Below is what the refurbishment looked like in March 2019 (Thank you GoS). It clearly illustrates the Lower Mayflower being reprofiled, the Upper Mayflower remaining in its existing configuration and the blank canvas that was the fit out of the ground floor hospitality and first floor offices, catering kiosks and toilets.
In fairness to all involved the retention of the virtually the same number of upper tiers seats ensured the maximum capacity possible which was the driving force towards trying to get to a final capacity (with the quadrants) of 20,000. The problem was that the replacement of the original flat back seats with the curved and rimmed seats used elsewhere reduced leg room. Under the Green Guide this was classed as replacement seating. The Lower Mayflower was new seating and so required to have the leg room and profile that it now enjoys.
A new roof may not have been in the original budget and the decision to house the Club offices at the rear of the Upper Tier was an understandable decision and was one that was originally approved by the City Council at the planning stage and apparently by the Safety Advisory Group too before construction and use.
All this was happening at a time when unexpected and exceptional costs were rising and eventually Simon Hallett had to provide the equity to complete the job so it could open and function. If we were starting from the same point it probably would have been better to demolish the whole stand and rebuild according to the new standards. The Club did not have that luxury as at the time of commencement when contracts were signed the funding was limited and negotiations with the contractor protracted. To get to the start line was a real and unexpected achievement at the time on what was the tightest of budgets.
That Simon Hallett and the Board are seeking to redress the issues of seating comfort and means of escape is highly commendable as I am sure many Club owners would recoil from spending the amount of money needed to achieve the required improvements. I think it will increase the capacity of the grandstand by 25% so there will be a return on the investment over time as well as the welcome improvement in seating and comfort standards.
As Simon and the Board are doing I would prefer to look forwards and avoid trying to apportion v blame elsewhere. What is done is done and decisions made at the time were probably made for the right reasons in an effort to keep what was after all a major construction project within budget.
In fairness to all involved the retention of the virtually the same number of upper tiers seats ensured the maximum capacity possible which was the driving force towards trying to get to a final capacity (with the quadrants) of 20,000. The problem was that the replacement of the original flat back seats with the curved and rimmed seats used elsewhere reduced leg room. Under the Green Guide this was classed as replacement seating. The Lower Mayflower was new seating and so required to have the leg room and profile that it now enjoys.
A new roof may not have been in the original budget and the decision to house the Club offices at the rear of the Upper Tier was an understandable decision and was one that was originally approved by the City Council at the planning stage and apparently by the Safety Advisory Group too before construction and use.
All this was happening at a time when unexpected and exceptional costs were rising and eventually Simon Hallett had to provide the equity to complete the job so it could open and function. If we were starting from the same point it probably would have been better to demolish the whole stand and rebuild according to the new standards. The Club did not have that luxury as at the time of commencement when contracts were signed the funding was limited and negotiations with the contractor protracted. To get to the start line was a real and unexpected achievement at the time on what was the tightest of budgets.
That Simon Hallett and the Board are seeking to redress the issues of seating comfort and means of escape is highly commendable as I am sure many Club owners would recoil from spending the amount of money needed to achieve the required improvements. I think it will increase the capacity of the grandstand by 25% so there will be a return on the investment over time as well as the welcome improvement in seating and comfort standards.
As Simon and the Board are doing I would prefer to look forwards and avoid trying to apportion v blame elsewhere. What is done is done and decisions made at the time were probably made for the right reasons in an effort to keep what was after all a major construction project within budget.