New Stadium Details And Discussions

Mister Jez said:

According to a poster on Fighting Cook, Archway have packed up, in the process of moving. It would be great if someone close to the Lane could wander down and get some photos. Pretty please....

Click to expand...

I think this is nonsense, haven't been down but they wouldn't just wind up the business and there is no way that they'd have found a site in a short period of time.

absolute bobbins said:

I think this is nonsense, haven't been down but they wouldn't just wind up the business and there is no way that they'd have found a site in a short period of time.

Click to expand...

Wasn't there talk that the club was offering them a site down near Tottenham Hale?

razor1981 said:

Although plans had been submitted for the NDP, we were a long way from making it a viable reality at that point and the council didn't look like backing down on a lot of unreasonable demands being made of THFC in terms of the monies for improvements to the public realm. That all changed after the riots.

The Olympic site at Stratford offered an opportunity for a cheaper stadium build on a site with some of the best transport links in London. An opportunity to make the new Spurs stadium one of THE iconic sporting destinations in England. Most importantly (if you accept that a bigger stadium is key to making us a more competitive force) it offered a viable alternative if the obstacles in Tottenham proved insurmountable - which looked a distinct possibility at that time.

Levy may have stated his preference for a move to Stratford as it was the option that made the most financial sense, though a lot of what he was saying publicly at that time was just politicking.

Click to expand...

Also, more expensive naming rights, interest from tourists/neutrals (Fulham brigade), corporate seating and non-Spurs event demand would have significantly increased stadium income. An additional £10 m/year would probably be on the lower side (as compared to current plan). West Ham won't be able to reap even half of these rewards - and will be right where they belong - in a shitty football stadium.

razor1981 said:

Although plans had been submitted for the NDP, we were a long way from making it a viable reality at that point and the council didn't look like backing down on a lot of unreasonable demands being made of THFC in terms of the monies for improvements to the public realm. That all changed after the riots...

Click to expand...

I agree with most of your post, but they weren't 'unreasonable demands', they were normal demands typical of the S.106 Agreement of any large development. They were all supported by established council policy that the development team would have read in detail before submitting the planning application. The long and detailed negotiation over the many transport and other requirements was what one would expect with any major planning application.

The only arguably unreasonable change that was forced upon the scheme was the retention of four historic buildings and that was imposed by English Heritage, against the desires of Haringey Council.

What changed, even before the riot, was that the banking crisis made it impossible to finance the development, so THFC were trying every option available to restore some profitability to the business plan, which included persuading the council to remove the affordable housing obligation and the requirement for THFC to pay for many of the public realm improvements. Where the riot became a key was that it released government funding for Tottenham that could pay for many of those obligations, thus exempting THFC from meeting the cost.

absolute bobbins said:

I think this is nonsense, haven't been down but they wouldn't just wind up the business and there is no way that they'd have found a site in a short period of time.

Click to expand...

Think what you like, I was only passing on. No one said anything about winding up, just they were packing us, presumably to move on.
Won't bother in future.

Mister Jez said:

Think what you like, I was only passing on. No one said anything about winding up, just they were packing us, presumably to move on.
Won't bother in future.

Click to expand...

don't worry mate, info is appreciated. it's not like archway have just been hit by this, they'd have been making perparations for the past few years.

danielneeds said:

Wasn't there talk that the club was offering them a site down near Tottenham Hale?

Click to expand...

They have offered 555 White Hart Lane but it's still an empty site by all accounts

Mister Jez said:

Think what you like, I was only passing on. No one said anything about winding up, just they were packing us, presumably to move on.
Won't bother in future.

Click to expand...

Wasn't a dig, I know you were repeating what you read in good faith. I was talking from a practical and logical point of view, having had to help a mate move his business premises.

whitesocks said:

It is a worry.
After all, they filled the stadium during the olympics and 90% of the crowd knew nothing of athletics.
Or even had much of an interest in athletics.
But they all paid big money for their seats with pretty distant views of the sporadic action and by most accounts had a really good day out, munching on their franchise burgers, waving their flags and clapping and cheering when told to.
OK that was one of the biggest events in the world, but if Wham can capture that spirit, then they'll be laughing.

