Jackie Broon Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 3 hours ago, Wallsendmag said: Had an interesting discussion last night with a friend of mine who works inside SJP and he'd been in discussion with the Facilities manager (I didn't even know we had one!) and the topic of a SJP expansion arose. The club have been in regular dialogue with the local authorities for a while and a list of options have been brought to the table. The obvious one is an 8,000 expansion of the Gallowgate end, which basically extends the Milburn Stand all the way around to the East Stand. 2 main obstacles, Strawberry Place and the Metro Station. However the club are pretty confident that this can be done. Tentative plans for a 4,000 expansion of the East Stand are also in place. This would bring the height of the East Stand up to the height of the current Gallowgate End. If you look at the San Siro it's built in a similar design. 3 higher sides and a slightly smaller one and this would being capacity up to between 64k-65k. We all know the main issue here. Encroachment onto Leazes Terrace and the problem of the building getting sufficient natural light. This could be overcome by cantilevering the upper tier of the East Stand and with a far steeper rake than the current design. A glass designed roof that lets light through as with the current Milburn/Leazes Stands would need to be added. Needless to say the cost would be massive, but PIF have a vision to grow their initial £300m investment 10 fold into a club worth upwards of £3bn and, aside from the obvious of being succesful this is another great way of doing it and they are adamant that a move to a new stadium isn't an option. As for timescales, all he said is that there is a confidence that the UK will win the bid for Euro 2028 and that it would be done in time for that. I'm not disputing what you're saying and happy to be proven wrong but I just can't see any potential to expand the East Stand. There's only about 17m between the current East Stand and Leazes Terrace, 7m between it 1-4 St James' Terrace, which is also listed (albeit Grade 2) and it is 10m from 7-11 St James Street, also Grade 2 listed. The stand is already cantilevered and probably takes up the smallest footprint it possibly could. I just don't see how any expansion of it is going to be feasible without unacceptable impacts on those listed buildings (including demolition of 4 St James' Terrace at very least). There would be more complex assessment of impacts on light but as a rule of thumb 15m would typically be the minimum distance allowed between a three storey building and a ground floor window. A glazed roof wouldn't make much/any difference because it would be the back of the stand that would probably have the impact, not the roof. So 17m is not a lot to play with, it might already be at or over the limit of what is acceptable in terms of height and proximity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Fly Saudia all over SJP is it? Give me details (£££) please NUFC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallsendmag Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 5 hours ago, Jackie Broon said: I'm not disputing what you're saying and happy to be proven wrong but I just can't see any potential to expand the East Stand. There's only about 17m between the current East Stand and Leazes Terrace, 7m between it 1-4 St James' Terrace, which is also listed (albeit Grade 2) and it is 10m from 7-11 St James Street, also Grade 2 listed. The stand is already cantilevered and probably takes up the smallest footprint it possibly could. I just don't see how any expansion of it is going to be feasible without unacceptable impacts on those listed buildings (including demolition of 4 St James' Terrace at very least). There would be more complex assessment of impacts on light but as a rule of thumb 15m would typically be the minimum distance allowed between a three storey building and a ground floor window. A glazed roof wouldn't make much/any difference because it would be the back of the stand that would probably have the impact, not the roof. So 17m is not a lot to play with, it might already be at or over the limit of what is acceptable in terms of height and proximity. It isn't already cantilevered. It's currently on a very shallow rake that can easily be altered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Wallsendmag said: It isn't already cantilevered. It's currently on a very shallow rake that can easily be altered. Yes it is, and how steep a stand is makes absolutely no difference to its capacity. Edited November 12, 2022 by Jackie Broon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 8 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: Yes it is, and how steep a stand is makes absolutely no difference to its capacity. It does if you intend to expand capacity by growing the stand vertically. The East Stand being redeveloped is the no-brainer one for me. You’re limited on space due to the road as well as Leazes Terrace itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: It does if you intend to expand capacity by growing the stand vertically. The East Stand being redeveloped is the no-brainer one for me. You’re limited on space due to the road as well as Leazes Terrace itself. It doesn't, excuse the shit drawing but this illustrates why it doesn't make a difference. Capacity is determined by a stand's depth, not its angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Love that the drawings are coming out. Can't wait to see where this conversation goes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said: It doesn't, excuse the shit drawing but this illustrates why it doesn't make a difference. Capacity is determined by a stand's depth, not its angle. Yes, but the number of tiers you can build when you are limited by how high you can build determines capacity. The East Stand isn’t optimised as originally it had corporate boxes - they were replaced by a continuous gradient in the mid-90s. The stand could be double tiered if redeveloped without the need to go any further back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comegetasample Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 I'm glad this thread is back ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Hope we go full Mestella with a mental vertical stand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Just trying to imagine the current East Stand age demographic dealing with the Stand being that steep. Leaning over to pass someone a Werther's Original and suddenly...darkness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobsonsWonderland Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Dresdens new stand... Obviously looks great until it starts bouncing up and down like Old Trafford top tier did in the fa cup semifinal! