Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Turnbull2000 said:

 

Too late for the riverside. The entire plot beside the Arena is just about to get approval for residential.

 

Yes, I posted this link about that earlier in the week . . . 

 

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/quayside-west-ex-calders-yard-site-heliport-site-and-newcastle-arena-future-site-newcastle-various-approved.983200/post-168894560

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robm said:

It's had approval for a while hasn't it? Would imagine it's not an easy site to develop with being industrial. Maybe do a swap.

 

As manorpark has alluded to, city planners were unhappy with original scheme. This have now been revised, and proposals for the site are now moving forward.

 

 

Edited by Turnbull2000

Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, manorpark said:

Am I right in thinking manorpark that the Freemen gave the Castle Leazes site the go ahead in the 90’s, and if Hall had gone the distance it would have then gone to govt planning for approval.

 

Was it not the timescales for planning approval that made them resort to SJP redevelopment ?

 

 

Edited by Whitley mag

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Am I right in thinking manorpark that the Freemen gave the Castle Leazes site the go ahead in the 90’s, and if Hall had gone the distance it would have then gone to govt planning for approval.

 

Was it not the timescales for planning approval that made them resort to SJP redevelopment ?

 

 

 

 

Yes, the City Council had approved it, and (amazingly) the Freemen had agreed to support it. They liked the plans for an enlarged Leazes Park encroaching into part of the land that had been occupied by the football stadium. That (St James' Park) was going to be reduced in size by about 50% of land area, and would have been converted into an indoor arena.

 

Local protest groups had gained support though and would have taken it to a public enquiry. It would all have taken far too long SJH said, so they opted to expand St James' Park instead.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, manorpark said:

 

Yes, the City Council had approved it, and (amazingly) the Freemen had agreed to support it. They liked the plans for an enlarged Leazes Park encroaching into part of the land that had been occupied by the football stadium. That (St James' Park) was going to be reduced in size by about 50% of land area, and would have been converted into an indoor arena.

 

Local protest groups had gained support though and would have taken it to a public enquiry. It would all have taken far too long SJH said, so they opted to expand St James' Park instead.

 

 

I think an enlarged and improved Leazes Park incorporating the current SJP site could bring real benefits to the city. It would open up Leazes terrace and bring an improved green space right into the city.

 

It would certainly encounter opposition again,  but I think the overall benefits to the city with usable park space would gain a lot of support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Whitley mag said:

I think an enlarged and improved Leazes Park incorporating the current SJP site could bring real benefits to the city. It would open up Leazes terrace and bring an improved green space right into the city.

 

It would certainly encounter opposition again,  but I think the overall benefits to the city with usable park space would gain a lot of support.

 

This is how Leazes Park opposite Leazes Terrace (with the East Stand gone) was going to look like with the half-sized St James' Park Arena plans . . . Newcastle_United_FC_-_1997_New_Ground_Pl 

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...