Tourists and corporate suits are increasingly the ones spending the money. They do not take it seriously, and do not have the knowledge or interest to make any criticism, constructive or otherwise.
It is more important to them that the facilities are clean and comfortable, the staff smiley and welcome, the food hot, the coke cold and the mascots are funny.
That, rather than be nearer to the pitch and a game with its 4-3-3 and 5-3-2s that they find increasingly hard to decipher.

The olympic stadium is easy to get to and I think it will suit quite a few modern day fans.

Click to expand...

The trouble West Ham will have is that the "new" olympic stadium will have hardly any corporate areas. Well, not in comparison to The Emirates or our new stadium. So they'll lose out on all that cash as a result.

The OS doesn't even have permanent toilets....hardly inspiring for corporate hospitality!

whitesocks said:

My thoughts are that the kop stand was more a consequence of the 2 stage build:
ie make the final stand as simple as possible, without boxes or any complex facilities,
so it could be quickly added without causing too much disruption to the rest of the new ground.

Now it seems likely that for health and safety/costs that this will be a 1 phase build,
I suspect that the kop idea will be quietly forgotten and all the off the shelf, pre-cast emirate bowl options will be revisited.

Oh well. It is not so important.
In 30 years it will start to look shabby/unsuited to our needs, yet will be impossible to upgrade - we'll be looking for a new stadium again.
That's the modern way - quick to build and quick to dismantle.

Click to expand...

Apologies if this has already been answered. Whilst catching up with this thread, I've seen a fair few people saying that 'The Kop Stand' will be taken from the designs, or won't happen etc etc. It's only a few months ago that the club actually released a statement (yep I was shocked too) that stated 'The Kop Stand' will remain in the design & will be incorporated into the new stadium build.. This was from May 2014.................


Tottenham Hotspur confirm 'Kop-style' stand remains part of stadium plans after new pictures spark confusion


An image of the new stadium showing a two-tier South Stand angered fans when it appeared online


But the club confirmed to the Haringey Independent that the one-tier 'Kop-style' stand, depicted in earlier designs, remains part of its plans

• email
• (0) comments
• print

First published Wednesday 30 April 2014 in News
Last updated 13:20 Thursday 1 May 2014by Chris Hewett

Tottenham Hotspur have confirmed a one-tier ‘Kop-style’ South Stand remains part of its new stadium designs following confusion among fans this afternoon.

Supporters were left disappointed when new images, published in an online application for minor amendments to the plans, appeared to show a switch to a two-tier stand – similar to Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium.

The graphics, which were available on Haringey Council’s planning website, were removed this afternoon after a Twitter storm erupted among fans.


Many were left angered at the apparent scrapping of the one-tier stand, with many contacting the club's official Twitter feed to voice their concerns.

But the club confirmed to the Haringey Independent this afternoon that the one-tier stand, similar to Liverpool’s famous Kop end, remains part of the designs.

The amendments, which were submitted to Haringey Council last week, concern drainage and hoardings placements, as well as environmental plans for the new stadium......................

And also this one http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/...s_after_new_pictures_spark_confusion/?ref=rss , which is basically a re-hash of the other article.

davidmatzdorf said:

No, that isn't so. The kop stand has nothing to do with speed or simplicity of erection, in fact I suspect (but don't know) that it presented some difficulties with emergency exit arrangements. It may even have prevented a two stage build, as the schematic plan showing which part of the stadium would be constructed in the second phase cut directly through the kop stand, with part of the kop in phase one and part of it in phase two. That would certainly have presented a structural challenge, although I suppose so would trying to construct half of the south stand in tiers as well.

The kop stand, as the club said very loudly in its press material at the time, was part of the overall design strategy to preserve the intensity of atmosphere in the stadium, an objective that (they said at the time) informed the entire design approach. Judging by the various 'soulless bowl' clichés that have accumulated in this thread over the past year or two, many people here seem to have forgotten that, but I haven't: KSS' instructions from the club were to maximise the rake of the seating and the proximity of the fans to the pitch, to try to increase the noise level and general intensity and make the stadium different from the typical shallow-rake, open-to-the-sky bowl stadium.

