York community stadium capacity likely to be 8,000

Sophie Hicks, York City’s communications and community director

Sophie Hicks, York City’s communications and community director

First published in Community stadium news York Press: Photograph of the Author by , Sports reporter

YORK’S Community Stadium is likely to have a maximum capacity of 8,000, it has emerged.

The final bidders to construct the new home of York City and York City Knights are being “encouraged” to put forward a design that realises that figure, City of York Council bosses have revealed.

But Coun Sonja Crisp, the authority’s leisure chief, said whether that would be achieved depended on the ability to secure Football Foundation (FSIF) funding, which would mean the ground would be all-seater.

If that grant isn’t forthcoming, terracing would probably be used as part of the design to boost capacity.

The Press reported on Tuesday how the council’s original criteria for the £19 million Monks Cross venue stated that an initial 6,000 seats should have the potential to be doubled.

That requirement was removed following an update to the authority’s Labour cabinet earlier this week after a report said it would not be possible without “significant compromise to the appearance and design of the stadium”.

The two bidders will now be asked to design a stadium that could also be increased to a 10,000 all-seat bowl in the future.

Outline planning consent, though, was only granted for a 6,000 stadium. Any increase in that would require a new planning application to be submitted to the council.

Work is scheduled to get under way in February next year – after the scheme was beset by delays – and the new ground is expected to be completed about a year later.

Crisp said: “Changes to the design criteria for the stadium are being proposed to encourage the final two bidders to come forward with an attractive design that increases the base capacity up to a maximum of 8,000.

“This follows discussions with the bidders’ design teams and the sports clubs.

“However the extent and means to which this is achievable is reliant on our ability to secure the FSIF funding prior to the final submission stage.

“If the funding is not secured, the option of some terracing as part of the overall design could be explored as a means to increase the base capacity.

“The future expansion option of up to 10,000 is also a design requirement.”

Sophie Hicks, York City’s communications and community director, added: “The football club have been in lengthy discussions with City of York Council and have met with the two final bidders.

“We understand the council’s position regarding the issue of further expansion and York City’s main priority is to work with the council to ensure the initial base capacity of the stadium is 8,000 as this fulfils our short to medium term requirements and meets our ambitions.”

Knights chairman John Guildford remained keen to see a mix of seating and standing in the stadium design.

“I hope they listen to the fans and the design comes back with some standing,” he said.

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:12pm Thu 9 Jan 14

SethArmstrong says...

Standing sections should be a priority.
Standing sections should be a priority. SethArmstrong
  • Score: 17

12:13pm Thu 9 Jan 14

ian923 says...

The devil is in the detail. Figures of 6, 8 and 10,000 being bandied about and the differences mean a further planning application. It's as if the Council are deliberately trying to thwart this development as the newts didn't work!
The devil is in the detail. Figures of 6, 8 and 10,000 being bandied about and the differences mean a further planning application. It's as if the Council are deliberately trying to thwart this development as the newts didn't work! ian923
  • Score: 12

12:14pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Yorkieroy60 says...

Well that sounds encouraging!-looks like some common sense is coming in to play!
Well that sounds encouraging!-looks like some common sense is coming in to play! Yorkieroy60
  • Score: 2

12:41pm Thu 9 Jan 14

The Great Buda says...

ian923 wrote:
The devil is in the detail. Figures of 6, 8 and 10,000 being bandied about and the differences mean a further planning application. It's as if the Council are deliberately trying to thwart this development as the newts didn't work!
Why would the council be trying to thwart a revenue stream?

This stadium is a good thing for people following Football, Rugby and Athletics, and the rent those clubs will pay is a good thing for the tax payer.
[quote][p][bold]ian923[/bold] wrote: The devil is in the detail. Figures of 6, 8 and 10,000 being bandied about and the differences mean a further planning application. It's as if the Council are deliberately trying to thwart this development as the newts didn't work![/p][/quote]Why would the council be trying to thwart a revenue stream? This stadium is a good thing for people following Football, Rugby and Athletics, and the rent those clubs will pay is a good thing for the tax payer. The Great Buda
  • Score: 2

12:48pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Some old bloke says...

