council want to talk to Town about new stadium

Quoted from Kris2

Only Fenty could spend that money on something so gaudy.  

Don't have much faith the money will be spent on anything Cleethorpes actually needs either way, I'm sure they'll take 600k and splash it on light shows and other dumb showy things like "modern art sculptures" and murals that don't add anything to the resort. If they want to improve tourism how about spending money on attractions, maybe get rid of the 100 year old attractions on the beach and build something new for people to enjoy. Not spend the money on stupid art projects that nobody cares about.

I think virtually everybody agrees with you. But when the government give money assigned to the arts, you have to spend it on that.

Quoted from pen penfras

I think virtually everybody agrees with you. But when the government give money assigned to the arts, you have to spend it on that.

Nice holiday under your rock?

Quoted from WOZOFGRIMSBY

Been fortunate to have had many an afternoon/evening on ‘the shed’. For me, and slightly biased about it, no ground in rugby comes close to it for atmosphere

Agreed. Gloucester is an anomaly as it's a rugby union club in England with a significant working class following.

Quoted from Kris2

Only Fenty could spend that money on something so gaudy.  

Don't have much faith the money will be spent on anything Cleethorpes actually needs either way, I'm sure they'll take 600k and splash it on light shows and other dumb showy things like "modern art sculptures" and murals that don't add anything to the resort. If they want to improve tourism how about spending money on attractions, maybe get rid of the 100 year old attractions on the beach and build something new for people to enjoy. Not spend the money on stupid art projects that nobody cares about.

I’m not defending the palm tree, but the attractions on the beach are private businesses. The council won’t be investing in anything like that. Their role is providing the overall environment to attract visitors.

And to be fair to pp in a later comment, money for public art must be spent on that or handed back.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

I’m not defending the palm tree, but the attractions on the beach are private businesses. The council won’t be investing in anything like that. Their role is providing the overall environment to attract visitors.

And to be fair to pp in a later comment, money for public art must be spent on that or handed back.

Well if we need to spend it on art can't we just stick an expensive metallic blob (modern art sculpture) in the middle of the seafront and be done with it? That's what all the big cities of culture do. At least it wouldn't be a laughing stock and would bring more affluent folk over who like that sort of thing.

Out of curiosity who is responsible for the eyesores on the beach that everyone's parents and grandparents probably worked on as kids?

Quoted from Withnail

Agreed. Gloucester is an anomaly as it's a rugby union club in England with a significant working class following.

The 4,000 people that stand on Leicester's Crumbie Terrace are not posh I can assure you...

Back on topic. We need two big stands - a minimum 5k seat capacity down one side is needed to create a big enough under stand area for conferencing and community uses, and an away end with 3k capacity. Apart from that two smaller stands that are mainly safe standing would be fine for me - that will get us the 14k that we need. There's enough vacant land adjoining Freeman Street now for that kind of stadium and some parking. The council can get on with other land acquisitions to expand the regeneration area while the stadium is being built.

Quoted from Limerick Mariner

The 4,000 people that stand on Leicester's Crumbie Terrace are not posh I can assure you...

Back on topic. We need two big stands - a minimum 5k seat capacity down one side is needed to create a big enough under stand area for conferencing and community uses, and an away end with 3k capacity. Apart from that two smaller stands that are mainly safe standing would be fine for me - that will get us the 14k that we need. There's enough vacant land adjoining Freeman Street now for that kind of stadium and some parking. The council can get on with other land acquisitions to expand the regeneration area while the stadium is being built.

What you are saying is the basis of a good plan. However you have to consider the cost, I believe £20 million was quoted some years ago for the Gt Coates site.

Presumably, the land would be free! being council and money from regeneration would help. I don't know if FA grants are available but the rest of the money would have to be found. So there will be a shortfall of a few million quid.

The problem as I see it at the moment is where is the shortfall going to come from?

Quoted from DB

What you are saying is the basis of a good plan. However you have to consider the cost, I believe £20 million was quoted some years ago for the Gt Coates site.

Presumably, the land would be free! being council and money from regeneration would help. I don't know if FA grants are available but the rest of the money would have to be found. So there will be a shortfall of a few million quid.

The problem as I see it at the moment is where is the shortfall going to come from?

I'd hope most of it would come from the public sector - central government grant and prudential borrowing by the Council, with Town taking a lease and perhaps paying for the GTFC specific bits of the fit out - club shop, ticket office etc. One precedent is the deal West Ham have on the Olympic Stadium, I'm sure there are others.

This stadium is a good precedent, Northampton Saints - circa 15k capacity. Replace the seats at the smaller end with safe standing as the Pontoon. The end with Saints on the seats would be the away end. Atmosphere is great - all kept in the stadium

[url]https://www.northamptonsaints.co.uk/club/our-stadium[/url]

Quoted from Kris2

Only Fenty could spend that money on something so gaudy.  

Don't have much faith the money will be spent on anything Cleethorpes actually needs either way, I'm sure they'll take 600k and splash it on light shows and other dumb showy things like "modern art sculptures" and murals that don't add anything to the resort. If they want to improve tourism how about spending money on attractions, maybe get rid of the 100 year old attractions on the beach and build something new for people to enjoy. Not spend the money on stupid art projects that nobody cares about.

Funny thing Kris but currently the biggest attraction in Cleethorpes is a hut put together by locals at no cost at all?

I am an art teacher by training and have had many a vigorous debate about the value of public art. Truth is that most of it is rubbish at best, insulting at worst and commissioned and made by people with very little understanding of the location or the possible benefits and making a connection between those two things. Artists are not people you can rely on to think in practical terms, on most occasions. But the people who commision public art certainly should be. Instead of conceptiual plastic stuff, why can't public art take the form of, say a series of wooden benches with carvings of different famous GY trawlers? Or maybe use the money to have the prow of an old trawler bolted into the Northwall as a viewing platform? Palm trees, no thanks. Politicians selling the idea of plastic palm trees to a disbelieving Cleethorpes public? No thanks. But public art can be both evocative of place and heritage as well as serving a public good, in my humble opinion.