LONDON - New White Hart Lane (56,250) [Archive]

2005

April 1st, 2008, 08:43 PM

Up at 7am, out of the house at 7:45am and arriving at the British Museum at about 8:30am to be told that tickets to see the terracotta army on the day had already been sold, my best chance of getting some is getting there, by the lovely time of 7am tomorrow.

It was nearly 9am, having been stuck at home for ages whilst doing sweet FA for months, I thought to myself that I should go somewhere, see something in the flesh that I'd always wished to. The Emirates Stadium was the first thing that came to mind, as much as I hate Arsenal I have to admit that their new stadium is good, such a shame it's theirs but oh well, I like my stadiums and this is one I've wished to see for ages.

Although I knew I wasn't going to be allowed in I thought I might as well, also after seeing it and then seeing Highbury, I'll go somehwere much better, White Hart Lane Hopped onto the Piccadilly line to Holloway road.

If I'm completely honest, it's a master peice, it's somewhat simple whilst very well made. It did cost a lot but, as far I could see, the stadium is worth every penny. Due to the fact that their offices are outside of the stadium, it feels lifeless. There is no character, I fully agree with what people have said on that matter. Whilst I thought this I couldn't help but think that Tottenham will most probably end up with the same, a brilliant stadium worthy of UEFA 5 star rating but not really full of life. Still, as time goes on it will have more life injected to it

Was I jealous? In honesty not all, hugely impressed but not jealous, the same bloke that was in charge of this project is in charge of Tottenham's and the announcement on what they will be building will be made within the next three months, also we beat Arsenal 5-1 when we last played and we have a trophy. .

I noticed that the Clock that used to sit above the Clock End has been placed on the outside, the second I saw this I couldn't help but think of the rebuilding of the West Stand, when Spurs didn't place the cockeral on the new stand, this, as folk law goes, cursed the club, hopefully the same happens to Ar5ena1 *fingers crossed*

After having walked round it, looking at it from every angle, I wished there was more goons, I was very well dressed today and felt that I could get away with pretending to be on the phone to some talking about a mega bucks transer just to wind them up, but there was hardly anyone there.

Highbury was the next stop. Whilst I walked past the old East Stand, after stepping in a turd, something there is a lot of in that area, I couldn't help but think what a shame it was that Highbury is now dead, yes it was worth a giggal when the goons cried over it but from an impartial it was a great stadium, looked pretty decent and was toching distance from the pitch.

After that I got on the tube to Seven Sisters, then got the train to WHL. Before getting to the stadium, I looked at the area and thought this place isn't in need of regeneration, its on its knees blubbering like a baby begging for regeneration. It was the first time I'd been to WHL in about 2 and a half years. I went to the tempory ticket office. I asked the lady which tickets were availble, there and then I found out why Spurs are making sure that they build a bigger stadium within the next 4 years, she informed me that the next three home games have sold out! There is five or six weeks of the season left and there is no chance of me getting a a ticket, gutted.Reminds me of when I attempted to get tickets for the Reading game that ended 6-4, four or five weeks before the game and it was sold out.

After this I decided to go the main reception to ask about tours, as I pasted the barricade the woman in the box said "Can I help you love?" I asked about the stadium tours, she said there only done on weekends, which left very confused as to why, and there all booked up until late May. I asked if she had hear anything about the stadium, her reply was "The club are very tight lipped on things." She went onto say that there has been loads of contractors coming lately, so it sounds like things are being finalised for the stadium, and the club are on course to announce plans before the end of June.

As I walked onto the Paxton Road, I looked at the land that people have said Tottenham have recently bought up, I have to admit that whilst walking past the site I couldn't help but have my doubts because the idea would cost so much. There iss the cost of the site, knocking everything down and then the building work on the new stadium, we could be talking about the amount that Arsenal are currently paying their stadium. Also, why Spurs won't rebuild the West and East has left me flumexed, they could easily have a teir over hangingthe road and then the space behind the West Stand is huge, still it's best not to doubt a man with a degree in Econmics and Land Economy from Cambridge.

As I'm sure all regulars know, everything has been bought up outside of the West Stand, literally no life there at all, very much a case when will it all get knocked down not if.
I now can't wait until the club announces its plans but I can't help but think that whatever is built won't be in White Hart Lane, fingers crossed it is though.

GunnerJacket

April 2nd, 2008, 04:57 AM

Some interesting comments. I'd long thought the club would have another go at expanding WHL before moving elsewhere. If this is not to be, then s**** have indeed been quietly moving finances about. Curious.

Firstly, according to some press reports like this one (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=548030&in_page_id=1779&ct=5) the profit margin may not be as rosy. Despite the admirable Ramos' efforts and noticable improvements the club must work with smaller guaranteed revenue streams than the likes of ManU and Chelsea. (Then again, everyone else in England does ;)!)

Further, unless I'm mistaken the profit mentioned above isn't complete after taxes, let alone an indicator of annual range. If it were I imagined the club would've acted sooner in this measure, or spent more on some transfers.

The good thing is they have the benefit of learning lessons from other clubs experiences, especially Arsenal. For all the pleasure we Gooners take in seeing Emirates, I can't help but feel jealous of the new Kop conceived for Liverpool's projected new stadia, wish the stands were closer to the pitch, etc. I wish English clubs would foster areas that cater to standing, even if they must still have seats, similar to those in Germany. I'm sure Tottenham would try to take these things into account as best as able.

I'm dubious of the 60,000+ measure if only because every other mark I'd heard prior to this ranged from 45-55k. This isn't a rivalry thing but a notion that the same size restriction that is keeping WHL nearly full and sold out now is something the club would surely like to continue.

Right then. I'm off. :cheers:

JimB

April 2nd, 2008, 02:07 PM

[Firstly, according to some press reports like this one (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=548030&in_page_id=1779&ct=5) the profit margin may not be as rosy.

That report, for the six months to December 31st 2007, shows profits to be down on profits for the same period in the previous year. They were down for a specific reason - namely, compensation to Martin Jol and for Juande Ramos. Nevertheless, profits were still a very healthy £10 million. And given the success in the Carling Cup, profits look to be on course, yet again, to exceed £25 million for the financial year.

Further, unless I'm mistaken the profit mentioned above isn't complete after taxes, let alone an indicator of annual range. If it were I imagined the club would've acted sooner in this measure, or spent more on some transfers.

All financial reports are "pre tax". I don't see what point you're trying to make.

I'm dubious of the 60,000+ measure if only because every other mark I'd heard prior to this ranged from 45-55k. This isn't a rivalry thing but a notion that the same size restriction that is keeping WHL nearly full and sold out now is something the club would surely like to continue.

Possibly. I think it more likely, however, that Spurs' primary concern is to maximize income, even if it means that some seats remain unsold for some games. Whether they have judged the optimum capacity to be 50K, 55K or 60K remains a secret.

GunnerJacket

April 2nd, 2008, 03:40 PM

All financial reports are "pre tax". I don't see what point you're trying to make. Merely suggesting that the entire allotment of profits may not be available for stadium expenses due to other obligations, such as taxes. If s**** wish to retain some of that profit for liquidity's sake, player transfers, etc, that would also reduce the volume of such funds towards construction. That's all I'm saying, that it's not as simple as saying there'll regularly be 20-30M in profits to be redirected towards the stadium.

Trust me, as a fan of a club known for thriftiness there's always some excuse available for why profits need to be redirected from where you think they should go.

Possibly. I think it more likely, however, that Spurs' primary concern is to maximize income, even if it means that some seats remain unsold for some games. Whether they have judged the optimum capacity to be 50K, 55K or 60K remains a secret.I agree that's possible, but many clubs are learning the value of maintaining high demand for tickets. Even lofty Liverpool is restraining from pushing the 70k barrier because they don't want to see empty seats. Better to maintain that waiting list for season tickets (itself a source of revenue) then to simply fill the large bowl when the big names come to town (a la Italian clubs). I think Juve's plans for a 40-45k stadium are a prime example of that. They could easily fill 70k for matches with Milan, Inter, Roma, etc, but it would be a cavernous void against the likes Atalanta or Verona, and that would detract from the value of season packages or prime seats.

JimB

April 2nd, 2008, 04:06 PM

Merely suggesting that the entire allotment of profits may not be available for stadium expenses due to other obligations, such as taxes. If s**** wish to retain some of that profit for liquidity's sake, player transfers, etc, that would also reduce the volume of such funds towards construction. That's all I'm saying, that it's not as simple as saying there'll regularly be 20-30M in profits to be redirected towards the stadium.

Okay, I see what you mean.

Just to clarify, however. If we were to take my back-of-a-beer-mat guesstimates as fact, then Spurs would need to find £17.5 million per annum in repayments. Even a relatively pessimistic scenario would see Spurs' revenues increase by £15-20 million.

So my only purpose in mentioning Spurs' current profits of £25-30 million or so per annum was to show that, even if the increased revenue from a new stadium was still some £2.5 million short of the amount required in annual debt repayments, there would be plenty of scope to meet repayments without eating too much into profits at current levels. In other words, profits would still be up around £25 million.

I'm not sure that I've made that very clear but I hope that you get my drift!

I agree that's possible, but many clubs are learning the value of maintaining high demand for tickets. Even lofty Liverpool is restraining from pushing the 70k barrier because they don't want to see empty seats. Better to maintain that waiting list for season tickets (itself a source of revenue) then to simply fill the large bowl when the big names come to town (a la Italian clubs). I think Juve's plans for a 40-45k stadium are a prime example of that. They could easily fill 70k for matches with Milan, Inter, Roma, etc, but it would be a cavernous void against the likes Atalanta or Verona, and that would detract from the value of season packages or prime seats.

You have a point but it all really depends on what Levy and co believe the potential of the club to be and how quickly they could get to the point of selling out the chosen capacity for every game. It would be foolish to build a 50K stadium only to discover that, within a few years, its capacity was inadequate.

It is possible that Spurs might go for the option of building a 50K or 55K stadium that is designed with the potential for an increased capacity.

JimB

May 2nd, 2008, 06:00 PM

The following was posted on a Spurs message board today, though I can't vouch for its accuracy:

Stadium agreed. New one to the north of WHL where they've been buying land. No need to find temporary home. Full details to be announced Sept. Don't ask me why. Existing Paxton stand area will form part of new stadium so capacity will go down whilst new one being built. New one is the bollocks, looks like a spaceship. 50000 capacity but can be tweaked easily to go up to 60000 in the future.

2005

May 4th, 2008, 12:01 AM

Jesus tap f***ing dancing christ, can't wait until we announce the plans and the transfer window is over, ITKs do my swede.

Karve

May 6th, 2008, 12:52 AM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=564189&in_page_id=1779

www.sercan.de

May 6th, 2008, 01:11 AM

looks like this can be true
just with smaller 3rd tier at the corners like da luz or emirates
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/9296/28714225sc5.jpg

JimB

May 6th, 2008, 03:06 AM

looks like this can be true
just with smaller 3rd tier at the corners like da luz or emirates
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/9296/28714225sc5.jpg

That's actually the wrong location, sercan. If recent rumours are to be believed, the new site would be to the north of Paxton Road and the current ground (to the left of your image) - Wingate Trading Estate, some of which is already owned by Spurs.

http://www.multimap.com/maps/?title=Tottenham%20Hotspur%20FC%20Ground%20-%20White%20Hart%20Lane%2C&t=l&map=51.6031,-0.0676|16|4&loc=GB:51.6031:-0.0676:16#map=51.60391,-0.06824|16|4&loc=GB:51.6031:-0.0676:16

I also suspect that the Daily Mail article was lifted off a Spurs message board (the lazy British press do that quite a lot!), so I wouldn't take it as gospel.

www.sercan.de

May 6th, 2008, 04:43 PM

i just thought as stadium design
in the article they say its like Emirates
WHich mean to me its like da Luz
so it has got a 3rd wave tier ad maybe a smalll 2nd business tier

JimB

May 6th, 2008, 06:19 PM

i just thought as stadium design
in the article they say its like Emirates
WHich mean to me its like da Luz
so it has got a 3rd wave tier ad maybe a smalll 2nd business tier

I suspect that you're giving the source of these rumours too much credit. Whoever has been feeding the press (assuming that the press aren't just making things up as they go along - quite possible!) probably just looked at plans for a bowl shaped stadium and therefore likened it to Emirates. I very much doubt that Spurs' new stadium will have a wavy top tier.

But it probably will have a middle corporate tier.

JimB

May 6th, 2008, 06:25 PM

From Tottenham's official site:

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/stadiumupdate060508.html

In the Club's 2007/08 interim financial statement we indicated that we would report on the outcome of our appraisals and our preferred option in respect of an increased capacity stadium by the end of June. However, following the latest appraisal, it will now not be possible to make an announcement within that time frame.

Chairman, Daniel Levy, said, “The difficulties with seeking a solution to our need for increased capacity are significant, they include low residual land values within the Tottenham area which in turn makes enabling development less feasible, along with a limited number of suitable alternative sites within London, all of which require land assembly.

“I am determined that we shall work towards a successful outcome and a project of this nature and importance cannot be hurried.

“On a point of clarity, we have taken no decision on whether or not to expand White Hart Lane and we continue to review and keep our options open.

“I appreciate that supporters are keen for news on the future of the stadium and felt that it was important to provide an update.

“I shall, of course, keep you fully appraised of any developments in the coming months.”

I don't really know what to think of that.

Could be that all the rumours were wrong and that Spurs had never come to any decision.

Could be that Spurs have gone back to the drawing board because of the credit crunch.

Or it just could be that, as the rumour further up this page predicted, Spurs will not be ready to announce stadium plans until September.

Patience is a virtue....but it's wearing very thin!

Nitro

May 6th, 2008, 06:31 PM

From my understanding the West Stand will be extended right up until Bill Nicholson Way, enabling a 3 tier stand to be built. Therefore the CarPark will no longer be on that side of the ground. The East Stand has no residential buildings behind it, Haringey Council have granted permission to also make this a 3 tier stand, with car parking behind. the north and south satnds will remain the same....the max capacity wud be 55,000 not 60,000.

The council have also given the thumbs up for the victoria line extention, there already exists an unused train line.

The only thing which is holding this project back is the money for it, and whether its is worth re-developing when they can built a 60,000-70,000 stadium in the leafy suburbs, or at tottenham marshes.

GunnerJacket

May 6th, 2008, 06:42 PM

If I didn't know better I'd think Spurs were trying to unseat Liverpool in the stadium soap opera department! Then there's always Everton, Newcastle, Portsmouth...

Nitro

May 6th, 2008, 08:40 PM

If I didn't know better I'd think Spurs were trying to unseat Liverpool in the stadium soap opera department! Then there's always Everton, Newcastle, Portsmouth...

lol. seems some of us have short memories, lets not forget how long it took for you guys to leave Highbury.....although the residents around ur old stadium still havent noticed u have left since its as 'loud' come 3pm on a Saturday than it was 3 seasons ago. :)

2005

May 6th, 2008, 10:33 PM

Nitro

May 6th, 2008, 11:20 PM

Is this based upon rumour you've read or have you been told this?

well its a quasi-official rumour.....i have correspodence with some people in Haringey Council's planning department, if i speak to them in the next few days i mite ask, im not sure if they are allowed to give me the details, but if im not mistaken a project of this stature is likely to impact upon the local area, so i mite have grounds to check the plans.

theres an article on the Telegraph online today about the stadium. To be honest i dont think its that likely Spurs will stay at WHL, that proposal i mentioned has been available for sometime. I cant blame Haringey for once, since they are aware how important it is to keep Spurs in the borough, they have been very good to Tottenham and have approved whatever has been put on the table. Its Levy that is looking for the cheapest option...he dont give a f**k if we leave, money talks.

JimB

May 7th, 2008, 12:35 AM

Its Levy that is looking for the cheapest option...he dont give a f**k if we leave, money talks.

When we're talking about figures like £300 million, I should bloody well hope that Levy is shopping around for the best possible deal for Tottenham!

Let's not do a Leeds, eh?

GunnerJacket

May 7th, 2008, 04:48 AM

lol. seems some of us have short memories, lets not forget how long it took for you guys to leave Highbury.....although the residents around ur old stadium still havent noticed u have left since its as 'loud' come 3pm on a Saturday than it was 3 seasons ago. :)Hey, just trying to add some levity. And believe me, I'm glad my club's soap opera with that effort is all but done. Cheers. :cheers:

2005

May 8th, 2008, 05:11 PM

From my understanding the West Stand will be extended right up until Bill Nicholson Way, enabling a 3 tier stand to be built. Therefore the CarPark will no longer be on that side of the ground. The East Stand has no residential buildings behind it, Haringey Council have granted permission to also make this a 3 tier stand, with car parking behind. the north and south satnds will remain the same....the max capacity wud be 55,000 not 60,000.

Reading through the thread again I couldn't help but remember reading something from a blog about 6 years ago. Some bloke said his father knew the stadium manager quite well. They got shown plans of the new East Stand, to make WHL 44,000 then they got shown plans for a new West Stand that coincide with what you've said, my guess is these plans are long gone but we'll find out sooner or later, preferably sooner!

Nitro, could you, by any chance, pleas ask your buddies at Haringey council if they still have pics of the old plans for the East Stand? I've never seen em in my life though always wanted to.

JimB

October 30th, 2008, 02:11 PM

You can change the thread title now!