Sorry if I'm over-simplifying things but it sounds like the 8000 all-seater stadium will only be possible if some of the funding is provided by FSIF. If that funding doesn't turn up, the capacity might well be achieved at a lower cost by taking out some of the seats and replacing them with standing room, since all you need for standing terraces is a bit of concrete and some metal supports to lean on. So what's the problem?
Sorry if I'm over-simplifying things but it sounds like the 8000 all-seater stadium will only be possible if some of the funding is provided by FSIF. If that funding doesn't turn up, the capacity might well be achieved at a lower cost by taking out some of the seats and replacing them with standing room, since all you need for standing terraces is a bit of concrete and some metal supports to lean on. So what's the problem? Some old bloke
  • Score: 2

1:05pm Thu 9 Jan 14

meme says...

what happened to the desperation that was needed for footie ground about 2 years ago? are we all fed scare stories ?
supposedly C of york FC would not survive if they did not have a new ground by now but its going to be at least a year and almost certainly longer before its actually delivered.
The time this has taken is a scandal and those responsible should be made answerable for their incompetence
what happened to the desperation that was needed for footie ground about 2 years ago? are we all fed scare stories ? supposedly C of york FC would not survive if they did not have a new ground by now but its going to be at least a year and almost certainly longer before its actually delivered. The time this has taken is a scandal [whether you support it or not] and those responsible should be made answerable for their incompetence meme
  • Score: -7

1:11pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Maltkiln says...

Some old bloke wrote:
Sorry if I'm over-simplifying things but it sounds like the 8000 all-seater stadium will only be possible if some of the funding is provided by FSIF. If that funding doesn't turn up, the capacity might well be achieved at a lower cost by taking out some of the seats and replacing them with standing room, since all you need for standing terraces is a bit of concrete and some metal supports to lean on. So what's the problem?
I agree ... I can't understand why we don't just forget the FSIF nonsense and go for the cheaper option with sections of terracing ... which is what everybody wants anyway ??!!
[quote][p][bold]Some old bloke[/bold] wrote: Sorry if I'm over-simplifying things but it sounds like the 8000 all-seater stadium will only be possible if some of the funding is provided by FSIF. If that funding doesn't turn up, the capacity might well be achieved at a lower cost by taking out some of the seats and replacing them with standing room, since all you need for standing terraces is a bit of concrete and some metal supports to lean on. So what's the problem?[/p][/quote]I agree ... I can't understand why we don't just forget the FSIF nonsense and go for the cheaper option with sections of terracing ... which is what everybody wants anyway ??!! Maltkiln
  • Score: 14

2:12pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Fat Harry says...

meme wrote:
what happened to the desperation that was needed for footie ground about 2 years ago? are we all fed scare stories ? supposedly C of york FC would not survive if they did not have a new ground by now but its going to be at least a year and almost certainly longer before its actually delivered. The time this has taken is a scandal and those responsible should be made answerable for their incompetence
The "desperation" was to get planning permission in place by a certain date to satisfy the FSIF requirements for their grant. That was achieved (after various delays & negotiations with FSIF).

Now it looks like there's a possibility FSIF may not make the grant after all, but if that means we can have terracing and an 8,000 capacity, so much the better.
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: what happened to the desperation that was needed for footie ground about 2 years ago? are we all fed scare stories ? supposedly C of york FC would not survive if they did not have a new ground by now but its going to be at least a year and almost certainly longer before its actually delivered. The time this has taken is a scandal [whether you support it or not] and those responsible should be made answerable for their incompetence[/p][/quote]The "desperation" was to get planning permission in place by a certain date to satisfy the FSIF requirements for their grant. That was achieved (after various delays & negotiations with FSIF). Now it looks like there's a possibility FSIF may not make the grant after all, but if that means we can have terracing and an 8,000 capacity, so much the better. Fat Harry
  • Score: 8

2:22pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Some old bloke says...