If Populous are now instructed to increase the capacity, it's hard to see how they can do this by making the rake shallower or by introducing extra separation, in the form of runways, into the kop, as both of those measures would tend to reduce the capacity.

The 'bowl' shape has nothing to do with intensity of atmosphere. The reason nearly all modern stadia are bowls is because they fully utilise the corners of the pitch for seating, whereas the traditional four-stands shape wastes all that space. When building a stadium in a cramped urban location, the bowl-shape maximises the number of spectators in any given envelope. Most bowl stadia are pretty atmosphere-free, but that isn't because they are bowls, it's because the rake of the stands is shallow, because they are un-roofed and because the fans are too far from the pitch. If the architects can solve those problems, then we can have a bowl-shaped stadium with an intense atmosphere.

Click to expand...

As per usual, an excellent post, David

I've dug up an old article that backs up everything you've said. I've done my best to 'bold' the important bits (the bits that confirm what you said in your response to @whitesocks .. I know that we've since heard of the switch to Populous, and the tweaked design etc. This is just to point out the importance of creating an atmosphere unlike any other stadium..............


Tottenham Hotspur Football Club Stadium
Spurs Ground Development, northeast London, UK – design by KSS Group

2 Apr 2014

New Spurs Stadium
Tottenham Hotspur: New stadium ready for 2017 say club

Tottenham Hotspur hope to be able to move into their new 58,000-capacity stadium in 2017.



The new stadium would be next to their current White Hart Lane ground, which holds 36,000 fans, reports the BBC today.



Tottenham anticipate putting out a tender for construction later this year and say opening the stadium in mid-2017 is “feasible”.



The news comes on the day Tottenham announced a profit of £1.5m in their latest financial results.
The north London club located in a small ground at White Hart Lane believe moving to a bigger stadium will help them increase their revenues and enable them to compete better against Europe’s top clubs.

Previous design:


The football club are currently sixth in the English Premier League. “We have fantastic, strong support,” chairman Daniel Levy told his club’s website. “Our current 36,000-seater stadium sells out and the waiting list for season ticket holders is currently in excess of 47,000.

Tottenham Football Club have purchased 18 acres of land adjacent to their White Hart Lane ground over the past decade and relocated 72 businesses. They are still waiting for a Secretary of State decision regarding a compulsory purchase order of further property before the new Spurs stadium building can begin. A tender for construction is expected to be out before the end of 2014 with the new stadium due to open for the 2017-18 season.



Tottenham Hotspur FC Stadium
London Olympic Stadium Legacy – West Ham or Spurs?

We are not prepared to ‘trash our international reputation’ – London 2012 chairman Lord Coe slams Olympic Stadium plans by Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. West Ham chief Karren Brady also continues to attack the bid by Spurs.

Chairman of the 2012 London Olympics Lord Coe has slammed plans by Tottenham Hotspur Football Club to occupy the Olympic Stadium in east London following the Games.



Spurs are currently battling West Ham for the right to take control of the stadium and if successful, plan to knock the stadium down and replace it with one that they say is more suitable for hosting football. Tottenham Hotspur Football Club do, however, state that they would redevelop the current athletics facilities at Crystal Palace.

Tottenham Hotspur Football Club chairman Daniel Levy said they had opened discussions about moving to the Olympic venue six years ago, and that their proposal made the best use of the facility whilst also promising massive investment in a London athletics facility at Crystal Palace.



“It’s very simple – we have a 36,000-strong waiting list for season tickets and we sell out every game, we need a bigger stadium,” he said. It’s exceedingly difficult to find a site to build a new stadium, and the North London Development project [redeveloping White Hart Lane] is not financially viable at the moment.

London Olympics Stadium Building – West Ham or Spurs?