It should read: LONDON - New White Hart Lane (60,000).

Yes, Ladies and Gents, Spurs have finally announced their stadium plans:

Tottenham Hotspur confirms Northumberland Development Project

• A world-class scheme incorporating a new stadium with a capacity of 60,000, a Club museum, new shops, new homes, a new base for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and important new public space
• Delivered on the current site and adjacent land, ending concerns about a move out of the Borough
• No need for a temporary move during construction
• Significant local benefits and a huge boost to the area
• Potential catalyst for wider regeneration and further investment
• First public exhibition to open from 14 November - 18 November

The Club is delighted to announce that, having concluded an extensive review of suitable sites and viable alternatives, its preferred stadium option is to remain at the Club's spiritual home in Tottenham - the option known to be the fans' favourite.

The existing 36,000 capacity stadium has remained unchanged for over a decade and the club is currently in the position of having 70,000 registered club members and a waiting list for season tickets of around 22,000 people.

The Club is preparing plans for a world class scheme incorporating a new stadium, Club museum, shops and homes, new facilities for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and important public space. The plans will enable the team to remain at the current site throughout construction.

Daniel Levy, Chairman of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club said:

"The Northumberland Development Project would deliver a world class scheme and substantial new investment for Haringey and our supporters. It represents a significant step in the growth of the Club, with a proposed stadium capacity of 60,000 and would provide state-of-the-art facilities, important public space, new jobs and homes and a significant boost for the local economy.

"It would also enable us to provide a new base for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation so that its award winning programmes can continue and have an even greater impact in the local community.

"Tottenham Hotspur is proud of its roots in Haringey. We have been in the Borough for 126 years and the Club is inextricably linked with this part of London. We believe that this scheme has the potential to create a truly inspirational environment for the Club and the community as well as acting as the catalyst for the uplift of the wider area.

"We are at an early stage of what is part of our long term plans for the Club and now we want the views of local people and our fans. I hope people will take the time to look at our plans and let us have their comments."

Councillor George Meehan, Leader of Haringey Council, said:

"I am delighted that Tottenham Hotspur has confirmed its commitment to remain in our borough.

"We have always regarded Spurs as one of Haringey's prime assets. They bring major economic benefits to our borough and carry out some excellent community work through the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation.

"But more than anything, Spurs has played an integral role in giving a sense of identity to the area it calls home. Tottenham would not be Tottenham without its football club.

"We have been working extremely hard to regenerate the Tottenham area, which suffered so much from industrial decline. Real progress is being made, and it is extremely pleasing that Spurs has demonstrated that they share our commitment to this continuing regeneration.

"But, as always, we will consider very carefully any plans that are submitted to us, as we strive to ensure that a new stadium delivers real benefits for all who live and work in the area."

The plans, which will be unveiled at the first public exhibition later this month, cover an area of around 20 acres including the site of the current ground and the adjacent industrial estate. The new stadium would be sited largely to the North of the existing one.

In policy terms, the area is within the 'Tottenham High Road Regeneration Corridor' and identified in the Haringey Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as a "major site for potential redevelopment" to act as a "catalyst for prime regeneration".

The transport infrastructure around the stadium is already in place, with 4 stations (White Hart Lane, Northumberland Park, Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale) and over 100 buses an hour serving the stadium area. Together these deliver a total capacity in excess of 90,000 passengers an hour.

The recent introduction of a match-day Controlled Parking Zone together with improved dedicated match-day services and a public information campaign to supporters, means that just over a third of people now come by car with the majority using public transport.

The Club will now undertake a thorough consultation programme with the local community and will also continue to consult with supporters. A first public exhibition is being organised to present the Club's vision for the area with the public invited to make comment on the plans. These comments will be considered and more detailed information will then be presented at a second exhibition before a planning application is submitted to Haringey Council.

The exhibition will take place in the Bill Nicholson Suite at the stadium during the following times:

- Friday 14 November, 10am - 5pm
- Saturday 15 November, 10am - 5pm
- Sunday 16 November, 10am - 5pm
- Monday 17 November, 12pm - 8pm
- Tuesday 18 November, 10am - 5pm

As always we shall look to keep you, our supporters, along with the local community of Haringey, as informed and up-to-date as possible.

On Friday 14 November, the Club will launch a special section of the website dedicated to our future plans. Please visit it at www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans to see the emerging plans and to let us have your comments

Whilst we are at the beginning of a long process, should we receive the necessary planning permissions, preference will be given to existing season ticket holders and corporate customers to retain their status in a new stadium. Priority for any new season tickets will go to our One Hotspur Bronze members, who make up our season ticket waiting list. Any current season ticket holders who are interested in obtaining additional tickets for friends and/or family members in a new stadium will therefore need to ensure those individuals are signed up to the One Hotspur Bronze membership scheme.

JimB

October 30th, 2008, 02:13 PM

A bit more info from the Chairman's statement in the annual report:

With a waiting list for season tickets of over 22,000 and Club membership levels of over 70,000, our need for an increased capacity stadium has been clear for all to see for some time. We diligently spent considerable time reviewing our options and the news that our supporters had been waiting for came this month when we announced our intention to remain in Tottenham, confirming the Northumberland Development Project – a world class scheme incorporating a new stadium with a capacity of 60,000, a club museum, new shops, restaurants, homes and important public space.

Having reviewed our stadium options it was clear that there were a limited number of alternative sites to our current location and following discussions with Council bodies, the LDA, Transport for London and local and central government officials, redeveloping the existing site emerged as the most viable route.

We have spent 5 years buying and taking options over property around the current stadium site to enable us to either develop locally or to gain the critical mass to achieve a substantial site sale as a contribution to a relocation. To date this includes almost 60 separate property transactions, including 40 residential and potentially 160 commercial properties at a commitment of £44m. The scheme includes the current site and adjoining land with the stadium sited largely to the north of the existing one. Getting to this stage has necessitated a great deal of work, determination and co-operation. The task ahead will by no means be easy but it is our firm belief that the new development will not only benefit everyone involved in the Club, but significantly enhance the immediate area around the ground. Importantly, it has real potential to kick start the regeneration of the wider area....

....Looking further forward and to funding for the new development, the funding package will necessarily include a combination of sponsorship, property deals, bank finance and innovative funding proposals.

However, stadium projects take time to deliver and we are determined not to undertake any capital project that undermines the financial stability that we have worked so hard to create at this Club. Be assured we shall look to ensure that this scheme is delivered in an appropriate manner. The project team now includes a multi-disciplinary group of architects, transport consultants, heritage specialists, planning consultants and other advisers.

The public consultation period will now begin and we would hope to submit a planning application in 2009. I am personally delighted that we have been able to put forward a viable option which we know to be the fans’ favourite – remaining at the Club’s spiritual home.

Main points I'd take from that (in no order of importance) are:

1. Not just a stadium but also a shopping and leisure complex.

2. Much of the property for the new site has already been bought (some £44 million spent on property purchases around the ground over the past five years).

3. Expect a name change for the stadium, despite it being in virtually the same place as the old stadium. Arsenal secured £70 million of up front cash from Emirates. Spurs will need to do something similar.

4. Planning application within the year (with Haringey council unlikely to put up much, if any, resistance).

5. 60,000...........yes!! Delighted that they haven't been overly conservative.

Can't wait to see the renders on 14th November.

JimB

October 30th, 2008, 02:37 PM

Just to highlight (for those who can't be bothered to read through all the info above!), renders of the new scheme will be available on this URL www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans from November 14th.

I have to say that this decision is the best possible outcome. I always wanted to stay at the same site - even while building work was going on; I always wanted a capacity of at least 60,000 (though I feared a 50K compromise).

Now we just have to hope that the chosen architects have designed:

a) a proper football stadium, with fans as close to the pitch as possible and with steeply rising tiers.

b) a stadium with character and not merely another dull, featureless, generic bowl.

c) a scheme with real architectural merit.

d) a stadium with no overhanging roofs - thereby obscuring the view of much of the rest of the stadium from many seats (such as at the Emirates).

e) a stadium with proper navy blue seats and not the inferior (Chelsea) blue of the current seats at WHL!!

Can't wait!

www.sercan.de

October 30th, 2008, 06:23 PM

And lets hope its not HOK Sports.
3 HOK Sports stadium in 1 city would be a lil bit too much.
:D

Republica

October 30th, 2008, 07:22 PM

They need to make sure tranposrt is ok. Isnt it a bit crap even now.

JimB

October 30th, 2008, 07:25 PM

There is a danger that it could be HOK, I suppose.

One of the key people working on Spurs' stadium project is also one of the main people who helped to deliver the Emirates through to completion.

JimB

October 30th, 2008, 07:42 PM

They need to make sure tranposrt is ok. Isnt it a bit crap even now.

Bit of a myth, really.

Public transport around White Hart Lane isn't great, admittedly, but it's no worse than most other English stadia.

I mean, you couldn't exactly say that Anfield, Hillsborough, Fratton Park, Villa Park, Emirates or Twickenham (among many, many others) are especially easy to access on match days.

White Hart Lane is within half a mile of the A406 North Circular; within five miles of the M25 motorway; 200 metres from White Hart Lane train station; and 600 metres from Northumberland Park train station. The area is very well served by buses. The nearest two London Underground stations (Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale) are, admittedly, a brisk 20 minute walk away. But maybe Spurs and Haringey council have decided that they will only be able to force Transport for London's hand (regarding a Victoria Line extension to Northumberland Park) if they go ahead with stadium plans regardless.

To ease congestion, there is now a controlled parking scheme around the stadium which has led to far less traffic in the immediate vicinity. Of course there are still traffic jams leading to and away from the stadium before and after matches - but you show me a major sporting venue where there aren't traffic jams on event days.

Gherkin

October 30th, 2008, 08:29 PM

White seats please! I can't think of any other football stadia in the UK with white seats...

RobH

October 30th, 2008, 09:35 PM

Ah yes, completely agree!

2005

October 30th, 2008, 10:16 PM

NeilF

October 30th, 2008, 11:25 PM

White seats please! I can't think of any other football stadia in the UK with white seats...

The only two in England with predominantly white seats are Broadhall Way in Stevenage and The Avenue Stadium in Dorchester, with capacities of 7,100 and 5,000 respectively. The only one in Northern Ireland is Taylor's Avenue in Carrickfergus, which only has about 400 seats. There are none in Scotland or Wales that I know of. It would certainly be the only large stadium in the UK with white seats but there's generally a reason for that. I can see the seats being either green or navy.

plasticterminator

October 30th, 2008, 11:42 PM

Spurs not only famous club in England with wrong colour seats (could be a new thread this one!) Leeds united also have the everton,chelsea,birmingham blue but play in white and traditonally yellow away strip. Newcastle grey seats also springs to mind.
And i dont mean clubs in temp homes sharing etc

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/Elland_rd2.jpg

Snowy

October 31st, 2008, 12:13 AM

My eyes was were partly filled on the platform at East Croydon, I have waited for over seven years for something to be finally confirmed, one thing I'd like to say, COME ON YOU SPURS 4-2 AND YOU F***ED IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, great game last night, but I think your avatar needs updating, you want 'Arry up there!

Yiddoes!!!!!!!!

EPA001

October 31st, 2008, 12:17 AM

Great news for Tottenham which has always been a special club in England to follow, even if they are struggeling the last couple of years. Hopefully the new stadium will give the whole club a boost!

Gherkin

October 31st, 2008, 02:04 AM

What do you think 2005?

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/spurser.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/spursser3.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/spurser4.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/gherkin007/spurser2.jpg

:lol: :tongue2:

Kobo

October 31st, 2008, 12:26 PM

I didn't read a date they want this built by, anybody know?

Goolay-Roubley

October 31st, 2008, 01:22 PM

London comes up trumps again. What a sporting city the place is. Now. Imagine the plans that Chelsea will put forward within the next year. I wouldn't be suprised if they go to 80,000.

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 01:59 PM

I didn't read a date they want this built by, anybody know?

No date.

So far, only the committment to hold a public exhibition of plans from November 14th-18th and then to submit a planning application some time during 2009.

Assuming that there are no difficulties with the application (and it is highly unlikely that there will be), all will depend on Spurs' ability to raise the finance. It is even possible that Levy has no intention of undertaking the building of the stadium himself but that, by doing all the preparatory work for a new stadium, he will make the club more attractive to potential new owners.

If Levy does intend to oversee the building of the new stadium and if he has already arranged for the finance, then the earliest that building could start, I would imagine, is 2010. If the schedule is similar to that of the Emirates' construction, that would mean Spurs moving into the new stadium at the beginning of the 2012-13 season.

The timing all really depends upon how much Spurs can demand for the stadium naming rights (and how much they can ask the sponsors to pay up front); how much profit they can make from the property aspect of the development; how much of their own money they can afford to pay up front; and how much they can safely and sensibly borrow.

Benjuk

October 31st, 2008, 04:14 PM

Bit confused by the capacity issue. They average about 35k. They apparently have a waiting list of 22k. So why go for a capacity of only 60k. That only leave 3k to expand beyond the existing market. Right?

Oh, and I don't believe for a second the capacity will be under 60, 356, even if they aren't going to leave room for further expansion of their support, they are honour bound as a football club to do a bit of one-up-man-ship on the neighbours.

Also, with a world cup bid coming up, it stands to reason that any club already building a super-stadium will want to make sure it's one of the two largest in London.

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 04:55 PM

Bit confused by the capacity issue. They average about 35k. They apparently have a waiting list of 22k. So why go for a capacity of only 60k. That only leave 3k to expand beyond the existing market. Right?

Tottenham sell out 36,000 every Premier League game, unless the away team fail to sell their allocation. But of that 36,000, only 23,000 are season ticket holders. The level of season ticket holders is capped so that getting to watch Spurs home games isn't entirely a closed shop.

In other words, with a waiting list of 22,000, Spurs could have sold 45,000 season tickets this year. Which, after allowing for up to 3,000 away fans, would leave a further 12,000 tickets to go on sale to the remaining 50,000 or so Spurs members and, after that, to go on general sale. That should be adequate for all bar the biggest games.

Oh, and I don't believe for a second the capacity will be under 60, 356, even if they aren't going to leave room for further expansion of their support, they are honour bound as a football club to do a bit of one-up-man-ship on the neighbours.

I suspect that you may be correct! Wouldn't be surprised if capacity was eventually revealed to be a little bit above 61,000........61, after all, being a rather significant number to Spurs fans!

Also, with a world cup bid coming up, it stands to reason that any club already building a super-stadium will want to make sure it's one of the two largest in London.

Capacity of stadium won't be the only determining factor, of course - especially if we're only talking about a difference of a thousand or so. Besides, I rather suspect that Chelsea will trump both Spurs and Arsenal before 2018 - or whenever the World Cup next comes to England.

www.sercan.de

October 31st, 2008, 05:28 PM

61?
why?

GunnerJacket

October 31st, 2008, 05:48 PM

61?
why?Last time they won the league and it also happened to be a league/cup double.

What do you think 2005?I would've thought the s**** fans would find such images to be sacrilege! :colgate:

It is even possible that Levy has no intention of undertaking the building of the stadium himself but that, by doing all the preparatory work for a new stadium, he will make the club more attractive to potential new owners. Really? I hadn't thought of that and hadn't heard anything about a possibility for selling. Seems surprising to me given that they're such a profitable club.

Bit confused by the capacity issue. They average about 35k. They apparently have a waiting list of 22k. So why go for a capacity of only 60k. That only leave 3k to expand beyond the existing market. Right?Sell-outs are all important to clubs these days, both as a means for keeping ticket prices high and to provide a sense of easier budgeting (less guess work on projections). Best to begin here and then expand as able in the future, while building up more of a waiting list (which can also be a profit maker).

- - -

Re: Chelsea building/World Cup
If Chelsea are to build or expand it's going to come again at the expense of RA, as the club itself remains a debtors operation. Given the costs that would entail I can't imagine RA is prepared to add to his existing $1B "losses" in the club, especially given the tenuous nature of their current success. As has been stated, they're not quite at the level of natural, consistent support as s**** or Arsenal, and without RA's funding they'd have to sell players, likely drop down the table, etc. (Even as Gooner I'd rather have an honest s**** side rewarded in the standings compared to Chelsea.) Bottom line, speaking purely about the club, Chelsea aren't equipped for such a move unless RA is simply interested in losing more money.

www.sercan.de

October 31st, 2008, 05:56 PM

Why not 63 :d
First European title

berkshire royal

October 31st, 2008, 06:03 PM

^^
Doing the double in English football is a huge achievment and also a huge crown, for me the FA Cup is the most revered domesti cup competition in the world. It is also significant because only 10 teams have ever done the double, and Spurs we're the first team to do it in the 20th century as well as being the first in 64 years.

I think it is a set guarentee the stadium will be slightly bigger then the Emirates it would be a nice touch if the capacity was 61,000. Sadly I wouldn't be suprised if it is a carbon copy of the Emirates, especially if HOK are designing it as they are extremely lazy when it comes to their football stadium designs.

flierfy

October 31st, 2008, 06:08 PM

Also, with a world cup bid coming up, it stands to reason that any club already building a super-stadium will want to make sure it's one of the two largest in London.
The difference in capacity will be marginal. If there are two London grounds to be picked for a World Cup then the FA will always choose Woolwichs ground. They favoured them all the time in every possible way. Why should that change? Certainly not because of two more seats.

