

That's possibly the worst bricklaying I've ever seen and I work in residential development so have seen some shit! Someone has been on a tight timescale there and just forgotten which bricks are supposed to be protruding.

The design rationale was a nod to Manchester's industrial heritage. Perhaps they took that a little too literally and want to show it's eventual decline.
 
I cannot believe that the bricklaying is my accident. This has to be planned, it would have been noticed and corrected by now
 
Coatigan said:
It has the potential to get quite messy. Logistically, rather than physically, if the club were to raise it as an issue.

The team have commited to a certain design look, but have picked a brick that naturally clashes with that. The specification is a bit of a screen sisk can step behind. But then on the other hand, they Were approved on the basis they would be large format factory made precast panels. Which would have at least partially avoided these issues. And if sisk were the ones that changed that, then it kinda falls back on them.

The irony is, a few here pointed this out when the mock-up first appeared, ages and ages ago. I said a couple times I also expected the angled piers to the square as approved to get flattened, once they pivoted from the precast. Been waiting to see how that plays out, and if an amendment comes in. They might surprise me and stick with it, but it just seems a bit ropey to try build them manually. If they are struggling with it at regular walls and 90deg turns, what chance do they have at the front with sharp irregular angles. They'd almost be better off binning that idea and changing the planning approval, rather than forcing too much at it and it all ending up a mess. Imho.
Click to expand...
You've convinced me anyway :-)
 
jrb said:
Yesterday.

PXL-20250927-135037534-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20250927-135408555-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20250927-135342669-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20250927-135128015-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20250927-134959495-MP-2.jpg
Click to expand...
They are never going to fill it, swaths of empty seats on Saturday and the Club backtracking on transfers to fellow season ticket holders. They just do not understand the long term loyal fans.
 
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