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 3 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said: Dresdens new stand... Obviously looks great until it starts bouncing up and down like Old Trafford top tier did in the fa cup semifinal! Christ, I was in that top tier at OT in 98. You could literally feel it move - it was like experiencing an earthquake. It was a bit unnerving 7 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said: Just trying to imagine the current East Stand age demographic dealing with the Stand being that steep. Leaning over to pass someone a Werther's Original and suddenly...darkness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: Yes, but the number of tiers you can build when you are limited by how high you can build determines capacity. The East Stand isn’t optimised as originally it had corporate boxes - they were replaced by a continuous gradient in the mid-90s. The stand could be double tiered if redeveloped without the need to go any further back The East Stand is actually very optimised in terms of its use of space, the back rows of seating are cantilevered over the back of the stand. To build a tier above would almost certainly require a supporting structure and facilities behind the existing stand. I have doubts whether there is much or any scope to build a taller stand without likely unacceptable residential amenity / hetitage impacts anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 12 minutes ago, Adam said: Hope we go full Mestella with a mental vertical stand. Those bottom two tiers is what I was thinking with a new East Stand. A shallow bottom tier with a steeper tier above. It would increase capacity and let’s face it the 50-year-old East Stand is a bit shabby really. What should also be considered is dropping the pitch a couple of metres (including getting rid of the ‘slope’) and adding another couple of rows Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Make it a big grass bank IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Just now, Jackie Broon said: The East Stand is actually very optimised in terms of its use of space, the back rows of seating are cantilevered over the back of the stand. To build a tier above would almost certainly require a supporting structure and facilities behind the existing stand. I have doubts whether there is much or any scope to build a taller stand without likely unacceptable residential amenity / hetitage impacts anyway. Yep, structurally it would be tricky and would likely require pillars to the underside of the top tier if it were built. The ‘right to light’ of course is the other issue - but it should always be remembered that we don’t actually know the extent of the impact (the Waldram Method is actually very conservative on light allowances), and of course depending on the circumstances there is the opportunity to pay compensation if needed. It might well be possible to lift the east stand higher without breaching Waldram’s 1/500th rule Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said: Yep, structurally it would be tricky and would likely require pillars to the underside of the top tier if it were built. The ‘right to light’ of course is the other issue - but it should always be remembered that we don’t actually know the extent of the impact (the Waldram Method is actually very conservative on light allowances), and of course depending on the circumstances there is the opportunity to pay compensation if needed. It might well be possible to lift the east stand higher without breaching Waldram’s 1/500th rule Right to light is a separate civil law issue, I'm taking about planning impacts. That would typically be determined by a BRE daylight and sunlight assessment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 5 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said: Right to light is a separate civil law issue, I'm taking about planning impacts. That would typically be determined by a BRE daylight and sunlight assessment. BRE still talks about ‘no sky lines’ and vertical sky components etc. It would require an actual assessment to be done. It’s been a few years so my old RICS guidance notes are falling away from my memory I’m afraid Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Show me the moneyyyyy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro111 Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Can't wait for the day any new plans are announced. Going to be pure stadium sex. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: BRE still talks about ‘no sky lines’ and vertical sky components etc. It would require an actual assessment to be done. It’s been a few years so my old RICS guidance notes are falling away from my memory I’m afraid It does and and it would, I do have a BRE assessment pack at work, but they're a ballache to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cort Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Is it not just that the exterior work on the new block is finished? Only looks like a matter of time until it’s open now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now