GunnerJacket

October 31st, 2008, 06:32 PM

Sadly I wouldn't be suprised if it is a carbon copy of the Emirates, especially if HOK are designing it as they are extremely lazy when it comes to their football stadium designs.+1. I would hope that we see another attempt to strike out for originality. Perhaps not as boldly as Liverpool, but it would be a shame to see a generation of stadiums so alike. It's bad enough The Grove has one sister in the new La Luz.

www.sercan.de

October 31st, 2008, 06:44 PM

The project at page 1 looked like da Luz or Emirates
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/9296/28714225sc5.jpg

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 08:20 PM

Really? I hadn't thought of that and hadn't heard anything about a possibility for selling. Seems surprising to me given that they're such a profitable club.

A profitable club, yes, but the vast majority of those profits are usually ploughed back into new signings and player wages. Only in the last couple of years have Spurs paid a dividend to shareholders.

A new stadium will be a hugely expensive commitment - and one that is not not entirely without risk. If Levy were to sell Spurs for, say, £300-350 million, ENIC will have made something like a 600% return on their overall investment. Levy may decide that that is profit enough and, having delivered planning permission for a new stadium, leave the actual financial risk to a new owner.

This is just one possible scenario, by the way, and no more likely than that ENIC will remain as Spurs' owners.

I can't imagine RA is prepared to add to his existing $1B "losses" in the club, especially given the tenuous nature of their current success.

To be fair, I think Abramovich has done alright out of his investment. Remember, he bought Chelsea for a mere £60 million. Sure, he's since invested a further £500 million (?) but I would guess that Chelsea is now worth north of £700 million.

And if they did decide to move to a new stadium, the sale of the Stamford Bridge site (including the existing hotels etc) would pay for much of the new stadium, I'd guess.

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 08:30 PM

Why not 63 :d
First European title

To be honest, I wasn't being entirely serious!

It just seems likely that, since Spurs have committed to a 60K stadium, they will make sure that the new capacity is a little bigger than Arsenal's. So 61K is a reasonable guess. 63K is rather too far above the quoted 60K figure, I'd have thought - otherwise, I'd have gone for 91K....'91 the last time that Spurs won the FA Cup!

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 08:48 PM

+1. I would hope that we see another attempt to strike out for originality. Perhaps not as boldly as Liverpool, but it would be a shame to see a generation of stadiums so alike. It's bad enough The Grove has one sister in the new La Luz.

I would love it if Spurs did surprise me and reveal an entirely original design which worked brilliantly both as a football stadium and, in its own right, as iconic architecture.

Sadly, I fear that I will be disappointed. I don't expect Spurs' stadium to copy too much from the Emirates but it will, I am almost certain, be a bowl design with three tiers - the middle of which will cater for corporate "customers".

plasticterminator

October 31st, 2008, 08:50 PM

Just regarding capacity, it is not a question of how big you want it but how big you are allowed to have it. There are a plethora of rules and regulations regarding public safety evacuation and transport infastructure as most people on this forum know already. So capacity is limited and determined by location as has been an argument with new liverpoool and as was an issue with emirates, so as i am unsure of what the capacity limit is for that location i will not add further perhaps someone can tell us? I would guess it will not be much more than the proposed 60k.

JimB

October 31st, 2008, 11:13 PM

According to curiousgeorge08 on the UK forums, MAKE are the architects.

I don't know whether what he's heard is fact or just rumour but, if true, quite exciting news. Ken Shuttleworth doesn't generally do bland.

plasticterminator

November 1st, 2008, 12:01 AM

It would be great to see something organic in uk a la valencia, beijing rather than what we have seen so far.

JimB

November 2nd, 2008, 03:03 PM

It would be great to see something organic in uk a la valencia, beijing rather than what we have seen so far.

I don't think we'll see anything as intricate as the bird's nest. The Chinese governement had an almost unlimited budget, cheap labour and a yearning need to impress the watching world. Spurs, on the other hand, don't have any of those things and will be hard pressed enough just to raise sufficient finance to build a new 60K stadium without incorporating such a massively expensive design.

Hopefully, the stadium will be aesthetically pleasing and have a unique identity - but without unnecessarily inflating the cost.

plasticterminator

November 2nd, 2008, 03:10 PM

I don't think we'll see anything as intricate as the bird's nest. The Chinese governement had an almost unlimited budget, cheap labour and a yearning need to impress the watching world. Spurs, on the other hand, don't have any of those things and will be hard pressed enough just to raise sufficient finance to build a new 60K stadium without incorporating such a massively expensive design.

Hopefully, the stadium will be aesthetically pleasing and have a unique identity - but without unnecessarily inflating the cost.

True what you say but a facade other than the glass frontage we get on a regular basis would be not break the budget providing the steel structure of the roof is not to crazy.

JimB

November 4th, 2008, 01:32 PM

True what you say but a facade other than the glass frontage we get on a regular basis would be not break the budget providing the steel structure of the roof is not to crazy.

Indeed...a glass frontage (like Wembley, for instance) would be very disappointing. Hopefully, Shuttleworth and his people will be rather more imaginative.

Kamaras Hair Gel

November 4th, 2008, 02:58 PM

Indeed...a glass frontage (like Wembley, for instance) would be very disappointing. Hopefully, Shuttleworth and his people will be rather more imaginative.

100 quid says a snooze bowl, glass facade and 3,000,000 boxes

in fact you wouldnt go far wrong with betting on an emirates with white seats

JimB

November 4th, 2008, 03:12 PM

100 quid says a snooze bowl, glass facade and 3,000,000 boxes

in fact you wouldnt go far wrong with betting on an emirates with white seats

If an established stadium architecture firm (such as HOK) were responsible for the design, then I'd agree with you. However, this will be MAKE's first stadium and, possibly, their biggest and most high profile project to date. The incentive for them to design something both memorable and unique will therefore be huge. I suspect, however, that you're correct in thinking that Spurs will want to adhere to a basic bowl design with a middle tier for corporate "customers".

RobH

November 4th, 2008, 07:19 PM

Indeed...a glass frontage (like Wembley, for instance) would be very disappointing. Hopefully, Shuttleworth and his people will be rather more imaginative.

Wouldn't bother me in the slightest as long as the inside retained atmosphere and was a good football stadium. Liverpool's proposed new ground has a glass frontage but is :drool:

Much rather have something similar to that with an uninteresting exterior than a corporate bowl with a fancy bird's nest exterior tbh.

JimB

November 4th, 2008, 08:24 PM

Wouldn't bother me in the slightest as long as the inside retained atmosphere and was a good football stadium. Liverpool's proposed new ground has a glass frontage but is :drool:

Much rather have something similar to that with an uninteresting exterior than a corporate bowl with a fancy bird's nest exterior tbh.

Completely agree about that. The interior of the stadium is far more important than the exterior.

Nevertheless, I would be very disappointed if the new stadium had an exterior as uninspiring as Wembley's.

plasticterminator

November 4th, 2008, 08:37 PM

Its very interesting to see that generally most people agree the glass frontage has been done to death last few years.

masterpaul

November 4th, 2008, 08:39 PM

Agreed, wembley has a very boring extirior (like a shopping center). Also it looks really bulky and fat.

-----------------------------------------

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/8461/newanfieldsoutheastsh2.jpg

Actually they all are gonna look like shopping centers.

flierfy

November 4th, 2008, 09:32 PM

Nevertheless, I would be very disappointed if the new stadium had an exterior as uninspiring as Wembley's.
Wembley's arch is the best thing that ever happened to a football ground. I don't think that a shopping centre ever had a far-ranging landmark like this.

GunnerJacket

November 4th, 2008, 09:38 PM

Its very interesting to see that generally most people agree the glass frontage has been done to death last few years.I don't think it's a "glass", per se, as much as it is about simply cladding a basic-shaped the venue in glass as a means reducing lighting costs. Play with the form, introduce other elements that employ more dynamic structure. Glass can be quite beautiful and useful, but simply using glass instead of brick or stone doesn't equate to being new or unique.

My $.02 anyway. :cheers:

Zorba

November 4th, 2008, 09:48 PM

I can't wait to see the design of the stadium. Although I don't know if Tottenham can fill up a 60k stadium on a regular basis. I guess it is a plan for the future. GO SPURS!

JimB

November 4th, 2008, 09:50 PM

Wembley's arch is the best thing that ever happened to a football ground. I don't think that a shopping centre ever had a far-ranging landmark like this.

The Wembley arch is the ONLY good and memorable element of the stadium's exterior.

The remainder (the actual body of the stadium) is, you must admit, ordinary in the extreme.

JimB

November 4th, 2008, 09:54 PM

I don't think it's a "glass", per se, as much as it is about simply cladding a basic-shaped the venue in glass as a means reducing lighting costs. Play with the form, introduce other elements that employ more dynamic structure. Glass can be quite beautiful and useful, but simply using glass instead of brick or stone doesn't equate to being new or unique.

My $.02 anyway. :cheers:

Agreed.

Nothing wrong with glass....so long as the architects do something new and different with it.

Kamaras Hair Gel

November 4th, 2008, 10:11 PM

Agreed.

Nothing wrong with glass....so long as the architects do something new and different with it.

yeah defo if its a circular design with a glass wrap around ala wembley then yes it has snoozefactor

new and invigorating designs on a postcard please

its a fantastic opportunity for the archies to make a mark on british venue

bigbossman

November 5th, 2008, 06:40 AM

RobH

November 5th, 2008, 01:47 PM

22,000 on the season ticket waiting list. And how are Spurs supposed to build a younger fanbase if they can't get tickets?

I think it may be difficult to fill regulary but Spurs' fanbase, as the 4th or 5th largest in England is more than capable of growing to fill such a stadium.

bigbossman

November 5th, 2008, 02:11 PM

we have the same waiting list with a 60,000 capacity stadium. and i go around inner city london and 90% of the kids there are arsenal, if they're not arsenal its usually united a few are chelsea nowadays as well.

clubs like millwall, charlton and palace have big fanbases around there respective suburbs. bexleyheath is awash with millwall fans, as is croydon with palace fans, but tottenham have the same catchment area as arsenal and as the game becomes more of a tv sport are bound to struggle.

case in point, i know alot of gooners around tottenham/edmonton way, but you dont get as many yids around islington/camden/hackney way!

also alot of tottenham fans are baby boomers or the children of, right now in the 21st century it is rare for someone to make a conscios decision to support them, as i have said they need success to get younger people interested. not just the ones who are born into spurs families

JimB

November 5th, 2008, 04:46 PM

i have no idea why tottenham are aiming so high, there fan base is shrinking every year and getting older, Arsenal and chelsea have exhausted all the youth support in london and most tottenham fans are hand me downs, within 15 years they will be back with west ham and palace if they don't have success soon! and i mean proper success not a carling cup!

There's always one, isn't there?....you know, some rival fan who blunders in and starts waving his willy around.

Congratulations, bigbossman. But seriously, if you really want to indulge in football discussions at the level of "my club is bigger than your club - nah, nah", go to BBC 606 and have it out with all the other ten year olds on there. This is an architecture forum. M'kay, petal?

That said, I'll take the bait just this once and respond to your points (such as they are):

As RobH has already pointed out, Spurs have 23,000 season ticket holders and more than 22,000 on the waiting list. Every Premiership game at White Hart Lane has been sold out for the past God knows how many seasons. This is despite scant success over the past 25 years and despite the outrageously high ticket prices that Spurs fans have always had to pay. Just imagine if Spurs ever did achieve consistent success! Clearly a new stadium is urgently required.

I need hardly point out, I hope, that it would be foolish in the extreme to spend an enormous sum of money on a new stadium only to discover, all too soon, that it is obsolete because it has insufficient capacity. Even if Spurs couldn't initially sell out 60,000 for every game, it is quite obvious that the club is highly ambitious and is set on breaking into the top four (regardless that those ambitions have, thus far, been thwarted). It follows, therefore, that Spurs believe that a 60K capacity will be required. It's called foresight; planning for growth. It's not rocket science, you know. I would suggest, by the way, that Spurs have a rather clearer picture of the current demand for tickets than you do and that, therefore, they are better able to judge what would be a suitable capacity for the new stadium.

As to the age of Spurs fans, you clearly don't get along to White Hart Lane very often. The majority of those who regularly attend matches at the Lane are under 40 - with an even spread of kids, teenagers, those in their 20's and those in their 30's. Right there, you have the foundations of an ongoing fan base for 50 years and more. The entire lifetime of any new stadium will be little more than that.

Certainly, it is true that Spurs will not have won a big proportion of floating voters over the past couple of decades. But that matters far less when a club already has such a large, loyal and passionate support as Tottenham's. With an existing UK fan base of 1.5 million (and a further 3-4 million worldwide), there will be more than enough children born to Spurs families to maintain the numbers even without significant further success.

And if that elusive success does ever materialize? Well, we might just find that 60,000 is simply not enough.

Right, now that we've got that out of the way, any chance that we can get back to discussing architecture?

www.sercan.de

November 5th, 2008, 05:35 PM

How many suites does the club want?
120 like at WHT or more?

JimB

November 5th, 2008, 05:40 PM

How many suites does the club want?
100?
120?

I've no idea.

It's certain, though, that the new stadium will include a large number of corporate seats - maybe, like the Emirates, as many as 9,000. It would be impossible to pay for the new stadium without them.

How many of these corporate seats will be in boxes / suites (as opposed to a middle tier, such as at Wembley / Emirates) is a matter for conjecture.

We'll just have to wait until Friday week, when the plans will be revealed.

bigbossman

November 5th, 2008, 06:29 PM

There's always one, isn't there?....you know, some rival fan who blunders in and starts waving his willy around.

Congratulations, bigbossman. But seriously, if you really want to indulge in football discussions at the level of "my club is bigger than your club - nah, nah", go to BBC 606 and have it out with all the other ten year olds on there. This is an architecture forum. M'kay, petal?

That said, I'll take the bait just this once and respond to your points (such as they are):

As RobH has already pointed out, Spurs have 23,000 season ticket holders and more than 22,000 on the waiting list. Every Premiership game at White Hart Lane has been sold out for the past God knows how many seasons. This is despite scant success over the past 25 years and despite the outrageously high ticket prices that Spurs fans have always had to pay. Just imagine if Spurs ever did achieve consistent success! Clearly a new stadium is urgently required.

I need hardly point out, I hope, that it would be foolish in the extreme to spend an enormous sum of money on a new stadium only to discover, all too soon, that it is obsolete because it has insufficient capacity. Even if Spurs couldn't initially sell out 60,000 for every game, it is quite obvious that the club is highly ambitious and is set on breaking into the top four (regardless that those ambitions have, thus far, been thwarted). It follows, therefore, that Spurs believe that a 60K capacity will be required. It's called foresight; planning for growth. It's not rocket science, you know. I would suggest, by the way, that Spurs have a rather clearer picture of the current demand for tickets than you do and that, therefore, they are better able to judge what would be a suitable capacity for the new stadium.

As to the age of Spurs fans, you clearly don't get along to White Hart Lane very often. The majority of those who regularly attend matches at the Lane are under 40 - with an even spread of kids, teenagers, those in their 20's and those in their 30's. Right there, you have the foundations of an ongoing fan base for 50 years and more. The entire lifetime of any new stadium will be little more than that.

Certainly, it is true that Spurs will not have won a big proportion of floating voters over the past couple of decades. But that matters far less when a club already has such a large, loyal and passionate support as Tottenham's. With an existing UK fan base of 1.5 million (and a further 3-4 million worldwide), there will be more than enough children born to Spurs families to maintain the numbers even without significant further success.

And if that elusive success does ever materialize? Well, we might just find that 60,000 is simply not enough.

Right, now that we've got that out of the way, any chance that we can get back to discussing architecture?

it wasn't meant to be a rant about arsenal beign bigger than spurs my points were

-spurs are a hand me down club, i never said that there fans are old, i said they are all linked to the club through family, and that the nucleus of the fan base shows no sign of exterior growth, and won't do so without success. basically a chicken and egg question, should the success come first or the stadium.

-i said spurs are being too ambitious as if they don't maintain success they will never fill it, and thats bad business sense. you even mentioned that yourself.

i was really getting at the point that arsenal built a stadium well too small for themeselves (they were forced to really) and are reaping the rewards, and its something tottenham should do, 45-50,000 is what they should be aiming for filling it every week and keeping demand high.

We have a similar pricing scheme to white hart lane, which i dont get to of course, and we have nearly double the capacity,

wasnt it 03/04 you were averaging 34,000, 2,000 below capacity, so if suddenly success deserts you or you stop looking like you are gonna break the top 4, you will lose a fair few fans, granted there might have been mitigating reasons for the low attendances (jacques santini??)

you havent had churn (economic term referring to old customers being replaced by new). This is what the arsenal have had, ie middle class fans replacing the traditional working fan, if success suddenly deserted arsenal alot of the old school and normal fans would be priced back in would return, same at chelsea (maybe).

i for one have no problem with you building the stadium, nor should i, i just think you are stretching yourself, and leaving yourself vulnerable if success deserts you.

