Jump to content

St James' Park


Delima

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

If Option C is viable (big "if" in my opinion) that would be amazing.

 

As someone who isn't from the area and has only been around SJP once - what would be the main constraints making it a "big if" as an option?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, cubaricho said:

 

As someone who isn't from the area and has only been around SJP once - what would be the main constraints making it a "big if" as an option?

Eating into Leazes Park is the primary issue I'd say

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cubaricho said:

 

As someone who isn't from the area and has only been around SJP once - what would be the main constraints making it a "big if" as an option?

Japanese knotweed in the park

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

Eating into Leazes Park is the primary issue I'd say

I think the park being a Grade II listed park is the primary issue.  Option C should be a non-starter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cubaricho said:

 

As someone who isn't from the area and has only been around SJP once - what would be the main constraints making it a "big if" as an option?

One of the main ones would be getting permission from the Freeman of the city, although there are rumbling that they are receptive of an offer of a land swap.

 

In the location the video depicted, it would mean taking out a bandstand area. Technically it could be relocated though, and was massively damaged a few years back and had to be virtually rebuilt then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Option A 95% the same as Celtic Park or my imagination? Have they got a similar issue to us with the small stand, or are they just happy with how it is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hazeyb said:

I think the park being a Grade II listed park is the primary issue.  Option C should be a non-starter. 

Why should it be a non-starter? The park is a tip and if the club can work with the council/friends of Leazes Park so that new parkland is created if SJP is demolished and the club takeover management of the park it is win/win for everybody. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

Why should it be a non-starter? The park is a tip and if the club can work with the council/friends of Leazes Park so that new parkland is created if SJP is demolished and the club takeover management of the park it is win/win for everybody. 

English heritage are a pack of bastards though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think a few would get a shock at the strength of opposition to building on the park, the friends of Leazes Park and every swampy within a 100 miles would be claiming they use the park for yoga every week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jack27 said:

brick by brick and beamish come to mind

Mate honestly, that are proper cunts. All happy to come along and tell someone who’s just bought nothing more than a pile of stones that they need to rebuild it as the castle it was in 1452, and won’t take no for an answer, yet unwilling to work with people in alternative plans.

One episode of grand designs should be enough to make anyone realise what a pack of Roy Croppers they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Think a few would get a shock at the strength of opposition to building on the park, the friends of Leazes Park and every swampy within a 100 miles would be claiming they use the park for yoga every week.

 

100% this. It would be the best option I think and if it was allowed to happen I think a redeveloped park on what's currently SJP would be hugely better than what we've got now (a falling apart rat infested grade 2 park) but there would be just as much opposition now as there was last time it/Castle Leazes was mooted imo

 

 

Edited by OpenC

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, OpenC said:

 

100% this. It would be the best option I think and if it was allowed to happen I think a redeveloped park on what's currently SJP would be hugely better than what we've got now (a falling apart rat infested grade 2 park) but there would be just as much opposition now as there was last time it/Castle Leazes was mooted imo

 

 

 


Not sure that would stand up if there was a thorough plan for looking after the park and adding more parkland elsewhere. I want to protect the park as well but it seems like making a much cooler overall situation would be a good idea for the city. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just don't see any of the options going ahead, when you take into account the number of season ticket holders affected and lost revenue. I would imagine we will hear some more concrete evidence in the summer after the club have completed their tick box (imo) exercise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Option D - on Castle Leazes - for me. Option C is a move away from the hallowed turf so why not move a further 200 yards north as it'd be less contentious (gar less encroachment into the park), less complicated and imo a better setting for the city.? Option A is more realistic than Option A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TomYam said:

Option D - on Castle Leazes - for me. Option C is a move away from the hallowed turf so why not move a further 200 yards north as it'd be less contentious (gar less encroachment into the park), less complicated and imo a better setting for the city.? Option A is more realistic than Option A.

 

the simpsons scotland GIF

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...