Sorry to be back on here so soon but questions keep popping into my head which no-one else is asking (okay, that might just be because they're stupid questions). The latest is about the FSIF insistence on the stadium being all-seater. If a FSIF grant is used to build an all-seater stadium, then at some future date the club decides to increase capacity by ripping out 4000 seats and putting standing areas there instead, does the FSIF demand it's money back?
Sorry to be back on here so soon but questions keep popping into my head which no-one else is asking (okay, that might just be because they're stupid questions). The latest is about the FSIF insistence on the stadium being all-seater. If a FSIF grant is used to build an all-seater stadium, then at some future date the club decides to increase capacity by ripping out 4000 seats and putting standing areas there instead, does the FSIF demand it's money back? Some old bloke
  • Score: 3

2:51pm Thu 9 Jan 14

nomadic85 says...

yes old bloke, think its 10 years they can do that for
yes old bloke, think its 10 years they can do that for nomadic85
  • Score: 3

3:05pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Fat Harry says...

Not stupid questions at all, some old bloke, ones that need to be asked, sometimes to keep club owners and council leaders & officials on the ball and accountable, and sometimes to keep reminding ourselves of everything that's happened.

It's an extremely complex issue, as some of the truly ignorant comments weve seen on past threads demonstrate.

Not too bad so far this time, but I'm sure there'll be a troll along in a minute.
Not stupid questions at all, some old bloke, ones that need to be asked, sometimes to keep club owners and council leaders & officials on the ball and accountable, and sometimes to keep reminding ourselves of everything that's happened. It's an extremely complex issue, as some of the truly ignorant comments weve seen on past threads demonstrate. Not too bad so far this time, but I'm sure there'll be a troll along in a minute. Fat Harry
  • Score: -2

3:35pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Budgie says...

No terracing, no atmosphere, it will b a sterile stadium.
No terracing, no atmosphere, it will b a sterile stadium. Budgie
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Thu 9 Jan 14

goreds says...

Where there's a will there's a way.
It's the lack of will from CoYc that has led to years of nothing much happening.
it is a shame YCFC and YCK have had to go cap in hand to the council and be subserviant to their whims.
If I'd been YCFC chairman I would have told them to stuff it - give us a 1/4 fraction (£5 million) of the cost of the new MX Stadium and we'll stay at BC and let YCK play there.The money left (£14million) could be spent on something useful and everybody is happy.
Where there's a will there's a way. It's the lack of will from CoYc that has led to years of nothing much happening. it is a shame YCFC and YCK have had to go cap in hand to the council and be subserviant to their whims. If I'd been YCFC chairman I would have told them to stuff it - give us a 1/4 fraction (£5 million) of the cost of the new MX Stadium and we'll stay at BC and let YCK play there.The money left (£14million) could be spent on something useful and everybody is happy. goreds
  • Score: 2

5:44pm Thu 9 Jan 14

joeya96YCFC says...

Well said Budgie above! We need some standing terraces.

Mind you, theres some hope as at every all seater stadium I have been to there are always people standing all the match and a lot of those that do normally sit stand up every time there is action near them, a goal mouth or a goal. Watch M of TD or the Football League show, there's supporters standing in seating areas throughout the match.

If it does (hopefully not) turn out to be all seater are the stadium management going to enforce seating by everyone throughout the match? (If so then presumably by bully boy stewards)? From what I have seen at other grounds its not possible.

C of Y Council should tell FSIF what they can do with their cash - dictating to us what we must have - we don't want it if there's conditions attached that we don't like - cheek. Anyway why are we dependent on that cash when Chesterfield, Rotherham have larger capacity stadiums for less money than the 19m that is quoted for ours? By the start of 2015/16 season Scunthorpe Utd will have a 12,000 stadium at £18m!!


Why does it need Sonja Crisp to comment when we have stadium Tsar Tim Atkins and Charlie Croft supposedly dealing with this? Too many Council officers involved in this for my liking!