JimB

November 5th, 2008, 08:11 PM

it wasn't meant to be a rant about arsenal beign bigger than spurs my points were

If you say so, of course it wasn't, sweetie. It was purely a coincidence that you smuggled irrelevant details about Arsenal's season ticket waiting list and little digs about soon being no bigger than Palace into the discussion, huh?

spurs are a hand me down club

And what's wrong with that? With 1.5 million UK based fans and a further 3-4 million worldwide, there will be enough "hand-me-down" new Spurs fans to keep attendances healthy for a good three generations to come - even if Spurs never again achieve "proper success", as you call it. That will see us through the lifetime of any new stadium.

i never said that there fans are old

You said they were ageing. I merely pointed out that you were wrong.

i said that the nucleus of the fan base shows no sign of exterior growth

Nope...you said that the fan base was shrinking.

basically a chicken and egg question, should the success come first or the stadium.

What is it that you find so difficult to understand? Quite clearly, a new stadium is urgently required to satisfy demand, despite Spurs' lack of success.

i said spurs are being too ambitious as if they don't maintain success they will never fill it, and thats bad business sense. you even mentioned that yourself.

I mentioned no such thing. I said that, initially at least, Spurs may not fill the stadium for every game. As to maintaining success - what success? Spurs have achieved nine tenths of bugger all for most of the past 25 years and still they have 23,000 season ticket holders paying outrageuos prices (given the generally poor quality of the team over the years) and a further 22,000 who desperately want to become season ticket holders.

i was really getting at the point that arsenal built a stadium well too small for themeselves (they were forced to really) and are reaping the rewards

This in an entirely illogical statement. If Arsenal had built a stadium which wasn't "well too small for themeselves", they would be reaping even greater rewards, surely? An object lesson to Spurs not to make the same mistake.

45-50,000 is what they should be aiming for filling it every week and keeping demand high.

Spurs could have sold 45,000 season tickets this season, had they the capacity. That's before tapping into the remaining 50,000 registered members who buy match tickets on a regular basis; the less frequent general sale fans who occasionally come to games; 2-3,000 away fans; increased numbers of corporate customers etc. It would be utterly pointless, then, to build a stadium which would not even satisfy current demand.

We have a similar pricing scheme to white hart lane, which i dont get to of course, and we have nearly double the capacity

Err, so what?

wasnt it 03/04 you were averaging 34,000, 2,000 below capacity, so if suddenly success deserts you or you stop looking like you are gonna break the top 4, you will lose a fair few fans

Average attendances in 03/04 were just under 35,000. Yes, there were mitigating circumstances. Spurs were nearly relegated that season, having been in the bottom three until the last couple of months. They sacked Glenn Hoddle after six games and refused to appoint a new manager - leaving David Pleat in temporary charge so that they could get the right man in for the following season. A great many Spurs fans boycotted games for the remainder of the season, arguing that they were damned if they were going to give the club their money when the club had given up on the season as early as October.

you havent had churn (economic term referring to old customers being replaced by new). This is what the arsenal have had, ie middle class fans replacing the traditional working fan, if success suddenly deserted arsenal alot of the old school and normal fans would be priced back in would return, same at chelsea (maybe)

I don't see what social class has to do with anything. Spurs has one of the wealthiest per capita fan bases in the country - if not THE wealthiest.

i for one have no problem with you building the stadium, nor should i, i just think you are stretching yourself, and leaving yourself vulnerable if success deserts you.

As I said in my previous reply, I'm quite sure that Spurs have a rather better understanding of the demand for tickets than you. Daniel Levy, whatever else he may or may not be, is very astute when it comes to matters of finance and financial risk. He would not be proposing a 60K stadium without having looked at the figures from every conceivable angle and concluding that the risk was acceptable.

Let's compare the benefits of a 60K stadium to one of 50K:

We already know that, with 45,000 potential season ticket holders, Spurs could already almost certainly sell out 50,000 for even the least glamorous games. If Spurs could, in addition, only sell out the full 60,000 for five Premiership games a season (Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and West Ham would always sell out) and, say, only one high profile cup game per season, that would still mean added income of at least £3 million per annum more than the revenue from a 50K stadium. Allow for a further ten games (cup and league) that average at 54K. That would bring in a further £1.5 million and a total of £4.5 million extra per annum as a result of the 10,000 extra seats.

All the above are conservative estimates.

Now assume that the stadium cost £300 million to build and that the extra 10,000 seats accounted for £50 million of that (an exaggerated figure, certainly). Now assume a punishing interest rate and debt payable over 25 years - resulting in added payments of £4 million per annum.

After all is said and done, and even after pessimistic estimates, Spurs would still be £0.5 million per annum better off with the 10,000 extra seats. Of course, this is all just back of an envelope stuff but it gives you an idea of what Spurs' thinking might be. And, let's face it - they are in the best position to judge.

bigbossman

November 6th, 2008, 09:07 AM

Sweetie LMAO, you internet guys you...

please, if you are gonna attempt to disect my comments argue all my points not select ones.

-from your estimates you fail to account for cost of the new stadium, the fact that unless you are playing as many games as possible you won't reap the rewards, that means long cup runs and champions league football

-Arsenal were forced to build a smaller stadium by islington council who said local infrastructure couldn't cope with more than 60,000 people per game. it's turned out to be a strange blessing because the demand is as high if not higher than it was at highbury keeping prices artificially high, something tottenham should bare in mind.

look i hope you do build it, i just think that it wont be the success that you lot are thinking it will be. You might fill it for your first couple of seasons but YOU NEED SUCCESS to maintain it, look at newcastle...

build a stadium within your means, not at the limit of them

Finally the reason why i compare to arsenal is beacue tottenham did first, with statements like "as least as good as arsenal" etc. You have a long way to go before you get in our league AGAIN, in terms of revenue potential and fanbase, and trying to copy us by building a 60,000 seater isn't the way to go.

Sea Toby

November 6th, 2008, 10:39 AM

That is the problem isn't it? As long as the television revenues are not divided equally among the Premier league teams there is no hope of much equality. Instead, the revenues are divided by TV ratings, obviously the winning clubs receive more. In America, we realize that the league is only as strong as the weakest links. Salary caps, and revenue sharing is the norm, not otherwise. We don't downgrade and/or upgrade clubs from a minor league to a major league.

All the clubs are playing in two leagues, the national and an international league at the same time. All for the chase of more money. Who dreamed this up? Its as stupid a system as one can get. Instead of a league of 30 or so equal teams, there are two levels of teams, upper and lower. I guess the upper crust teams like it because they can maintain themselves at a upper level with good management. Money buys too much.

In America we have amateur drafts, salary caps, and equal status teams. With proper management any team can win, and not necessarily the highest payroll teams.

You are worried that without salary caps and such equalizing measures, your teams won't survive the current credit crunch. No one in America is fearful of this happening to their major league teams. Many of your clubs are looking for sugar daddies, people willing to lose their shirts and their wealth supporting a team. In Liverpool, they are upset the new owners borrowed the money to buy the team. Yet, they can't wait for the new owners to build a new stadium, one which will increase the team's revenue strings which will buy better players. That is the key for newer bigger stadiums.

Nevermind buying the club through a loan will eventually pay off. Any funds servicing a loan is funds not buying better players.

2005

November 6th, 2008, 12:07 PM

Was pleased to read this.

Levy acknowledged the concern. "We said to the architects that atmosphere is something we absolutely want to protect because there's a great atmosphere here," he said.

"One of the difficulties of bigger stadiums is that it is harder to retain atmosphere within stadium because you're further away from the pitch. That is always a challenge; I don't care where you go in the world."

flierfy

November 6th, 2008, 12:16 PM

You are worried that without salary caps and such equalizing measures, your teams won't survive the current credit crunch.
What a crude comment. You seem to forget that they are clubs over here and not franchises. And these clubs survived depressions and war times. Why should they now falter? Because of inequality and the lack of salary caps? Nonsense. Salary caps never work and club are different and ever will be. Unlike franchises clubs are distinguishable. They have loyal fan bases that never let their club go bust. Clubs might be relegated but they rarely disappear.

Sea Toby

November 6th, 2008, 01:26 PM

Let's see, Manchester United plays at Old Tafford, seats 78k. What is equal to the revenues of that stadium compared to Wignan Athletic's JJB Stadium, seats 25k? Not even close. Revenues and payrolls can be checked as well, Wignan Athletic 27 million payroll as compared to Chelsea's 133 million payroll. This is the difference between night and day!

JimB

November 6th, 2008, 04:03 PM

from your estimates you fail to account for cost of the new stadium, the fact that unless you are playing as many games as possible you won't reap the rewards, that means long cup runs and champions league football

I don't see your point. Spurs are no more likely to be successful and to embark upon long cup runs if they build a 50K stadium than if they build a 60K stadium. If your point was just that the more successful that Spurs are (in any stadium of any size) the more money they will earn, then you are merely stating the blindingly obvious.

Arsenal were forced to build a smaller stadium by islington council who said local infrastructure couldn't cope with more than 60,000 people per game. it's turned out to be a strange blessing because the demand is as high if not higher than it was at highbury keeping prices artificially high, something tottenham should bare in mind.

Hahahaha! I find it staggering that any proper football fan would actually count the setting of artificially high ticket prices as a "blessing"! Genuinely beggars belief! But fair enough, if that's what you really want at Arsenal. It's most definitely NOT what we want at Spurs, however.

look i hope you do build it, i just think that it wont be the success that you lot are thinking it will be. You might fill it for your first couple of seasons but YOU NEED SUCCESS to maintain it, look at newcastle...

Spurs haven't needed success to get to a point where they already have 23,000 season ticket holders; 22,000 on the season ticket waiting list; a further 50,000 paid up and registered members; 1.5 million UK based fans; a further 3-4 million fans worldwide. Yet again, I repeat: the people at Spurs who have made the decision to build a 60K stadium are in a rather better position than you to judge what capacity that stadium should be.

build a stadium within your means, not at the limit of them

I guess that the collected wisdom of the world on the subject of goal setting has completely passed you by? If you only ever set easily achievable goals, you will never grow. You have to stretch yourself. Why not be honest just for once and admit that the real reason why you are protesting so much about this is that it just narks you that Spurs will soon have a stadium to rival Arsenal's. You just want to keep Spurs down in what you consider to be their proper place.

Finally the reason why i compare to arsenal is beacue tottenham did first, with statements like "as least as good as arsenal" etc.

Eh? Tottenham haven't mentioned Arsenal at any point in relation to their stadium plans. Go on, I challenge you to find any quote from Spurs such as you claim. Put up or shut up.

You have a long way to go before you get in our league AGAIN, in terms of revenue potential and fanbase, and trying to copy us by building a 60,000 seater isn't the way to go.

See? I was right. This is all about you. Honestly, the sheer arrogance of Arsenal fans can be breathtaking at times. You really think that Spurs building a new stadium is all about trying to copy Arsenal? Nothing to do with the real and urgent need for a new stadium, then? Nothing to do with 23,000 season ticket holders and a 22,000 waiting list? Nothing to do with the ambition to improve and grow the club? Nothing to do with the desire to compete at the top level of English and European football? Nothing to do with what Spurs, after careful and deliberate consideration, deem to be a suitable capacity and an acceptable financial risk?

Nope, according to you, Spurs just want to copy Arsenal. It would be no less risibly arrogant for me to say that Arsenal only have so much white in their kit because they wanted to copy Tottenham; that they only won the double in 1971 because they wanted to copy Tottenham; that they only play beautiful pass-and-move football under Wenger because they wanted to copy the style most closely associated with Tottenham.

Seriously, get a grip.

Whether you like it or not, Spurs are going to build a 60K stadium. Whether you like it or not, the people at Spurs are in a far better position than you to judge on a suitable capacity. Whether you like it or not, Spurs are not content to play the role of Premiership and European also-rans in perpetuity. Whether you like it or not, Spurs are an ambitious club and the building of a new 60K stadium is crucial to their ambitions.

Nothing to do with Arsenal....m'kay? So just cease your trolling, creep away and console yourself with the "blessing" that is your artificially inflated ticket price. There's a good lad.

JimB

November 6th, 2008, 04:16 PM

JimB

November 6th, 2008, 04:17 PM

bigbossman

November 6th, 2008, 08:58 PM

Hahahaha! I find it staggering that any proper football fan would actually count the setting of artificially high ticket prices as a "blessing"! Genuinely beggars belief! But fair enough, if that's what you really want at Arsenal. It's most definitely NOT what we want at Spurs, however.

of course its a FINANCIAL blessing to the club, i as a fan am not the club so it is not a blessing to me as i can barely afford to attend more than 2 games a season (usually againt tosh like fulham), but to the club it is as THEY CAN CHARGE HIGHER PRICES AND MAKE MORE MONEY, DOY!

bigbossman

November 6th, 2008, 09:03 PM

Eh? Tottenham haven't mentioned Arsenal at any point in relation to their stadium plans. Go on, I challenge you to find any quote from Spurs such as you claim. Put up or shut up.

there u go http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/7699135.stm

with direct quotes from levy saying "It will be an iconic stadium and will be at least as good as Arsenal's Emirates."

granted he might've been asked how it will compare to our stadium, but the article reports it as him saying it without being asked, he didn't need to bring us in but he did.

michał_

November 6th, 2008, 10:34 PM

granted he might've been asked how it will compare to our stadium, but the article reports it as him saying it without being asked, he didn't need to bring us in but he did.

How the hell did he not need to bring you in? If you build a 60k stadium that's going to be ultra-modern, where are you going to look for a comparison? Maybe the closest ultra-modern 60k stadium around, eh? It's a natural thing and I sure hop it will be better than Arsenal, cause on the outside, "Arsenal Terminal" is bloody boring. A nice look from the inside doesn't compensate for everything...

And Tottenham surely deserves a stadium of that magnitude. They fill their current ground in 99% (even though it's hidously ugly), have a huge waiting list for season tickets and so even if they are not going to fill it at once, it's something to build upon without a doubt.

Bobby3

November 7th, 2008, 02:48 AM

Where will Spurs play while this is going on? I'd assume they'll hire Wembley given the heat between them and Arsenal and West Ham.

Benjuk

November 7th, 2008, 03:43 AM

From soccernet...

Daniel Levy and the Tottenham Hotspur board could be forgiven for being more than just a little annoyed with the International Olympic Committee.

White Hart Lane will be replaced as Spurs' home, but not by the Olympic stadium in Stratford.

On the same day last week that the Spurs chairman announced plans for a new 60,000-seat stadium to replace White Hart Lane, the IOC performed a totally unexpected and astonishing U-turn which could end up costing Spurs a lot more than the £44 million it has already.

With London set to host the 2012 Olympics a centrepiece stadium is being constructed in Stratford, a district of east London a little more than five miles from White Hart Lane.

For years football clubs like Spurs, West Ham United and even lower league sides like Leyton Orient have cast covetous looks in the direction of Stratford, hoping that they could become the new tenants of a new Olympic stadium after the conclusion of the games.

However, there was one rather large stumbling block; an IOC stipulation that the main Olympic venue must have an athletics legacy, meaning the stadium could not be handed to a football club once the Olympic flame was doused. That was the IOC's position, everyone knew it and it was there for all to see.

That was until IOC president Jacques Rogge spectacularly backtracked and said the most important thing was that the stadium was used in some sporting capacity and not left to become an expensive white elephant.

It should have been music to the ears of the Spurs board, had they not been simultaneously revealing that the club had spent five years buying and taking options over property around White Hart Lane, including ''almost 60 separate property transactions, including 40 residential and potentially 160 commercial properties at a commitment of £44 million.''

The IOC's decision must be excruciating for Tottenham. Of course, moving into the Olympic stadium would not exactly be cheap, but it would surely be more cost effective than the massive expense of actually building a stadium once added to the £44 million Spurs have already incurred to this point.

Forget the financial implication of the IOC's volte face, the key frustration for Spurs must be that they made an important decision whilst under the impression that all the variables were set.

That previously immoveable objects have now been shifted has denied the club an option that could have saved them lot of money.

Interesting.

JimB

November 7th, 2008, 03:53 AM

Where will Spurs play while this is going on? I'd assume they'll hire Wembley given the heat between them and Arsenal and West Ham.

No need to move anywhere.

The new stadium will be situated immediately to the north of the existing stadium, on land currently occupied by a light industrial estate. White Hart Lane will operate at full capacity throughout the construction period and will then be redeveloped for housing / shops etc.

JimB

November 7th, 2008, 04:11 AM

From soccernet...

Interesting.

I'd say that the IOC has done Spurs a HUGE favour!

Moving to Stratford was one of the least favoured options as far as Spurs fans were concerned. Spurs belong in Tottenham and the fans are thrilled that the new stadium is bang next door to the old one and that we can park, drink and eat in all the same places (other than those that will be bulldozed by the redevelopment!). We're also thrilled that we'll be getting a purpose built football stadium and not some frankenstein-like converted athletics stadium.

I'm not sure that the Olympic stadium was ever a viable option for Spurs, anyway. Firstly, if any football club was going to take up residence at the Olympic stadium, it was always most likely to be West Ham - by far the closest club to Stratford.

Secondly, knowing Spurs' tough line on financial matters, I'm not sure that they could ever have signed up to the kind of deal that Man City had to sign with their local council (who own the COM stadium).

JimB

November 7th, 2008, 04:51 AM

of course its a FINANCIAL blessing to the club, i as a fan am not the club so it is not a blessing to me as i can barely afford to attend more than 2 games a season (usually againt tosh like fulham), but to the club it is as THEY CAN CHARGE HIGHER PRICES AND MAKE MORE MONEY, DOY!