Previously:

Tottenham Hotspur Football Club Stadium proposals, northeast London
2008-
Design: KSS Group

28 Oct 2009

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium
Submission
KSS are delighted to announce that Tottenham Hotspur Football Club have submitted a planning application to London Borough of Haringey for the Northumberland Development Project which includes KSS’ design proposals for a new 56,000 capacity stadium. The move marks a major milestone in the Club’s desire to build a new venue at its historic home to compete with the best in the UK, and also its regeneration strategy for the wider North Tottenham area.


images courtesy of KSS

Daniel Levy, Chairman of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, said:
“The submission of the application is a hugely important step for the Club.
“Our desire from the outset has been to create a scheme of major benefit for local people and to deliver the most fan-friendly stadium in Europe.
“The inclusion of a new single tier stand combined with a fantastic stadium design demonstrates our absolute commitment to create the most atmospheric stadium for our supporters.
“Our fans will have an exceptional view of the action and will find themselves closer to the pitch than at any other comparable stadium.
“We have also embraced environmental sustainability as part of the plans, delivering a 40% reduction in carbon emissions against current building regulations which will make it one of the best performing of its kind in the UK.

David Keirle, KSS Project Director, said:
“Throughout the whole design process we have continued to refine the designs to maximise stadium atmosphere, including a reduction in the space allocated to corporate areas in order to deliver the new single tier stand.
“The acoustics will be excellent, with the bowl design helping to reflect sound back onto the pitch whilst the stadium architecture itself responds to the Spurs identity, using flowing lines and a gracefully undulating roof to create a visually striking building.
“It will be an exceptional place to watch football and a fantastic addition to this part of the High Road.”

Andy Anson, Chief Executive of England 2018 Ltd, said:
“Tottenham Hotspur Football Club’s provisional designs for their new stadium are very impressive. Potential England 2018 Host Cities will deliver their final bid submissions to us in November and we fully expect the stadium to be one of those included as a potential host venue for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup bid. We wish the club every success with their plans.”

KSS have worked with Tottenham Hotspur Football Club for over seven years. As well as being architects for the new stadium, they are also responsible for the Club’s new training centre, which commenced on site in September 2009. KSS have also worked closely with the Club in preparing proposals that will enable the stadium to act as a candidate host venue as part of England‘s 2018 World Cup bid.

Previously:
Proposed Capacity: 58,000

Spurs Stadium Masterplan – surrounding area
2008-
Make Architects with Martha Schwartz

Facilities incl. Tottenham Hotspur Club Museum, hotel, housing, retail

Exhibition on the proposals until 7 Apr 2009

Spurs Stadium architect : KSS Design Group

Tottenham Hotspur FC Training Facility – also by KSS

Spurs Lodge Kittens said:

Quick query/theory - happy for those of you more up to speed on these things to shoot me down - but could the reason we've come out of the last few transfer windows with a positive balance be because Levy is stashing away all the extra TV income etc that is coming our way, which other teams are using to buy players, so that our naming rights deal / loan is smaller / more manageable and more likely to be taken up by a sponsor??

It seems to me that if this practice went on for other windows then this extra '30/40m' that is talked about for the new TV deal could go someway to us not even needing a sponsor for the stadium. Is that at all possible?

Click to expand...

SteveH said:

This has been my thinking. The cost of buying land around WHL must have been huge. I would have thought way in excess of £40m IMHO

Click to expand...

I think that's as good as written, to be honest. It's what I've been constantly spouting to those wonderful people who 'support' our club, yet seem to care more about 'Net Spend' that they do about what actually happens on the pitch ..

Those same people would undoubtedly be on here screaming their heads off about 'Shitty tight bastards ENIC' if we had splashed the cash that they've wanted us to splash in transfer windows, and then weren't able to make any team improvements once the stadium is finished, due to the £400mil+ debt that would be a result if that stadium build.

In my opinion, it's already been a massive achievement for a club of our size (6th richest in the league, I believe?) to be finishing 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, in the last 5 seasons. IF we can maintain that sort of consistency over the next few years (whilst the stadium is being constructed) and then move into our new stadium with little to no debt to manage, we will be in one heck of a strong position.

Look at the constraints that Arseanal have had to endure whilst paying off their stadium debt. We will, hopefully, be able to do the complete opposite of what they've done, ie we've gone windows without spending big, but we've done it before construction of our stadium, rather than waiting until after it's completed.