Every time there is anything in the Press about this the more I think things are not been handled as well as they should be. It's all very odd - the figures don't add up if compared to the stadiums mentioned above - let the supporters see the detailed plans/figures please. I know that is not likely - too many people involved have too much they would rather us not see!
Well said Budgie above! We need some standing terraces. Mind you, theres some hope as at every all seater stadium I have been to there are always people standing all the match and a lot of those that do normally sit stand up every time there is action near them, a goal mouth or a goal. Watch M of TD or the Football League show, there's supporters standing in seating areas throughout the match. If it does (hopefully not) turn out to be all seater are the stadium management going to enforce seating by everyone throughout the match? (If so then presumably by bully boy stewards)? From what I have seen at other grounds its not possible. C of Y Council should tell FSIF what they can do with their cash - dictating to us what we must have - we don't want it if there's conditions attached that we don't like - cheek. Anyway why are we dependent on that cash when Chesterfield, Rotherham have larger capacity stadiums for less money than the 19m that is quoted for ours? By the start of 2015/16 season Scunthorpe Utd will have a 12,000 stadium at £18m!! Why does it need Sonja Crisp to comment when we have stadium Tsar Tim Atkins and Charlie Croft supposedly dealing with this? Too many Council officers involved in this for my liking! Every time there is anything in the Press about this the more I think things are not been handled as well as they should be. It's all very odd - the figures don't add up if compared to the stadiums mentioned above - let the supporters see the detailed plans/figures please. I know that is not likely - too many people involved have too much they would rather us not see! joeya96YCFC
  • Score: 6

7:03pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Peppa07 says...

There's never been any clarity around the stadium issue. What level of funding is on offer anyway from FSIF? It would be a shame to be dictated to by this grant if it's only a small proportion of the cost. Certainly the fans want standing areas, as do YCK, and away fans too. So it looks to me like a good news story if the stadium would have standing areas, be 8,000 capacity with the potential to increase to 10,000. The Scunthorpe comparison is instructive. How can our planned 8,000 stadium cost more than the Iron's planned 12,000?
There's never been any clarity around the stadium issue. What level of funding is on offer anyway from FSIF? It would be a shame to be dictated to by this grant if it's only a small proportion of the cost. Certainly the fans want standing areas, as do YCK, and away fans too. So it looks to me like a good news story if the stadium would have standing areas, be 8,000 capacity with the potential to increase to 10,000. The Scunthorpe comparison is instructive. How can our planned 8,000 stadium cost more than the Iron's planned 12,000? Peppa07
  • Score: 1

9:12am Fri 10 Jan 14

nomadic85 says...

£19m is not for the stadium, that includes all other bits and bobs such as relocating athletics and other community facilities. I think the stadium budget is £13m.

The FSIF contribution is £2m, if it comes off. They only fund all seater stadia at football league level
£19m is not for the stadium, that includes all other bits and bobs such as relocating athletics and other community facilities. I think the stadium budget is £13m. The FSIF contribution is £2m, if it comes off. They only fund all seater stadia at football league level nomadic85
  • Score: 2

9:45am Fri 10 Jan 14

Peppa07 says...

nomadic85 wrote:
£19m is not for the stadium, that includes all other bits and bobs such as relocating athletics and other community facilities. I think the stadium budget is £13m.

The FSIF contribution is £2m, if it comes off. They only fund all seater stadia at football league level
Nomadic85 - thanks for that. In straitened times £2m is not to be sniffed at but it would be a shame if it dictates against standing areas. I understand that even some Premier League clubs are considering restoring standing areas so there's something out of kilter with the FSIF insistence on all-seating. I wonder if FSIF might relax the condition - as thinking on safety and design has progressed?
[quote][p][bold]nomadic85[/bold] wrote: £19m is not for the stadium, that includes all other bits and bobs such as relocating athletics and other community facilities. I think the stadium budget is £13m. The FSIF contribution is £2m, if it comes off. They only fund all seater stadia at football league level[/p][/quote]Nomadic85 - thanks for that. In straitened times £2m is not to be sniffed at but it would be a shame if it dictates against standing areas. I understand that even some Premier League clubs are considering restoring standing areas so there's something out of kilter with the FSIF insistence on all-seating. I wonder if FSIF might relax the condition - as thinking on safety and design has progressed? Peppa07
  • Score: 1

10:23am Fri 10 Jan 14

Zetkin says...

From what I can gather, there's no realistic chance of FSIF relaxing their stance, which is a shame.