Err......let me get this straight. Your argument is that it's a "blessing" that Arsenal have a smaller capacity than they need? Because that means that they can set artificially inflated ticket prices? Which means that they can make more money? Right? Have I got you so far?

Well excuse me for being a bit simple but couldn't Arsenal set much lower ticket prices and yet make just as much money as they do now if they had a stadium with the bigger capacity that you claim they need?

Blessing, my arse!

JimB

November 7th, 2008, 05:06 AM

there u go http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/t/tottenham_hotspur/7699135.stm

with direct quotes from levy saying "It will be an iconic stadium and will be at least as good as Arsenal's Emirates."

granted he might've been asked how it will compare to our stadium, but the article reports it as him saying it without being asked, he didn't need to bring us in but he did.

Fair play. I hadn't seen that quote.

But:

1. As you say, it is quite possible (probable, even) that Levy mentioned Arsenal in relation to a journo's question. Articles hardly ever cite the questions to which quotes refer, so no reason why this article should be any different.

2. "As good as" is not the same as "as big as" and refers, to state the obvious, to quality rather than quantity. Your argument revolves around the question of quantity.

2005

November 10th, 2008, 04:02 PM

Can't wait until Friday, been waiting seven years for this!!

GunnerJacket

November 10th, 2008, 06:16 PM

Err......let me get this straight. Your argument is that it's a "blessing" that Arsenal have a smaller capacity than they need? Because that means that they can set artificially inflated ticket prices? Which means that they can make more money? Right? Have I got you so far?

Well excuse me for being a bit simple but couldn't Arsenal set much lower ticket prices and yet make just as much money as they do now if they had a stadium with the bigger capacity that you claim they need?

Blessing, my arse!From a financial perspective I'd suggest he's correct. At the least, it's becoming the standard direction for US sports teams and creeping into other cultures as well. (See most new Mexican and Argentine facilities). 1) Overbuilding runs the risk of ticket-saturation, which is a business no-no in this day and age. Consistent sell-outs equates to near guarantee budgeting, something financial planners prefer in an unsure world. Perhaps more-importantly... 2) your proposal for more seats at lower prices yields smaller profit margins per-seat. Essentially, you're saying build more stadium, at greater cost, for the same level of return. No bank would appreciate that, despite the benefits you and I would reap as commoner fans. From a business perspective you want as much revenue from as little expenses as possible. For now such high prices are something the market (but not I, sadly) can sustain.

Granted, the levels we're talking about means this is a matter of semantics. Levy's proven at least smart enough to know where s**** should set their margin, and I suspect 55-65k is right on target. The optimum pricing and sell-out scenario BBM is referencing is really only critical when looking at significant shares of seats not selling, which I'd peg at 3-6k for a stadium that size. Doubt we'll see that many seats consistently left unsold, if for no other reason but to speculate who the next manager will be. :tongue2:

I'd say that the IOC has done Spurs a HUGE favour!

Moving to Stratford was one of the least favoured options as far as Spurs fans were concerned... We're also thrilled that we'll be getting a purpose built football stadium and not some frankenstein-like converted athletics stadium.Agreed. A redesign could've been done very well, but relocating might've hurt the club.

Not that I'd have minded too much... :) :cheers:

JimB

November 10th, 2008, 08:04 PM

1) Overbuilding runs the risk of ticket-saturation, which is a business no-no in this day and age. Consistent sell-outs equates to near guarantee budgeting, something financial planners prefer in an unsure world.

That's a very good point. Guaranteed income allows for much easier financial planning. However, I don't believe that financial planners necessarily need to be assured that a stadium will be full for every game. They only need to be assured that the figures will remain in the black even if the stadium isn't full. They can just as easily plan on, say, a guarantee of 90% of capacity being used on average as they can on 100% of capacity being used.

2) your proposal for more seats at lower prices yields smaller profit margins per-seat. Essentially, you're saying build more stadium, at greater cost, for the same level of return. No bank would appreciate that, despite the benefits you and I would reap as commoner fans. From a business perspective you want as much revenue from as little expenses as possible. For now such high prices are something the market (but not I, sadly) can sustain.

Again, you make a very good point. However, the benefits to the club of an extra 10,000 seats wouldn't be restricted merely to ticket sales. You must also factor in the inevitable increase in merchandise sales; the increased value of the stadium's catering concessions; the ability to accomodate (and therefore gain or consolidate) potential new fans; the prestige of having a 60K as opposed to 50K stadium; and any other intangible benefits.

The optimum pricing and sell-out scenario BBM is referencing is really only critical when looking at significant shares of seats not selling, which I'd peg at 3-6k for a stadium that size. Doubt we'll see that many seats consistently left unsold

I suspect that you slightly overestimate Spurs' ability to sell out a 60K stadium - which is somewhat surprising! I think it highly unlikely, even with current high ticket demand and the inevitable added interest generated by a move to a new, state of the art stadium, that Spurs could sell many more than 50,000 tickets for the likes of Bolton or Middlesbrough at home on a wet and windy, midweek night in Febuary. Not without reducing ticket prices significantly.

However, I think that Spurs could plan for a minimum Premier League attendance of 50K for 4 or 5 games; full houses of 60K for 5 or 6 games; with the remainder averaging out at around 55K.

Republica

November 10th, 2008, 08:08 PM

Extra seats normally pay for themselves after after a few years if they are only sat in a few times each season.

However a stadium that isnt full may not generate as much profit as a smaller full one. And we all know that money is key in bringing in the best players.

GunnerJacket

November 10th, 2008, 10:14 PM

However, I don't believe that financial planners necessarily need to be assured that a stadium will be full for every game. They only need to be assured that the figures will remain in the black even if the stadium isn't full. They can just as easily plan on, say, a guarantee of 90% of capacity being used on average as they can on 100% of capacity being used.Agreed, but the desire is also to maximize the price for whatever tickets are sold. So long as tickets go unsold, they've little recourse to ask the price they want, thus the desire to have sell-outs.

Again, you make a very good point. However, the benefits to the club of an extra 10,000 seats wouldn't be restricted merely to ticket sales. You must also factor in the inevitable increase in merchandise sales; the increased value of the stadium's catering concessions; the ability to accomodate (and therefore gain or consolidate) potential new fans; the prestige of having a 60K as opposed to 50K stadium; and any other intangible benefits.Again, agreed. And again this is semantics at this point. Surely s**** could build 70k and it would eventually be paid off and it would surely see at least several full/near-capacity crowds in the near term. What the financiers and engineers are surely evaluating is how best to maximize the short-term return while preserving options for long term growth. Pool's Stanley Park showed a bright example of this when originally leaving one end nearly open, a move designed solely to maintain high demand for their product despite having a waiting list that exceeded the new capacity. They only upped the ante after seeing what ManU could do and seeing the change in construction costs. (Well, there was more to it still, but you get the picture.)

Bottom line, if you're planning on growing again in the future it's usually best to initially err on the side of caution and simply add later, rather than overbuild and change the character of your product (Middlesbrough).

I suspect that you slightly overestimate Spurs' ability to sell out a 60K stadium - which is somewhat surprising! I think it highly unlikely, even with current high ticket demand and the inevitable added interest generated by a move to a new, state of the art stadium, that Spurs could sell many more than 50,000 tickets for the likes of Bolton or Middlesbrough at home on a wet and windy, midweek night in Febuary. Not without reducing ticket prices significantly.I thought you hinted that was an okay practice? ;)

I kid. :colgate:

In all seriousness I suspected, and perhaps still feel, they'd be better served with something between 50 and 55k, at least until we all see what's going to happen with the Reign of the Sugar Daddies. And they may yet do that pending realized construction costs, loan terms, etc. As I said, done right a design can always be enlarged later. And if atmosphere is as important as Levy says, maybe it'd be all the better not to change the crowd make-up too much.

Guess we'll know more this week. Cheers. :cheers:

RobH

November 10th, 2008, 11:22 PM

Apparently MAKE are doing the masterplan for the area but the stadium designer is KSS group.

berkshire royal

November 11th, 2008, 12:25 AM

^^
I just checked out the KSS Group web page (might I add a very good page to) and I think it is highly likely that they are the architects because they are the group that designed Spurs new Training Centre (Approval granted 2008).

There credentials include The Falmer Stadium at Brighton (easily the best mid-sized new stadium design in the country), Estadio Municipal in Coimbra, The New Haifa Stadium (which looks like a pretty nice stadium) and also both the Bates Villages, and also the beauty that is the Grandstand at Ascot. This all sounds good hopefully they use this opportunity to make something that is impressive and most importantly original.

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 04:20 AM

build 60k with option to increase to 70k for world cup. say bye bye emirates.

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 05:18 AM

Agreed, but the desire is also to maximize the price for whatever tickets are sold. So long as tickets go unsold, they've little recourse to ask the price they want, thus the desire to have sell-outs.

I see your point. But, to return to bigbossman's initial argument, I still can't accept that Arsenal being forced to build a lower capacity than they wanted or needed can be viewed as a blessing. I suspect that the restriction is costing them rather more than it is benefiting them - while, at the same time, effectively disenfranchising the club's core support, many of whom can no longer afford to attend games.

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 05:24 AM

Apparently MAKE are doing the masterplan for the area but the stadium designer is KSS group.

Where did you hear that? Do you trust the source?

As berkshire royal pointed out, KSS are the architects for Spurs' new training ground and academy. Could it just be that someone was getting their wires crossed?

RobH

November 11th, 2008, 12:01 PM

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 02:18 PM

My concept proposal for the stadium
(http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=746048)

2005

November 11th, 2008, 03:41 PM

That is amazing!

I love the angles of the tiers, the design is simple and modern. Not every stand looks the same. Really like it to be honest and really like your work.

MoreOrLess

November 11th, 2008, 03:51 PM

Wow thats the best peice of stadium design I'v seen someone come up with here by a country mile mo.

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 04:17 PM

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 04:24 PM

I've just seen your interior drawing.

Love the steep tiers!

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 04:48 PM

Wow!

Fantastic effort, Mo. I especially love the swooping roof. Wonderfully elegant. And I love the fact that the shape, from above or below, is rectangular as opposed to oval. The hard edge of the rectangle juxtaposes beautifully with the soft swoop of the roof.

Just one query, though. Does the swoop of the roof cut off from view any part of the stadium from any of the seats? That, for me, is a no-no. I think it's important that fans should be able to see every other fan in the stadium (other than those in the tiers immediately above and below them, of course).

That was quite important. It does.

Since the site is in a residential area, the roof is slightly downward sloping to deflect noise downwards towards the centre of the stadium.

So what I did was to find a balance.

1. The spectator at the very last row, can see the entire field as well as the first two tiers. This is much more than what one would experience at Emirates. Only the top 6 rows will see 46,000 of the 60,000 spectators.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/5-2.jpg

2. In addition, the roof is transparent, so although 14,000 spectators can't be seen directly, the atmosphere and colour of the stadium is never out of sight.

3. The sightlines are also reasonable enough to add a temporary tier to the back of the 3rd tier to allow temporary expansion to 65-68k. Indicated by the red line extending from the top tier towards the roof.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/6-2.jpg

vs.

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/7691/plannf9.jpg

Even at the top seat of the temporary expansion of the third tier, spectators would see the field of play and the entire first tier.

4. Unlike Emirates where sight of the rest of the stadium is restricted both at the tier behind the goal posts and the grand stand, this stadium only has those "restricted" views at the grand stands.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/78/194606594_a321511da8.jpg?v=0

vs.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p210/rfataar/7-2.jpg

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 04:53 PM

I've just seen your interior drawing.

Love the steep tiers!

yip. you wanted allianz and i made them slightly steeper. i hope the that everybody sort of sees my attempt to incorporate the light blue and white of spurs into the stadium.

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 05:29 PM

Read it on another forum. Have no reason not to trust them. We'll have to wait till Friday to see.

Also if you search google for "KSS stadium", they were the group who designed the planned expansion of WHL to a 48,000 seater a few years ago.

I still think it possible that someone is getting their wires crossed. Yes, KSS did draw up the initial plans for the redevelopment of the current West Stand but everything might have changed after Spurs put together their new stadium development team a year or so ago.

As you say, we'll know for sure in less than three days!

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 06:14 PM

yip. you wanted allianz and i made them slightly steeper. i hope the that everybody sort of sees my attempt to incorporate the light blue and white of spurs into the stadium.

I saw that the tiers were slightly steeper than the already steep Allianz tiers. Just what we wanted! Are there FIFA / UEFA / health and safety limits on the steepness of tiers and, if so, how close does your design come to reaching those limits?

Light blue isn't really one of Spurs' principal colours, by the way, though it is sometimes (and currently) the colour of Spurs' second kit. Navy blue and white are the Spurs colours.

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 06:33 PM

So what I did was to find a balance.

1. The spectator at the very last row, can see the entire field as well as the first two tiers. This is much more than what one would experience at Emirates. Only the top 6 rows will see 46,000 of the 60,000 spectators.

A pretty good compromise, IMO. Not ideal.....but I'll let you get away with it this time since I'm so impressed by the aesthetic of your roof!

2. In addition, the roof is transparent, so although 14,000 spectators can't be seen directly, the atmosphere and colour of the stadium is never out of sight.

Good idea. Would definitely help to minimize any sense of being cut off from the rest of the stadium.

4. Unlike Emirates where sight of the rest of the stadium is restricted both at the tier behind the goal posts and the grand stand, this stadium only has those "restricted" views at the grand stands.

For me, that's the Emirates' biggest flaw (closely followed by the shallow lower tier). Too many seats with a restricted view of the remainder of the stadium. I understand why, for planning reasons, Arsenal had to design a low roof profile and that they were trying to help the acoustics but I think that they lost more than they gained and that there were surely better, alternative design solutions.

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 06:55 PM

I saw that the tiers were slightly steeper than the already steep Allianz tiers. Just what we wanted! Are there FIFA / UEFA / health and safety limits on the steepness of tiers and, if so, how close does your design come to reaching those limits?

Light blue isn't really one of Spurs' principal colours, by the way, though it is sometimes (and currently) the colour of Spurs' second kit. Navy blue and white are the Spurs colours.

k cool.

the tiers are only about 1 degree steeper, nothing that gets close to FIFA safety concerns. i think kings park in south africa has its upper tier at 40 degree.

www.sercan.de

November 11th, 2008, 07:02 PM

Are there any FIFA rules for the steepness of tiers/stands?

BTW,
Dortmund stadiums has got max. 37°

MoreOrLess

November 11th, 2008, 07:44 PM

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 08:01 PM

JimB

November 11th, 2008, 09:56 PM

Personally Jim I don't think its so much not being able to see the entire stadium that hurts the expereince but feeling "boxed in" by a really low roof or overhanging stand. Never been to the Emirates but I was near the top of the Jose Alvalade for Portugal/Spain at euro 2004 and at the back of the first tier of the Millenium Stadium for a palace playoff final and thats really what stood out for me both times. Mo's roof seems like its further away from the fans to me and would IMHO create a less oppressive atmosphere.

You're right. Feeling boxed in is a good reason not to have a steeply overhanging roof (like Emirates and, especially, Old Trafford). It's the same at those stadiums where an upper tier overhangs a lower tier (especially at Everton or the old Highbury).

But I still prefer to see as much of the stadium as possible. I remember once being towards the back of the upper tier in the Darwen end at Ewood Park. There was no sense of an oppressive overhanging roof. But there was a sense of detachment from the remainder of the stadium because much of it was obscured from view. Something to do with the gradient of the tier and the fact that the stand is boxed in by its sides. It led to a rather unsatisfactory experience of a live game - as if those of us in the upper tier existed in a bubble.

Mo Rush

November 11th, 2008, 10:38 PM

You're right. Feeling boxed in is a good reason not to have a steeply overhanging roof (like Emirates and, especially, Old Trafford). It's the same at those stadiums where an upper tier overhangs a lower tier (especially at Everton or the old Highbury).

But I still prefer to see as much of the stadium as possible. I remember once being towards the back of the upper tier in the Darwen end at Ewood Park. There was no sense of an oppressive overhanging roof. But there was a sense of detachment from the remainder of the stadium because much of it was obscured from view. Something to do with the gradient of the tier and the fact that the stand is boxed in by its sides. It led to a rather unsatisfactory experience of a live game - as if those of us in the upper tier existed in a bubble.

you're gonna hate green point stadium. :0

I2lx0wexiYk

KONSTANTINOUPOLIS

November 12th, 2008, 01:50 AM

^^ :ohno: they ruined this beautiful stadion with that uncomfortable roof.
Why they are constructing these kind of roofs, can't they see that is making the stadion ugly (at least from TV) and its uncomfortable for the fans?
I thought that these roofs exist in some old stadiums in England but i see they keep constructing these roofs in some stadia till today.

JimB

November 12th, 2008, 02:13 AM

you're gonna hate green point stadium. :0

Such a shame, IMO, that they designed the roof like that. In most other respects, its a great stadium in a fantastic location in one of my favourite cities in the world.

I had no idea, by the way, that the interior of Green Point stadium would resemble the interior of the Emirates quite so much.

Mo Rush

November 12th, 2008, 03:53 AM

Such a shame, IMO, that they designed the roof like that. In most other respects, its a great stadium in a fantastic location in one of my favourite cities in the world.

I had no idea, by the way, that the interior of Green Point stadium would resemble the interior of the Emirates quite so much.

all about the sightlines, hence the stadium bowl. but you know that.

the roof is intentionally downward sloping to direct attention onto the field of play. the majority of the grandstand third tier is temporary and will be replaced with conference space/suites/vip areas post 2010.