IF we have indeed done as I suspect, imagine the step forward we could be able to take/make, when getting an extra £1mil per week (home match) in ticket sales whilst we've remained competitive for top 4 positions throughout our frugal seasons.

Booney said:

I'd hope for some kind of major announcement shortly after the CPO appeal deadline runs out on September 10th.

Levy is a lot of things but stupid isn't one of them. With all of our competitors splashing the transfer cash he'll know that the fans will soon get restless unless we're offered some kind of explanation as to where our finances are being directed. Most won't find a new Sainsburys and a lonely digger as exciting as Alexis Sanchez or Falcao. We need and deserve something a little more 'concrete'.

Click to expand...

He's likely to get a backlash either way mate. Although there are a few of us who can fully understand the lack of massive Net Spend (IF it is because of getting as much together as possible for the stadium construction), there is one thing that Levy has constantly repeated since the first day the original plans were released, ie something along the lines of "The new stadium will not impact upon spending on/improving the team on the pitch"!

It's another stick that the 'Anti ENIC' brigade can use to beat the owners of our club with. Those 'bashers' simply don't care about common sense or the bigger picture. They're more interested in Joe Lewis living in a tax haven & not pumping £1billion of his own money into the club, ala Abramovich.

cornelius knob said:

This is actually a really informative and well written post in my opinion. But to sum it all up, I think its clear for all to see that as things stand, a new stadium may be built, but no-one really knows how big or to what design. Equally, however, and much more worryingly, A new stadium may well not get built after all !

Click to expand...

OK, I've now seen a fair few of your posts in this particular section of the site, and I'd like to say, I hear ya fella .

absolute bobbins said:

I think this is nonsense, haven't been down but they wouldn't just wind up the business and there is no way that they'd have found a site in a short period of time.

Click to expand...

Mate, I don't know if you can remember, but it's only a couple of months ago that I spent 3 days 'debating' with Peter from Archway, on twitter? Well a couple of weeks after that 'debate' (which was posted on here) somebody appeared on Twitter & said that Peter/Archway were actually thinking of retiring altogether (I also posted that in this thread).

Obviously I can't know for sure that the info was correct, Peter, for some reason, decided to stop responding to my questions after the CPO was granted in favour of the council , so I got no answer when I asked him if it was correct & he'd be retiring. I even took the time to message him to let him know that it's a sad state of affairs if this has all led to them shutting up shop, and I actually hope that isn't the case, but got no response.

Just though I'd add that because it had been spoken about previously in here, and maybe you never saw the discussion at the time.

absolute bobbins said:

They have offered 555 White Hart Lane but it's still an empty site by all accounts

Click to expand...

555,white hart lane belongs to safe house strorage, I know the owner personally, he had offered the site to spurs but DL did not think the site was suitable, knowing the owner like I do, he probably asked for ten times what it was worth.
He's a right liberty taker, wants everything for nothing, and wants everything he has got at the top possible price.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the 'kop' end designed with a 9000 capacity? If the stadium is now to be 62000 as suggested wll that mean the kop's capacity wil increase? 9k does not sound very impressive considering Anfields's is 12k(I believe), Wednesday's is 11k, Shefield Utd's is 10k!

shelfmonkey said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the 'kop' end designed with a 9000 capacity? If the stadium is now to be 62000 as suggested wll that mean the kop's capacity wil increase? 9k does not sound very imoressive considering Anfields's is 12k,

Click to expand...

The only reason I can think is that this is due to its very narrow nature, trying to keep the corners as efficient as possible. The Kop at Anfield is massive, but is actually not that efficient due to the lost capacity in the corners. But the KSS design is a bit of a cut and shut, so maybe Populous think they can do it a bit better and get a few more seats in their design.

absolute bobbins said:

They have offered 555 White Hart Lane but it's still an empty site by all accounts

Click to expand...

Thought it was 500 White Hart Lane....

absolute bobbins said:

I think this is nonsense, haven't been down but they wouldn't just wind up the business and there is no way that they'd have found a site in a short period of time.

Click to expand...

They've only got a few weeks left on their 3 month notice to vacate (that runs concurrently with the appeal 6 weeks, not after it)