We're still suffering from the Hillsborough fall-out; the powers-that-be decided that:
a) the disaster was the fans' fault
b) the only way to control the fans was to force them in regimented all-seater stadia.

Sadly the FSIF seems to be clinging to that mantra long after everyone else has abandoned it; as other people have said, even Premier League clubs are looking at safe standing on the German model.

That said, the FSIF bent over backwards to help City earlier in the saga, not least by lending the club the £2million to help buy the ground back on the understanding it would be converted to a grant later.

This in itself was unprecedented, but they also continued to treat City as a League club even though we were in the Conference at the time. This was important because if City had been treated as non-League, only a few hundred thousand would have been available.

Being unable to buy the ground back at that stage might have seen the club forced out of BC and into an undeveloped Huntington Stadium, so whilst we dislike the FSIF's conditions, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that without their help, we might no have a football club at all, still less any prospect of moving into a new stadium which, for all its pitfalls, will offer City the chance to progress as a club over the next couple of decades,
From what I can gather, there's no realistic chance of FSIF relaxing their stance, which is a shame. We're still suffering from the Hillsborough fall-out; the powers-that-be decided that: a) the disaster was the fans' fault b) the only way to control the fans was to force them in regimented all-seater stadia. Sadly the FSIF seems to be clinging to that mantra long after everyone else has abandoned it; as other people have said, even Premier League clubs are looking at safe standing on the German model. That said, the FSIF bent over backwards to help City earlier in the saga, not least by lending the club the £2million to help buy the ground back on the understanding it would be converted to a grant later. This in itself was unprecedented, but they also continued to treat City as a League club even though we were in the Conference at the time. This was important because if City had been treated as non-League, only a few hundred thousand would have been available. Being unable to buy the ground back at that stage might have seen the club forced out of BC and into an undeveloped Huntington Stadium, so whilst we dislike the FSIF's conditions, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that without their help, we might no have a football club at all, still less any prospect of moving into a new stadium which, for all its pitfalls, will offer City the chance to progress as a club over the next couple of decades, Zetkin
  • Score: 4

11:48am Fri 10 Jan 14

OLD - HEAD says...

When I read about clubs building new grounds and their overall cost is going to be much less than ours, and built in half the time. I honestly begin to wonder if this will ever happen. Its seems like we are jumping from one crisis to another.
When I read about clubs building new grounds and their overall cost is going to be much less than ours, and built in half the time. I honestly begin to wonder if this will ever happen. Its seems like we are jumping from one crisis to another. OLD - HEAD
  • Score: 2

12:12pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Robert Davro says...

8000 is too high. It will only be half full for most City games after the honeymoon period. Should be 6000 with potential to expand if we get promotion etc.
8000 is too high. It will only be half full for most City games after the honeymoon period. Should be 6000 with potential to expand if we get promotion etc. Robert Davro
  • Score: -5

12:19pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Fat Harry says...

I disagree Old Head, and don't think we are jumping from crisis to crisis.

It seems to me more that we are just moving ahead very very slowly.

Over the last few days we have learned that it's quite likely we'll get some terracing which will delight the vast majority of City supporters (I appreciate the Knights fans might have different ideas about which parts of the ground should be given over to standing accommodation), that there are two companies bidding for the contract, and that those two companies have been told to aim for a capacity of 8,000, which is a significant improvement.

That there are specific companies being specific instructions broadly in line with what most potential stadium users would like seems to me to be another small but significant step forward.

Like everyone else id like to see bigger, quicker steps though.
I disagree Old Head, and don't think we are jumping from crisis to crisis. It seems to me more that we are just moving ahead very very slowly. Over the last few days we have learned that it's quite likely we'll get some terracing which will delight the vast majority of City supporters (I appreciate the Knights fans might have different ideas about which parts of the ground should be given over to standing accommodation), that there are two companies bidding for the contract, and that those two companies have been told to aim for a capacity of 8,000, which is a significant improvement. That there are specific companies being specific instructions broadly in line with what most potential stadium users would like seems to me to be another small but significant step forward. Like everyone else id like to see bigger, quicker steps though. Fat Harry
  • Score: 4

12:19pm Fri 10 Jan 14

YorkCityLuke says...

