I've had a look at the drawings on the council planning website and it shows standing behind both posts and the corner terracing sections in phase 1. Phase 2 will have standing on the lower tier down the side of the pitch opposite the main stand.

Re you sure that's not phase 3? I've not studied in great detail recently but thought that the phases were (and I do stand to be corrected):

Phase 1:
Big main stand on one side, single tier of standing behind each goal and two corners, single tier of seating down side.

Phase 2:
As above but with a second seating tier down side opposite main stand.

Phase 3:
As phase 2 but tier of seating behind each goal and corners and seating replaced by standing on lower tier along the side.

To my understanding phase 2 involves removing the seats from the first tier down the touchline then adding a second tier above with seats. Phase 3 involves adding a second tier with seating above two corners and behind both posts.

Phase 2 15K Capacity is the addition of a 2nd Teir to the East Elevation - Ship Canal side adding 3,000 seats . The existing ground floor tier seats will remain .
Mute point ,I'd like to see Phase 1 built before I get worried above Phase 2 or 3.

It'll be a long, long while before we see Phases 2 or 3 (if ever?) so plans may well change before then anyway.

To be honest I'd rather the stadium look visually better with the two corner terracing sections than have a few thousand extra seats that I'm sure we won't need in 2012. OK if crowds really pick up like they did for Warrington when they moved to the HJ then it makes sense to go bigger.
I always think it reflects badly on Superleague when you regularly watch a live match on Sky and see large blocks with 1000's of empty seats in these shiny modern stadiums.

Example: The Warrington v Catalan semi in a smaller capacity ground at Widnes but nearly full compared to Leeds v St Helens at Huddesfield with one entire side completely empty.

I know it might upset a few but i always think its better when a team has a "end" to attack or defend.

As long as there is standing somewhere it will do me

Another update and another important date coming up -
[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-10935843[/url

Knowing little about how planning works- is this application a formalty there isn't any way the govt etc can mess it up for us.

lets hope not anybody in the know, know?

It should be a formality, but I suppose it depends what the Garrido gets up to.

JAW has added comments [url=http://reds.originalreddevils.com/2010/08/11/stadium-build-to-begin-in-november/on't 'fishal site[/url

Will the park and ride still be going ahead?

I know this is one of the more simple questions, but...are the seats actually going to be green?

It's like someone getting planning permission to build a big extension on their house and then not having it built for whatever reason. Then reapplying to the council because the planning consent has elapsed, with new plans for an extension that's smaller than the previous one that was granted.

I think if it was bigger it would be a completely different story.

Does anybody know when we are expected to find out the result of these proposals?

Sure I read it was Thursday 19th August.

It goes to planning committee on the 19th and unless they defer the decision (for example if the opposition parties kick up a load of fuss) it should be approved then.

My understanding is that it's not quite as outlined by theredshed above. Basically the initial application that was submitted and aproved several years ago was the outline application - basically granting permission to build certain things on the site (a stadium holding 20,000) of general appearance, size, and position. This full application is putting the meat on the bones in terms of being given permission to build a specific design. At this stage they can't suddenly throw out the whole idea of building a stadium, but they could object to elements of the design and require it to be amended.

Nice one for that

That's even better! Thanks Iain

= =#004080Oh Lord Protect us from NIMBY'S & TORIES

What is the capicity of your new ground, read a while back it was scaled back to 15k but today read it was 20k and why GREEN seats on the plans ?

It has been scaled back but with future expansion possible and the seats are green because those images where supplied by the architect as a concept rendering. No one really thinks they'll be green in the real thing.

The ground has been scaled back to 12,000 the images that are shown on this thread and on the reds website are for the 20,000 stadium. We have the filip of future expansion but who's gonna pay for that and what are the criteria?

Common sense says that if anyone thought they were thinking of increasing the attendance in the next 5-10yrs or so then they would build it 15,000 or 20,000 now

The idea IS to improve attendance but a 12,000 stadium is more than enough for now since our average is less than 4,500. Making a stadium to hold more than double the average is a good business plan and with the scope to expand means anything is possible in the future. Lets just get the next year over with and, fingers crossed on the SL licence, we can then take it 3 years at a time.