Spectators will sit in semi-darkness ,with the lighting, exactly the same as berlins olympiastadion lighting up the field of play.

RobH

November 12th, 2008, 01:07 PM

Oh really, I didn't know that. At the risk of taking this thread off-topic a little, what will its capacity be during and then after the world cup?

Mo Rush

November 12th, 2008, 02:37 PM

Oh really, I didn't know that. At the risk of taking this thread off-topic a little, what will its capacity be during and then after the world cup?

68,000 to 55,000

KiwiBrit

November 12th, 2008, 07:51 PM

...the roof is intentionally downward sloping to direct attention onto the field of play...

You make it sound as though without the roof spectators may be a little confused to what they should be looking at Mo :lol:

Mo Rush

November 12th, 2008, 08:40 PM

You make it sound as though without the roof spectators may be a little confused to what they should be looking at Mo :lol:

lol

GunnerJacket

November 12th, 2008, 10:01 PM

2005

November 13th, 2008, 12:32 AM

lol.

I shit a brick, I so nervous, les than a day and a half to go, really really hope it's something that I just fall in love with and makes the awful waits and delays worth while.

Gherkin

November 13th, 2008, 12:47 AM

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 03:20 AM

Any guesses on the extent of conceptual design to be revealed Friday? Are we talking about a representative image that already accounts for input from the board, or merely a site plan saying "insert stadium here?"

Loads of guesses - just not sure that any of them are accurate!

My best guess is that we are probably talking about a pretty well advanced design. Levy has already been quoted in the past week or so, saying that the retention of atmosphere within the stadium was one of the main things they discussed with the architects - which suggests that we will see rather more than merely a representative image. And I wouldn't have thought that Spurs will have to make many alterations to appease the planners. The area around White Hart Lane isn't exactly architecturally sensitive. Nor is it especially densely populated. And Haringey council will bend over backwards to keep Spurs sweet.

There will be an equally big emphasis on the other aspects of the development, I suspect. Spurs will want to stress the community benefit of the development - the shops; the housing; the new open space etc.

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 03:36 AM

2005, I'm looking at recent 60,000 seater stadiums and there's a lovely design for Zenit. St. Petersberg:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=459203

It ticks all the right boxes (modern, flat roof, 60,000+ seats) but of course isn't a traditional English stadium. Would you prefer a oblong shaped stadium?

The Zenit stadium is fantastic. I would be quite happy if Spurs ended up with something like that.

However, ideally I'd like something rather less bowl shaped.

I saw these obsolete renders on the SOLNA - Swedbank Arena (50,000) thread and really liked them. Something like this, but with 10,000 more seats, would suit me perfectly (though, obviously, without the sliding roof):

http://www.svenskfotboll.se/files/{ED81ED9F-7D77-42B0-BCF2-5F859AE841E5}.jpg

http://www.svenskfotboll.se/files/{FD443A39-499B-4B56-A48E-D2048C17A273}.jpg

http://www.svenskfotboll.se/files/{06851101-D204-4636-8BE4-23052C6E044C}.jpg

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 04:16 AM

I've just seen this on Spurs' official site. Either they've brought forward, by one day, the date on which they will reveal the plans or someone working on the website has got ahead of themselves:

Club displays outline scheme for first time - please send us your comments!Today sees the Club unveil its emerging plans for a new stadium which would keep Tottenham in Tottenham.

We're designing a scheme for our current site and adjoining land - the Northumberland Development Project - a world-class scheme incorporating a new stadium with a capacity of 60,000, a Club Museum, new shops and restaurants, new homes, a new base for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and important new public space.

Over the next week, the Club will be hosting the first of two public exhibitions to set out our vision for the area, as we undertake a thorough consultation programme with the local community as well as continue to consult with you, the fans. Having previously consulted fans via website surveys the Club now invites comments from supporters on the scheme to date - information will be able to be viewed on this site later today or at the Exhibition which runs as follows:

Friday 14 November, 10am - 5pm
Saturday 15 November, 10am - 5pm
Sunday 16 November, 10am - 5pm
Monday 17 November, 12pm - 8pm
Tuesday 18 November, 10am - 5pm

As always we shall look to keep you, our supporters, along with the local community of Haringey, as informed and up-to-date as possible and later today, the Club launches a special section of the website - www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans to keep you up to date on our emerging plans and to let us have your comments.

2005

November 13th, 2008, 11:53 AM

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/docstore/Booklet_Web.pdf

2005

November 13th, 2008, 12:08 PM

Just to say, that isn't the design, that is the concept, that is what will happen. We've got some of the BEST architects in the World who have been appointed to do different things try your best not to get a bone-on.

KSS

Responsible for Stadium design, to deliver fantastic design a world-class experience for all our supporters and visitors. KSS is a 100 strong architectural practice with extensive experience designing major stadiums and sporting facilities, ensuring exceptional design, safe access, excellent sight lines and all aspects of the spectator experience. Recent projects include the City of Manchester Stadium, a new stadium at Coimbra in Portugal for Euro 2004 and a new training academy for Bolton Wanderers FC.

MARTHA SCHWARTZ

Responsible for public realm, to ensure exceptional new areas of public space are a real asset for the area 365 days a year, not just on match-days. Martha Schwartz Partners is the leading company for landscape design with an international reputation for delivering landscape architecture solutions of the very highest quality. The company has worked on schemes across the world, recently completing the Grand Canal Square in Dublin and Manchester Exchange Square.

MAKE

Responsible for the wider plan, to properly integrate the new buildings into the area and provide a real boost to the High Road and beyond. Make is one of the UK’s leading architectural firms, founded by Ken Shuttleworth, with over 100 staff based in studios in London, Edinburgh and Birmingham. Recently completed buildings include the St Paul’s Information Centre in the City of London, the 55 Baker Street office development in central London and three striking new buildings for the University of Nottingham’s Jubilee Campus.

BURO HAPPOLD

Responsible for technical engineering, environmental sustainability and transport aspects, to deliver a scheme which works for the area now and into the future. Buro Happold is an international engineering consultancy renowned for its work on major sports facilities. Recent projects include the O2 Arena at the Greenwich Peninsula, the Lansdowne Road Stadium in Dublin, the Olympique Lyonnais Stadium in France and Harlequins Rugby Stadium in Twickenham. The company is also working on the London 2012 Olympic Stadium.

Levy said in an interview on the Official website that we hope to move in as early as late 2011 with the work starting next year!!!

www.sercan.de

November 13th, 2008, 12:46 PM

Ok, its not the design, but the shape looks really like Emirates
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/5149/unbenanntha8.jpg

Mo Rush

November 13th, 2008, 12:52 PM

Im giving myself a pat on the back for
1. Getting the position of the stadium correct
2. Also have four major stair cases forming the corners of the stadium
3. For indicating the public space using blocks/squares on the ground

2005

November 13th, 2008, 12:55 PM

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/whldemonk6.jpg

PHASE 1

New stadium build commences to the North of the existing stadium. The existing stadium remains in use at full capacity.

PHASE 2

Out of season, the North Stand of the existing stadium is demolished and the new pitch is laid.

PHASE 3

The partially completed new stadium is in use for one season with a capacity in excess of the current ground. The remainder of the existing stadium is demolished.

PHASE 4

Out of season the remainder of the new stadium is completed, ready for the start of the following season.

Simple, yet awesome!

No capacity decreases only increases, I like!

RobH

November 13th, 2008, 02:16 PM

Seems like a good solution. Would have to be a very quick turnaround in the close-season during phases 2 and 4 though!

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 02:47 PM

Well....it does look as though we are to be given yet another bowl shaped design, sadly. I realise that, at the moment, the drawings only show a representative shape of a stadium rather than any detailed, complete design but the two public spaces (between the stadium and the High Road) would necessitate an oval shape rather than a rectangular shape. The best that we can now hope for is that the exterior is rather more interesting, at least, than the likes of Wembley, and that the interior has steep stands, close to the pitch.

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 02:48 PM

Seems like a good solution. Would have to be a very quick turnaround in the close-season during phases 2 and 4 though!

Exactly what I was thinking!

Kamaras Hair Gel

November 13th, 2008, 02:48 PM

Ok, its not the design, but the shape looks really like Emirates
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/5149/unbenanntha8.jpg

agreed...h'mmmm please god not another zzzzbowl

GunnerJacket

November 13th, 2008, 04:55 PM

Crikey, did I sleep through Thursday?!?! :tongue2:

Initial thoughts:

- How funky will that be seeing games in the half-finished stadium?! Both cool and weird, especially seeing the open space behind the one end line.

- Sorry for those lamenting another "bowl," but if you want seats in the primary viewing areas that's the default form. But as I've said with regards to Emirates, expansions/ changes are always possible with enough money and time. Remember the positives, especially those of you on the waiting list for tickets!

- Knock Emirates all we want, form follows function and it's quite attractive once you accept some of the conditions placed upon them (height, noise reduction, FIFA pitch dimensions...). So as to avoid unnecessary gnashing of teeth here, prepare yourselves for comparable terms, then appreciate whatever character is provided.

- Hey, I'm guessing there won't be any obstructed views!! :banana:

- Could be worse - At this rate you'll have a new ground before Liverpool!!! :bash:

Cheers. :cheers:

JimB

November 13th, 2008, 06:26 PM

Mo - Someone posted your stadium design on this Spurs message board and it was very favourably received! In case this link only takes you to the main forum page, click on "Alleged first look at the new stadium" and go to bottom of page 4 and over to page 5.

http://www.glory-glory.co.uk/forums/5/504251/ShowThread.aspx

bumdingo

November 13th, 2008, 09:34 PM

GunnerJacket

November 13th, 2008, 09:52 PM

This is similar to what they did with Benfica's Stsdium of LightGood call!

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/architecture/stadium_design/pictures/lisbon_luz/lisbon_luz1.jpg

Kobo

November 13th, 2008, 10:06 PM

When its in "phase 2" stage, could Spurs play one match in the old stadium, then the next match in the new stadium? Also, if Spurs just play in the old stadium whilst still in phase 2, could they sit the away fans in the new stadium during matches?

BeestonLad

November 14th, 2008, 01:31 AM

^^ lol is that a serious question?!

Gherkin

November 14th, 2008, 01:53 AM

:lol: Putting the away supporters in the far end of the old stadium would be funny. Spurs' supporters would of course get to sit in the new stadium :D

JimB

November 14th, 2008, 02:50 AM

This is similar to what they did with Benfica's Stsdium of Light

Big difference being, of course, that part of the old Stadium of Light was demolished in order to make way for the new stadium - while the old stadium was still in use.

At White Hart Lane, it will be the other way around. The old White Hart Lane will remain intact until Spurs are ready to move into the two thirds / three quarters of the new stadium that has been completed.

The reason for the different approach is quite obvious. The old Stadium of Light had a capacity that was far in excess of what Benfica needed. It therefore made sense to reduce capacity at the old stadium in order to allow complete construction of the new stadium.

At Spurs, on the other hand, the old stadium already has inadequate capacity, so it makes far more sense to maintain that capacity until enough of the old stadium has been built to allow Spurs to move - and then to complete the remainder of the new stadium.

Sea Toby

November 14th, 2008, 10:09 AM

There have been many stadiums in the US that were built next door, and a few like this with an end missing, and then finished after the old stadium was torn down and removed. The new Saint Louis Cardinals baseball stadium comes to mind, the new Busch Stadium/

It all depends on how much room or space is available.

Kobo

November 14th, 2008, 11:51 AM

:lol: Putting the away supporters in the far end of the old stadium would be funny. Spurs' supporters would of course get to sit in the new stadium :D

No you are right the away fans should be in the stadium that is being torn down, preferably in the furthest corner! It would be very funny if Tottenham did this.

GunnerJacket

November 14th, 2008, 06:37 PM

So there's nothing more revealed today? I'd research it myself but that would mean going onto a s*** board, which I'm not allowed to do!:tongue2:

en1044

November 14th, 2008, 06:52 PM

MoreOrLess

November 14th, 2008, 07:02 PM

When its in "phase 2" stage, could Spurs play one match in the old stadium, then the next match in the new stadium?

Phase two wil only exist for a very short period out of season, I'd guess the old stadium will be demolished very early into phase 3 if the entire stand is to be built in a year.

KiwiBrit

November 14th, 2008, 07:37 PM

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/whldemonk6.jpg

Is that it at this stage?, four scribbles of how the construction process will happen? I thought we were going to see initial design plans of the interior/exterior of the new stadium. Makes you wonder why we had to wait weeks to see these when they probably took the designer a single lunchtime to complete.

Sorry to sound negative, but Spurs have been planning this for ages and I'm surprised we were only showed these. Maybe someone on here knows when the concept plans will be available?

2005

November 14th, 2008, 09:25 PM

I can fully understand the frustration mate, you don't have to apologise, think how I feel? I've waited seven years for this.

Anywho, this is a good read, it's from someone who went to the exhibition today.

Very interesting and well worth popping along too. There were three guys who were on hand to ask questions who are working closely with the project. Said guys also worked on the Death Star but it looks like that will be a positive thing as admitted mistakes were made that they are keen to avoid on this project.

First of all, pictures of the new stadia design & interior should be ready to view by the public in mid january. It is almost certain however that the stadia will be bowl shaped. The guy said this is due to fitting as many spectators in as you can and preventing 'a shadow effect' on the pitch which many German Stadia suffered from in last World Cup.

Their brief is to mantain the atmosphere of WHL in the new stadium. Apparently lessons have been learned from the Death Star!

The guy said they have ALL been reading/taking board comments on Spurs Forums!

I asked questions along with a few other fans. I wanted to know if the club planned to open a bar as many pubs are have been closed in WHL in recent years. Not plans as yet but they hope knock-on effect of investment will attract business.

The most interesting point myself & other put across was the need to accomadate existing season tickets holders in seats equal to their view & position at WHL and not to be pushed aside or charged silly money if they wish to do so (like what happened at Chelsea & Scum). They took this on board.

Lastly, the guy said it is really important for as many fans as possible to give positive feedback back to the club or any ideas, queries they may have. Opposition voices are often more vocal so the club want as many of us as possible backing the plans. One positive is that Haringey Council are very much behind the move.

Defo worth attending folks

So, the sketches are close to the truth and it'd going to be interesting to see the design, jeeez I'm so nervous, I don't want to wait another two months.

Trafalgar1

November 16th, 2008, 10:07 AM

I can fully understand the frustration mate, you don't have to apologise, think how I feel? I've waited seven years for this.
Any truth to the rumour that the design winner was a Blue Peter contestant? ;)

Levy does look a little embarrassed standing in front of it there..

Sea Toby

November 16th, 2008, 03:46 PM

They haven't gone that far yet, the exact plans. This is showing how the new stadium will be built. I wouldn't place any importance of this for what the new stadium will eventually be.

2005

November 16th, 2008, 11:51 PM

They haven't gone that far yet, the exact plans. This is showing how the new stadium will be built. I wouldn't place any importance of this for what the new stadium will eventually be.

But it does give you a general idea.

I don't know if you read this.

First of all, pictures of the new stadia design & interior should be ready to view by the public in mid january. It is almost certain however that the stadia will be bowl shaped. The guy said this is due to fitting as many spectators in as you can and preventing 'a shadow effect' on the pitch which many German Stadia suffered from in last World Cup.

2005

November 17th, 2008, 12:01 AM

Just read this. It's a better and more informative read than the other one I posted. It's from a person who is a poster on a different Spurs forum to the other one I posted.

Just got back from the exhibition.

Not really much on show that hasn't already been released on the website, but that's to be expected.

Chatted to Robert Green from Buro Happold, the people responsible for technical engineering, environmental sustainability etc for about twenty minutes.

Nice enough bloke, but to be honest he didn't really have that many answers to the points raised - most of it was answered with a "you're not the first to mention that, please put it on the feedback form".

The main bits that he did say were as follows:

The computerised renders and full plans should be available after Christmas, probably in January.

There'll be another exhibition for these, but no date has been finalised for this yet.

He indicated we'd most likely move into the new stadium some time around 2013-2014.

There's no specific planning restrictions in Haringey on the height of the stadium (so we could have steep stands), unlike the Emirates, but there are considerations with regards to the shadow the new stadium would have on neighbouring properties.

It will be a bowl.

KSS have a remit to protect the atmosphere we have at the lane and to have the stands as close to the pitch as possible, though there are regualations govening the latter point.

Sainsburys are most likely to occupy the supermarket that will be built, though nothing is final. Not known whether we would sell the property to them or lease it.

He expects that the cockeral on top of the stands would be retained.

There is no suggestion that the stadium will be an emirates mark II - they are very aware of this concern, and the concerns about bowl structures and the atmosphere issues.

60k is an indicative capacity and whilst it will be around that figure, it is not set in stone - could be 61k, for example.

Local, non-spurs, opinion has been generally positive.

Took the opportunity to raise, both verbally and in writing, the following

1. Keeping existing season ticket holders together, especially the shelf and park lane
2. They need to address pricing, especially in midweek when we sometimes don't sell out our existing capacity
3. They need to look to Germany as to how to build stadia, like the Alianz arena and learn what doesn't work at Wembley & the Emirates (noise, corporates etc)
4. Transport issues need to be addressed, my mate suggested funding the £60m extension of the vic line to northumberland park and getting money back through revenue sharing agreements with TfL)

Apparently Levy was around on the first day of the exhibition, and after that senior management have been taking it in turns to do half days, though we didn't see any faces.

Also had a walk around the ground, went down the players tunnel, onto pitchside, sat in Harry's seat, which was cool, some nice photos.

JimB

November 17th, 2008, 12:09 AM

I can fully understand the frustration mate, you don't have to apologise, think how I feel? I've waited seven years for this.

Seven years?

Pah!

Bloody nippers!

I've been waiting for this since I saw the front page of Spurs News (the paper that preceded Spurs Monthly and Hotspur) in 1992 or 93. It showed a beaming Igal Yawetz (then club director and architect) standing beside a model of the new 36,000 seat White Hart Lane, revealing for the first time the new Park Lane and Paxton Road stands that were to be built during the Sugar years.

In the article, he discussed the fact that he would eventually like to see the the East stand redeveloped to create a capacity of 40,000. He even said something ridiculous like, "I believe that, in the future, all clubs will have to have a seated capacity of 40,000 if they are to compete in European competition".

I remember being bitterly disappointed by the lack of vision and ambition (that was to become so characteristic of the club under that regime). I hated the fact that the goalpost roof structure at either end effectively prohibited further capacity increases.

I am therefore beside myself with excitement at the titillating prospect of my first sight of Spurs related stadium porn in over 15 years!

Mo Rush

November 17th, 2008, 12:31 AM

so its a bowl...back to the drawing boards for me.

Durbsboi

November 17th, 2008, 09:48 AM

looks like emirates carbon, hope its not tho...

JimB

November 17th, 2008, 10:11 AM

looks like emirates carbon, hope its not tho...

It'll be a bowl, yes......but not an Emirates copy. Spurs will make quite certain of that.

If I were to hazard a guess, it'll look rather more like the Allianz Arena from the inside, with steeper stands, closer to the pitch.

I'd be quite happy with that.

Durbsboi

November 17th, 2008, 10:15 AM

cool, yeh its pertty hard to tell from sketches, the renders when they come out will surely reveal noticeble differences between the 2 stadiums.

JimB

November 17th, 2008, 10:26 AM

cool, yeh its pertty hard to tell from sketches, the renders when they come out will surely reveal noticeble differences between the 2 stadiums.

I think we can quite safely dismiss the sketches as irrelevant in terms of the actual stadium design. Their only purpose is to show how the stadium will fit, spatially, into the overall development (including supermarket, housing, museum, open spaces etc.) and how the construction schedule will accomodate the move from the old stadium to the new.

The most that we can glean from the sketches about the stadium design is that, in all liklihood, it will be bowl shaped.

Kobo

November 17th, 2008, 12:20 PM

So are we likely to see some renders of the new stadium in January 2009?

LDN_EUROPE

November 17th, 2008, 01:13 PM

London really could host a Football World Cup all on it's own. I look forward to seeing the designs.

JimB

November 17th, 2008, 05:26 PM

So are we likely to see some renders of the new stadium in January 2009?

Varying accounts suggest January or Febuary.

Certainly early next year, anyway.

JimB

November 18th, 2008, 01:34 AM

Another report from a poster on a Spurs forum who went to the exhibition:

I went along to the presentation this evening. A few things that I don't think have been mentioned:

1/ I asked whether the club was decided on a bowl shape. The woman (her badge said 'Project Manager' but I can't remember her name) said that one of the things they were discussing was the possibility of having four stands in a rectangle shape on the inside within a 'bowl footprint' (a bit like the Allianz?) to preserve 'stand identity'. I wasn't clear on the reason why they are set on an oval in the first place -- but I got the impression that it has to do with space, as others before have said.

2/ Another guy who was there was asking why the club can't request that an underground station is built near northumberland park along the victoria line. She more or less said outright that at this stage of the consultation process they have to present a feasibility study which shows how the plans can operate WITHIN EXISTING travel arrangements. This is why they've been harping on about the fact that existing matchday services can carry 'upto 90,000 people' an hour. If we based our planning application on their being a victoria line extension then it would be rejected out of hand. She did say, however, that TFL reps had been at the club today and the possibility of a new tube station was discussed. So expect this to be something that doesn't get sorted for a while -- that's if it is on the cards at all.

3/ Someone asked how long it would take and she said 'if one thing follows another, we'd expect it to take about 6 years to completion' -- that's everything apart from the apartments at the bottom.

Benjuk

November 18th, 2008, 10:41 AM

London really could host a Football World Cup all on it's own. I look forward to seeing the designs.

Would probably get closer than any other city - but still not that close.

Wembley
Twickenham
Emirates
New Chelsea
New WHL
Olympic Stadium (if they don't reduce it)
erm...
West Ham (if they expand or move)
erm...
Charlton (if they get promoted and expand)
erm...

JimB

November 21st, 2008, 06:08 PM

Some more encouraging noises re the likely stadium design....the following is a reply from Spurs' stadium project people to an email from a fan:

You asked a specific question about the atmosphere in the new Stadium. I wanted to re-assure you that the number one brief to our stadium architects is exactly this – to retain the fantastic atmosphere at Spurs. This means ensuring seats are close to the pitch, with quite high banking and un-restricted views for every spectator.

We have looked at and learned lessons from stadia around the world and will provide more details specifically about the stadium design at our next exhibition early next year.

GunnerJacket

November 21st, 2008, 09:37 PM

Some more encouraging noises re the likely stadium design....the following is a reply from Spurs' stadium project people to an email from a fanJust to provide a little perspective, they said the same thing regarding the Emirates and I view it a stock promotional language. Now if they mention very specific design elements I'd be more than hopeful for you. For now such generalities are merely that, generalities. It looks like we'll have to wait a couple more months for the preliminary design from the architects.

JimB

November 22nd, 2008, 04:00 PM

Just to provide a little perspective, they said the same thing regarding the Emirates and I view it a stock promotional language. Now if they mention very specific design elements I'd be more than hopeful for you. For now such generalities are merely that, generalities. It looks like we'll have to wait a couple more months for the preliminary design from the architects.

Granted that all we have to go on are words at the moment. And the reality may be very disappointingly different.

But I doubt that that email was merely "stock, promotional language". As you know, Spurs are never far from a comparison (usually unflattering) with Arsenal. And, for their part, Spurs know that, despite the outstanding financial success of Arsenal's move to the Emirates and despite the many plaudits that the stadium has earned, it does have its faults.

Spurs will be especially keen, then, not to repeat those faults. And I disagree with you that generalities, and not specific design elements, are all that have been mentioned so far. That email specifically says: "this means ensuring seats are close to the pitch, with quite high banking".

While not conclusive (and nothing will be until the final design is revealed), it is most certainly encouraging.

JimB

November 23rd, 2008, 09:01 PM

An article on the proposed new stadium that appeared in a building magazine. Not much that's new but one or two snippets of information. And it's good to know that the man in charge of the project (who was also responsible for the Emirates) is a Spurs fan:

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3128170

JimB

December 2nd, 2008, 03:27 AM

A brief update from Spurs' official site. Nothing really new other than a confirmation of the rough timing for the second public exhibition (which will include detailed plans and renders):

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans/news/northumberlanddevelopmentprojectfirstexhibition011208.html

The Club recently launched its public consultation on the Northumberland Development Project with the first of two public exhibitions held at the current Stadium. An invitation to the exhibition, staged over five days, was extended to the local community and you, the fans, to come and see the Club's emerging plans for a new stadium and its vision for the area - and to have a say on these initial proposals.

Nearly fifteen hundred people visited the public exhibition, demonstrating the high level of interest there has been since the Club announced its intention to remain in the Borough and redevelop the existing site.

The Club has received over 600 emails since the launch through the dedicated Northumberland Development Project section on the website, and has also received a considerable number of comments through the post and over the phone.

The overwhelming response has been a resounding welcome of the scheme, as well as providing us with some extremely helpful insights and suggestions. We appreciate the time that local individuals and fans have taken to let us have their views, all of which are being considered as we continue to consult and further determine our plans.

Work has now begun on the second exhibition which will take place in January, 2009.

As always we shall look to keep you, our supporters, along with the local community of Haringey, as informed and up-to-date as possible, so keep an eye on the new Future Plans section of the website - www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans - CLICK HERE - which will carry all of the latest news and will provide you with regular updates on our emerging plans.

BobDaBuilder

December 2nd, 2008, 07:50 AM

They should make it substantially larger than Emirates so they have 'hand' over the hated Gunners.

JimB

December 2nd, 2008, 10:40 AM

They should make it substantially larger than Emirates so they have 'hand' over the hated Gunners.

I suspect that the capacity will surpass Arsenal's :) - but by no more than 1000 or so.

However, I also suspect that Arsenal will counter by somehow finding a way to increase capacity at the Emirates!

Nevertheless, I have high hopes that, regardless of the two stadiums' respective capacities, Tottenham's new stadium will be the better football stadium - with steeper tiers and and stands closer to the pitch than the Emirates.

2005

December 7th, 2008, 02:43 PM

I suspect that the capacity will surpass Arsenal's :) - but by no more than 1000 or so.

However, I also suspect that Arsenal will counter by somehow finding a way to increase capacity at the Emirates!

Nevertheless, I have high hopes that, regardless of the two stadiums' respective capacities, Tottenham's new stadium will be the better football stadium - with steeper tiers and and stands closer to the pitch than the Emirates.

I've visited the Emirates once, whilst being massively impressed by its grandeur I was left amazed that they managed to get the stadium built in the first place, how on Earth does that area cope with 60,000? I spoke to a gooner who said he had to wait an hour in a queue at Finsbury station!

The wait for the first renders is becoming rather unbearable, I CAN'T WAIT!

Bobby3

December 8th, 2008, 05:59 AM

Expanding the Emirates would be pretty costly.

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 03:43 PM

Rumours doing the rounds that full renders of the stadium will be released at today's AGM....

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 03:51 PM

Rumours doing the rounds that full renders of the stadium will be released at today's AGM....

emirates II

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 04:36 PM

emirates II

??

Why do you say that? I doubt it.

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 04:41 PM

He's joking. Well, half joking I think.

I reckon it'll be better than the Emirates in terms of closeness to pitch, steepness of stands and may even be slightly bigger in capacity but it'll be a bowl and there will be a fairly big emphasis on corporate boxes, as with all new stadiums. Just my guess.

Close stands to the pitch
Steepish stands
White seats with blue THFC lettering
Jumbotrons at either end

^That'd be great.

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 05:11 PM

Club reveals first images of proposed new stadium

The Club today revealed the first images of the Club's proposed new stadium design, part of the Northumberland Development Project.

Designs for the new home of the Club have been developed by KSS, leaders in stadia design.

Commenting on the release of the images, Club Chairman Daniel Levy said:

"The brief I gave the architects was to design an iconic stadium that would be one of the best in Europe. My over-riding priority is to re-create the terrific atmosphere we have at the current stadium, within a world class stadium that offers state-of -the-art facilities.

"This means designing a stadium which has supporters as close as possible to the field of play and not simply looking to chase headline capacity. Our fans will find themselves closer to the pitch than at any other comparable stadium in the UK. This design puts fan experience first.

"In addition to the stadium, we are designing great facilities within the overall masterplan that will add positively to the local environment and locality, components that can play a role in the regeneration of the wider area."

http://admin.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/spurs_body_image/stadium/zzz420c.jpg

David Keirle, Chairman of KSS, outlined the strategy behind the stadium design:

"The key driver has been to deliver the best possible fan experience on all levels.

"The visuals of the new stadium show that it's really seen as a building which responds to the brand, which we see as representing style and flowing lines of football.

"We have spent a great deal of time looking at different roof formations. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. All seating is enclosed, there are no open corners, so everything is focused back onto the pitch and the acoustics will maximise the impact of the vocal support from fans. The stadium will have a roof that allows us to have four large screens up in the top corners, which means every spectator will be able to see a whole host of information.

"The plans we have produced will result in close proximity for the fans to the pitch, we are going to be metres closer than other stadiums of comparable size. We are fine tuning the plans and these will ultimately determine the final capacity."

http://admin.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/spurs_body_image/stadium/zzz420b.jpg

The new stadium will also benefit from a Club museum, shops and homes, new facilities for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and important public space.

The plans will enable the team to remain at the current site throughout construction.

Daniel Levy added:
"Development projects on this scale take a long time from the initial starting point to final completion. Any new stadia we have seen recently would have been designed at least eight to ten years ago. We are designing for our future and this stadium design has been described as the first of the next generation of stadia.

"This development is more than just somewhere where the team can play football. The Northumberland Development Project will deliver substantial investment for the future of the Borough and will benefit the community.

"It's about leaving a legacy for this great Club and, once delivered, I hope all our fans around the world will be very proud."

http://admin.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/spurs_body_image/stadium/zzz420a.jpg

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/artic...dium151208.html (http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/clubrevealsfirstimagesofproposednewstadium151208.html)

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 05:31 PM

Another image. Have to laugh at the "Naming Rights" name!

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/240x359/stadium/zzz240a.jpg

It is a bit like the Emirates from the outside but I think we all knew that it would be.

Far more important is the interior and I'm encouraged by what is being said about proximity to the pitch.

I'm also delighted that the roof isn't one of those that swoops down and obscures much of the remainder of the stadium from view - as at the Emirates.

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 05:35 PM

emirates II

as I was saying...

http://admin.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/spurs_body_image/stadium/zzz420c.jpg

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 05:37 PM

its a disappointing design. atmosphere of course would be top top notch but...sigh

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 05:40 PM

How can you possiby tell from that pic Mo?

Quintana

December 15th, 2008, 05:42 PM

It lacks originality (can't argue with Mo here) but it looks nice from the outside. Can't wait for pics of the interior.

We should we change the name of this thread to "LONDON - Naming Rights Stadium (60,000)" though :D

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 05:50 PM

its a disappointing design. atmosphere of course would be top top notch but...sigh

Agreed. Its exterior aesthetics are unremarkable and I'm not a fan of wavy top tiers. I'd prefer a top tier that was the same height all the way around.

However, function is far more important than form to me (and to the vast majority of fans). So I'm delighted that we won't be getting an Emirates mark II on the interior.

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 05:58 PM

Agreed. Its exterior aesthetics are unremarkable and I'm not a fan of wavy top tiers. I'd prefer a top tier that was the same height all the way around.

However, function is far more important than form to me (and to the vast majority of fans). So I'm delighted that we won't be getting an Emirates mark II on the interior.

well its mostly emirates. except for the roof. thats an anfield proposal roof

http://www.stadiumguide.com/anfieldnew1.jpg.

Furthermore I find the interface or interaction with the surrounding public space weak.

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 06:00 PM

The current stands wrap around into a nice round bowl, but what they do have is distinct personalities. Park Lane is very different from Paxton Road and The Shelf, so what we've looked at is creating a very tight wrap-around bowl that gives the opportunity for different personalities because each of the upper tiers will be distinct and separate. So you will actually get the tight feel of a bowl, but also the feeling that each stand has it's own personality.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/insightintostadiumdesign151208.html

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 06:03 PM

Insight into stadium designDavid Keirle, chairman of KSS, gives us an insight into the thinking behind the designs of the new stadium.

1. When you were initially approached to design the new stadium, what was the brief you were given by the Club and do you feel these aims have been achieved?

We were given a very clear brief by Daniel, and that was to provide fantastic atmosphere. There are a number of things people criticise the existing stadium for, but one thing it does have is fantastic atmosphere, that intensity and proximity of the fans to the pitch. Daniel made it clear he wanted a world class stadium, but he wanted to do things slightly differently. We wanted to give fans the best possible experience and recreate the atmosphere at the current stadium, and that's been the single most important factor as we've gone along.

As to whether we've achieved it, I think that's for others to judge, but I am very excited about what we've done. We've spent a long time getting this right, and Daniel's pushed us extremely hard on the design. Designing a big stadium is always complicated, and there are many factors to judge and balance, but I'm really excited about what we've done and I think it's something that will really separate us from other clubs.

2. Talk us through the design of the stadium.

We wanted to design a stadium that really reflects the Spurs brand. Fans will know that we've had a reputation over the years for flowing football, so we've tried to reflect these flowing lines. The whole architecture has responded to that concept and it is a flowing design that really picks up on that. We've focused on major entrances in the corners so fans can see them and it's obvious where they are with big video screens outside. It's a single entity that can be seen from a great distance, most of north London, particularly at night when the roof will appear to float above the stadium because we've got a wonderful screen of glass that links the two. We're intending to clad the building in aluminium shingles because it's a very complex shape, and it will allow us to shape the elevations of the building. That in itself will lift it above any other stadium and make it look so great. We've had a positive response from everyone we've shown it to, from all the various local governments and authorities, and I think it's a very exciting design.

3. The Club has been looking at options for several years now in respect of a new stadium - can you elaborate on this?

We were initially commissioned about five years ago to look at options for the existing stadium and looked at what it might be possible to do with the east and west stands and to upgrade north and south. But those proved very limiting and came nowhere near to the quality of fan experience or overall capacity the board at that time were considering was appropriate for Spurs. So that was reasonably quickly put to one side and we were then asked to look at other potential sites in north east London. We came up with about 18 or 20 sites that had the potential to manage a stadium of this size. But for one reason or another, they were all either undeliverable, not viable or nowhere near transport. All of those fell away and we started looking at a new stadium two years ago, and that was looking at options for the existing site and whether we could play away for a couple of seasons. It was about that time that we started expanding the site and looking at what those options are. A few months ago re-developing on the existing site became viable and deliverable.

4. What considerations did you take into account when designing the new stadium with respect to fans and local residents?

Designing a stadium like this is a whole myriad of geometric requirements and fan experience requirements, but there were some very key aspects to it. The first one was that Daniel really wanted a world class stadium that truly reflected the Spurs brand and that was materially different from other stadiums. Clearly many stadiums are following a common theme these days, but we were really looking at doing things differently. That meant we had to look at delivering the best possible fan experience and that was across a range of different levels, but most importantly that would replicate the intense atmosphere and viewing experience of our current stadium. I'm a Spurs fan who goes to a lot of stadium, and while the existing stadium has many faults as a stadium behind the scenes, it has the best atmosphere of any stadium in the Premier League, it's just stunning. Everything that we have done since we started this has been aimed at recreating that intense atmosphere. We're not chasing a headline capacity.

The other issue is that when it proved impossible to relocate sufficiently far away from the existing site to build a whole new stadium, and looking to vacate a ground for a number of years proved in no way viable or attractive as an option, the next thing was to look at designing a stadium that could be phased so that we could build approximately two thirds of it while we are still playing at home and then knock down the existing stadium, completing the new one the following season - so that we're always playing at our home. It was also a great opportunity to maintain the terrace of listed buildings to the north.

We wanted the stadium to be part of a much wider development with the new supermarket, housing and new public space. It is important that this sits comfortably within the locality, contributes to the area and provides enough reasons and facilities for the fans to arrive earlier, depart later and enjoy a total matchday experience.

Those are the real key design drivers that then lead on to maximising the fan experience, atmosphere and the facilities we want within the concourse. Anyone that knows the current stadium knows the concourse is very tight and it's difficult to get a drink and food at half-time, there aren't as many toilets as there should be because it's the design of a different era. We're looking at providing the best facilities and I think the Club wanted the stadium that would sit as a single object in its public realm and we'd look at it and think it's amazing, it's different to anything that's gone before.

5. How does this design differ from other new stadiums we have seen in recent years?

We focused on providing a much better atmosphere, a much better environment and intense relationship between fans and players than exists elsewhere. For instance, the distance set between the first row of seats and the pitch is something that's been criticised in many larger stadiums because, in complying with all the requirements in terms of safety, sight lines and everything else, it's much easier when you start further away from the pitch. We've turned that on it's head and said we're going to be metres closer than other comparable stadiums. So we've started from the point of view that we want people to have a similar kind of experience going to the new stadium as they do at the current stadium in terms of where they sit. The one thing you'll notice is that, in some places, we're four and a half metres closer to the pitch than at most other stadia.

It's not just about being closer to the action, it's also about being related to what's back-of-house. We've been looking at the offer on various concourses and executive levels to give a great relationship between where you sit and watch and what you can do there, how you can get in and out of the stadium.

We've looked at really trying to emphasise the public realm outside the stadium so that fans have got somewhere to meet. We're embedding video screens into the external envelope of the building so what we can build up the atmosphere outside, and providing the right facilities within the stadium enables people to arrive earlier. We want fans there an hour and a half before kick off so that fans can really enjoy the experience. The other big thing we've really worked on is keeping the noise within the stadium.

We have spent a great deal of time looking at different roof formations. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. All the seating is enclosed, there are no open corners, so everything is focused back onto the pitch and the acoustics will maximise the impact of the vocal support from fans. The stadium will have a roof that allows us to have four large screens up in the top corners, which means every spectator will be able to see a whole host of information.

So the overall spectator experience will be a million miles away from the current back-of-house, and very close to what happens on the pitch once you're in your seat. That's a balance that hasn't really been struck at many other stadiums that have been built in the last few years, I see that from a fans perspective. When you see the visuals of the new stadium, again it's really seen as a building which responds to the Spurs brand, which we see as representing style and flowing lines of football. We've tried to design something that reflects that and we've really achieved that.

6. How will the great atmosphere synonymous with Spurs home games be maintained within this new stadium?

It's about getting close to the pitch but it's also about keeping the atmosphere and noise within the stadium itself. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. It's not just about having a great atmosphere for the fans, it's about having an intense atmosphere for the opposition to come to and be intimidated by. There are no open corners so everything is focused back onto the pitch.

One of the things we've spoke about is how we get the fans to sing together when they go to the new stadium. One of the problems with new stadiums is fans moving from their historic home where they all sing together, so we'll be working with fan groups and asking where they'd like to be so it compares and really try to recreate this intense group of supporters. It's not just a design issue, it's a question of how the crowd works.
We also want to make sure the atmosphere isn't just about sitting in your seat; it's that you learn about the lineage that's imbedded within the building, and we're doing the same thing with the training ground and picking up on the heritage and the lineage of what's gone before and what's to come with the new players coming through the system. You will be able to learn about the heritage on the concourse and that builds it up. We went to look at some American stadia in the summer and we looked at how baseball teams picked up on their heritage and built up the atmosphere through great pictures and images on video screens throughout the stadium. That builds up to the moment you get in your seat and you realise how close you are considering this is a big stadium.

7. Fans have commented that having distinct stands is important. The new stadium is a bowl, how will that cover this point?

I am aware of the discussions regarding separate stands, but it's important to note that the current stadium is a bowl and does not have separate stands, almost all stadia are bowl designs for a very good reason. If we did separate the stands, you would have gaps in between them where the atmosphere can leak out, which we don't want. The current stands wrap around into a nice round bowl, but what they do have is distinct personalities. Park Lane is very different from Paxton Road and The Shelf, so what we've looked at is creating a very tight wrap-around bowl that gives the opportunity for different personalities because each of the upper tiers will be distinct and separate. So you will actually get the tight feel of a bowl, but also the feeling that each stand has it's own personality.

The bowl design means good sight lines from every single seat and also means, with the design of our tiers, that every fan will have a view of all the fans in the stadium.

8. What is the expected capacity?

The Chairman has been quite clear in his brief to us - it's not about chasing headline capacity, it about atmosphere and fan experience. The key issue is that we're going to have the best atmosphere of any Premier League stadiums both now and afterwards, so everything relates back to that.

We're going to be somewhere between 55,000 and 60,000. It's getting the balance right between proximity to the pitch, seat width, leg room, sight lines, all of those combined. We could give everyone a much bigger capacity but everyone will be further away from the pitch. We think that being closer, and we've talked to fan groups and a lot of people at the club, gives you that intensity.

9. What excites you most about this project?

I think we have the chance to see something a bit different. We've been involved in a number of stadium projects over the years, but as a Spurs fan and a football fan, the opportunity to be able to design a total piece of architecture sitting in this urban block, which seeks to reflect everything about Spurs, is exciting. It's not just about architecture, it's about fan experience. It's a wonderful challenge to be given as a stadium architect.

10. Would you say this is a stadium of the future?

I think it really is a stadium of the future. You have to remember these projects take a long time from start to finish, so any of the new stadiums we have seen recently would have been designed at least eight to ten years ago. Now we've had the opportunity to look at the best in the world and we've taken all the tips and brought them together, so it's a real opportunity for us to design something which is. Having shown a number of people the design, somebody recently said to me that they thought this was the first of a brand new generation of stadia.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/uploads/assets/240x359/stadium/zzz240b.jpg

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 06:05 PM

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 06:07 PM

Video interviews, top right:

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/index.html

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 06:11 PM

We've focused on major entrances in the corners so fans can see them and it's obvious where they are with big video screens outside.

when the roof will appear to float above the stadium because we've got a wonderful screen of glass that links the two.

do you think they saw my design ?

I had corner staircases, a floating-ish roof ..

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 06:16 PM

do you think they saw my design ?

I had corner staircases, a floating-ish roof ..

I think one of the stands will be named the Mo Rush stand in your honour. ;)

Mo Rush

December 15th, 2008, 06:29 PM

I think one of the stands will be named the Mo Rush stand in your honour. ;)

I dont support Spurs so no thanks.

JimB

December 15th, 2008, 06:31 PM

One other thing to take into account re the exterior look of the stadium is that the THFC website always makes a dog's dinner of images. I suspect that the exterior will look rather more striking in reality than it does in these images. Much will depend on the cladding and I'm interested as to how these aluminium shingles will look.

2005

December 15th, 2008, 06:31 PM

Exterior images and comments from the club and KSS design have been released.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/clubrevealsfirstimagesofproposednewstadium151208.html

Club reveals first images of proposed new stadium

The Club today revealed the first images of the Club's proposed new stadium design, part of the Northumberland Development Project.

Designs for the new home of the Club have been developed by KSS, leaders in stadia design.

Commenting on the release of the images, Club Chairman Daniel Levy said:

"The brief I gave the architects was to design an iconic stadium that would be one of the best in Europe. My over-riding priority is to re-create the terrific atmosphere we have at the current stadium, within a world class stadium that offers state-of -the-art facilities.

"This means designing a stadium which has supporters as close as possible to the field of play and not simply looking to chase headline capacity. Our fans will find themselves closer to the pitch than at any other comparable stadium in the UK. This design puts fan experience first.

"In addition to the stadium, we are designing great facilities within the overall masterplan that will add positively to the local environment and locality, components that can play a role in the regeneration of the wider area."

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/zzz420c.jpg

David Keirle, Chairman of KSS, outlined the strategy behind the stadium design:

"The key driver has been to deliver the best possible fan experience on all levels.

"The visuals of the new stadium show that it's really seen as a building which responds to the brand, which we see as representing style and flowing lines of football.

"We have spent a great deal of time looking at different roof formations. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. All seating is enclosed, there are no open corners, so everything is focused back onto the pitch and the acoustics will maximise the impact of the vocal support from fans. The stadium will have a roof that allows us to have four large screens up in the top corners, which means every spectator will be able to see a whole host of information.

"The plans we have produced will result in close proximity for the fans to the pitch, we are going to be metres closer than other stadiums of comparable size. We are fine tuning the plans and these will ultimately determine the final capacity."

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/zzz420b.jpg

The new stadium will also benefit from a Club museum, shops and homes, new facilities for the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation and important public space.

The plans will enable the team to remain at the current site throughout construction.

Daniel Levy added:
"Development projects on this scale take a long time from the initial starting point to final completion. Any new stadia we have seen recently would have been designed at least eight to ten years ago. We are designing for our future and this stadium design has been described as the first of the next generation of stadia.

"This development is more than just somewhere where the team can play football. The Northumberland Development Project will deliver substantial investment for the future of the Borough and will benefit the community.

"It's about leaving a legacy for this great Club and, once delivered, I hope all our fans around the world will be very proud."

An interview with Daniel Levy and David Keirle will be available shortly on Spurs TV Online and all free-to-view areas...

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/zzz420a.jpg

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 06:32 PM

See post #223 2005!

RobH

December 15th, 2008, 06:39 PM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/12/15/article-1094978-02D0176F000005DC-340_468x322_popup.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/12/15/article-1094978-02D01730000005DC-852_468x239_popup.jpg

2005

December 15th, 2008, 06:53 PM

This is a rather long read but defo worth reading.

Insight into stadium design

designing a stadium that could be phased so that we could build approximately two thirds of it while we are still playing at home and then knock down the existing stadium, completing the new one the following season - so that we're always playing at our home. It was also a great opportunity to maintain the terrace of listed buildings to the north.

We wanted the stadium to be part of a much wider development with the new supermarket, housing and new public space. It is important that this sits comfortably within the locality, contributes to the area and provides enough reasons and facilities for the fans to arrive earlier, depart later and enjoy a total matchday experience.

Those are the real key design drivers that then lead on to maximising the fan experience, atmosphere and the facilities we want within the concourse. Anyone that knows the current stadium knows the concourse is very tight and it's difficult to get a drink and food at half-time, there aren't as many toilets as there should be because it's the design of a different era. We're looking at providing the best facilities and I think the Club wanted the stadium that would sit as a single object in its public realm and we'd look at it and think it's amazing, it's different to anything that's gone before.

5. How does this design differ from other new stadiums we have seen in recent years?

We focused on providing a much better atmosphere, a much better environment and intense relationship between fans and players than exists elsewhere. For instance, the distance set between the first row of seats and the pitch is something that's been criticised in many larger stadiums because, in complying with all the requirements in terms of safety, sight lines and everything else, it's much easier when you start further away from the pitch. We've turned that on it's head and said we're going to be metres closer than other comparable stadiums. So we've started from the point of view that we want people to have a similar kind of experience going to the new stadium as they do at the current stadium in terms of where they sit. The one thing you'll notice is that, in some places, we're four and a half metres closer to the pitch than at most other stadia.

It's not just about being closer to the action, it's also about being related to what's back-of-house. We've been looking at the offer on various concourses and executive levels to give a great relationship between where you sit and watch and what you can do there, how you can get in and out of the stadium.

We've looked at really trying to emphasise the public realm outside the stadium so that fans have got somewhere to meet. We're embedding video screens into the external envelope of the building so what we can build up the atmosphere outside, and providing the right facilities within the stadium enables people to arrive earlier. We want fans there an hour and a half before kick off so that fans can really enjoy the experience. The other big thing we've really worked on is keeping the noise within the stadium.

We have spent a great deal of time looking at different roof formations. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. All the seating is enclosed, there are no open corners, so everything is focused back onto the pitch and the acoustics will maximise the impact of the vocal support from fans. The stadium will have a roof that allows us to have four large screens up in the top corners, which means every spectator will be able to see a whole host of information.

So the overall spectator experience will be a million miles away from the current back-of-house, and very close to what happens on the pitch once you're in your seat. That's a balance that hasn't really been struck at many other stadiums that have been built in the last few years, I see that from a fans perspective. When you see the visuals of the new stadium, again it's really seen as a building which responds to the Spurs brand, which we see as representing style and flowing lines of football. We've tried to design something that reflects that and we've really achieved that.

6. How will the great atmosphere synonymous with Spurs home games be maintained within this new stadium?

It's about getting close to the pitch but it's also about keeping the atmosphere and noise within the stadium itself. The roof has been designed to focus the noise back onto the crowd and onto the pitch. It's not just about having a great atmosphere for the fans, it's about having an intense atmosphere for the opposition to come to and be intimidated by. There are no open corners so everything is focused back onto the pitch.

One of the things we've spoke about is how we get the fans to sing together when they go to the new stadium. One of the problems with new stadiums is fans moving from their historic home where they all sing together, so we'll be working with fan groups and asking where they'd like to be so it compares and really try to recreate this intense group of supporters. It's not just a design issue, it's a question of how the crowd works.
We also want to make sure the atmosphere isn't just about sitting in your seat; it's that you learn about the lineage that's imbedded within the building, and we're doing the same thing with the training ground and picking up on the heritage and the lineage of what's gone before and what's to come with the new players coming through the system. You will be able to learn about the heritage on the concourse and that builds it up. We went to look at some American stadia in the summer and we looked at how baseball teams picked up on their heritage and built up the atmosphere through great pictures and images on video screens throughout the stadium. That builds up to the moment you get in your seat and you realise how close you are considering this is a big stadium.

7. Fans have commented that having distinct stands is important. The new stadium is a bowl, how will that cover this point?

I am aware of the discussions regarding separate stands, but it's important to note that the current stadium is a bowl and does not have separate stands, almost all stadia are bowl designs for a very good reason. If we did separate the stands, you would have gaps in between them where the atmosphere can leak out, which we don't want. The current stands wrap around into a nice round bowl, but what they do have is distinct personalities. Park Lane is very different from Paxton Road and The Shelf, so what we've looked at is creating a very tight wrap-around bowl that gives the opportunity for different personalities because each of the upper tiers will be distinct and separate. So you will actually get the tight feel of a bowl, but also the feeling that each stand has it's own personality.

The bowl design means good sight lines from every single seat and also means, with the design of our tiers, that every fan will have a view of all the fans in the stadium.

8. What is the expected capacity?

The Chairman has been quite clear in his brief to us - it's not about chasing headline capacity, it about atmosphere and fan experience. The key issue is that we're going to have the best atmosphere of any Premier League stadiums both now and afterwards, so everything relates back to that.

We're going to be somewhere between 55,000 and 60,000. It's getting the balance right between proximity to the pitch, seat width, leg room, sight lines, all of those combined. We could give everyone a much bigger capacity but everyone will be further away from the pitch. We think that being closer, and we've talked to fan groups and a lot of people at the club, gives you that intensity.

9. What excites you most about this project?

I think we have the chance to see something a bit different. We've been involved in a number of stadium projects over the years, but as a Spurs fan and a football fan, the opportunity to be able to design a total piece of architecture sitting in this urban block, which seeks to reflect everything about Spurs, is exciting. It's not just about architecture, it's about fan experience. It's a wonderful challenge to be given as a stadium architect.

10. Would you say this is a stadium of the future?

I think it really is a stadium of the future. You have to remember these projects take a long time from start to finish, so any of the new stadiums we have seen recently would have been designed at least eight to ten years ago. Now we've had the opportunity to look at the best in the world and we've taken all the tips and brought them together, so it's a real opportunity for us to design something which is. Having shown a number of people the design, somebody recently said to me that they thought this was the first of a brand new generation of stadia.
____________________________________________________

I LOVE THAT LAST LINE!