If it's an all seater stadium with an athletics track between the fans and the pitch, and is situated out-of-town, it will be terrible. There must be some way to stay at BC and shelve this plan permanently.
If it's an all seater stadium with an athletics track between the fans and the pitch, and is situated out-of-town, it will be terrible. There must be some way to stay at BC and shelve this plan permanently. YorkCityLuke
  • Score: -1

12:29pm Fri 10 Jan 14

arsene.about.york says...

I thought that the athletics track was being moved to the university and we were talking about a conventional stadium . Have I missed something ?
I thought that the athletics track was being moved to the university and we were talking about a conventional stadium . Have I missed something ? arsene.about.york
  • Score: 3

12:57pm Fri 10 Jan 14

duffy says...

Good to see the initial capacity increased to 8000. The proposed 6000 was never realistic when segregation was needed for the bigger games. The main worry for me is still location and getting adequate transport links in place.
Good to see the initial capacity increased to 8000. The proposed 6000 was never realistic when segregation was needed for the bigger games. The main worry for me is still location and getting adequate transport links in place. duffy
  • Score: -1

3:05pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Peppa07 says...

The scariest thing I've read on here is mention of an athletics track! Like arsene.about.york I thought the athletics was part of the university development and not integral to the Community Stadium itself. Can anyone confirm what is the truth on this? Athletics, like Speedway and greyhound racing, has no place in a football ground. It would be a disaster. The old Stamford Bridge was like that in the 1970s - and Wembley, Hampden Park - all crap grounds despite their celebrated names. The pitch is just too far away.
The scariest thing I've read on here is mention of an athletics track! Like arsene.about.york I thought the athletics was part of the university development and not integral to the Community Stadium itself. Can anyone confirm what is the truth on this? Athletics, like Speedway and greyhound racing, has no place in a football ground. It would be a disaster. The old Stamford Bridge was like that in the 1970s - and Wembley, Hampden Park - all crap grounds despite their celebrated names. The pitch is just too far away. Peppa07
  • Score: 1

4:56pm Fri 10 Jan 14

duffy says...

Peppa07 wrote:
The scariest thing I've read on here is mention of an athletics track! Like arsene.about.york I thought the athletics was part of the university development and not integral to the Community Stadium itself. Can anyone confirm what is the truth on this? Athletics, like Speedway and greyhound racing, has no place in a football ground. It would be a disaster. The old Stamford Bridge was like that in the 1970s - and Wembley, Hampden Park - all crap grounds despite their celebrated names. The pitch is just too far away.
You can relax, it's not part of the plans.
[quote][p][bold]Peppa07[/bold] wrote: The scariest thing I've read on here is mention of an athletics track! Like arsene.about.york I thought the athletics was part of the university development and not integral to the Community Stadium itself. Can anyone confirm what is the truth on this? Athletics, like Speedway and greyhound racing, has no place in a football ground. It would be a disaster. The old Stamford Bridge was like that in the 1970s - and Wembley, Hampden Park - all crap grounds despite their celebrated names. The pitch is just too far away.[/p][/quote]You can relax, it's not part of the plans. duffy
  • Score: 1

5:02pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Peppa07 says...

Thanks, Duffy!
Thanks, Duffy! Peppa07
  • Score: 0

10:18pm Fri 10 Jan 14

bill bailey says...

OLD - HEAD wrote:
When I read about clubs building new grounds and their overall cost is going to be much less than ours, and built in half the time. I honestly begin to wonder if this will ever happen. Its seems like we are jumping from one crisis to another.
Its like TERRYS FACTORY all over again, applications after applications, put it in the in tray PENDING,
[quote][p][bold]OLD - HEAD[/bold] wrote: When I read about clubs building new grounds and their overall cost is going to be much less than ours, and built in half the time. I honestly begin to wonder if this will ever happen. Its seems like we are jumping from one crisis to another.[/p][/quote]Its like TERRYS FACTORY all over again, applications after applications, put it in the in tray PENDING, bill bailey
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree