Jump to content

St James' Park


Delima

Recommended Posts

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

Just now, manorpark said:

 

This 1997 proposal is explained in my post about two posts above from your post.

Right, I remember that, just didn't seem like it in the illustration.

 

I regularly drive down Richardson road and look over Castle Leazes (The Dog Bog as the locals call it and an area few wander over in darkness) and wonder what would have happened had it gone ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours 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 forget what the leader of the campaign against it was called but I know that they went to Sunderland to obtain signatures for their petition against it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Sima said:


I forget what the leader of the campaign against it was called but I know that they went to Sunderland to obtain signatures for their petition against it.

Aye, they went to Sunderland on match days and I think a lot we’re students, the majority of which are probably now living elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kanji said:

It almost feels like the best plan is a land trade, of sorts. Which would be sensational. 
 

(based on the above)

On that shot above of Leazes Terrace you can just see the Tyne bridge aspect to the roof of new stadium in distance, it was going to be the stadiums Wembley arch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, manorpark said:

 

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 

 

I've always loved this rendering. Would imagine the residents would appreciate not having to look out onto a giant slab of concrete, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it's been mentioned before but NUFC don't own the land that SJP is on, it's currently leased to them by the freemen of Newcastle.

 

I presume their would be no objection on their part but bare that in mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything other than rebuilding on the land that SJP currently sits on should be an option. Its what makes up special so to speak, you can see the stadium from most places within the city. It has to be within ~200m of the current location. 

 

Buy the abortion being built next to the strawberry, pull the fucking lot down. Reroute the metro, build down its might cost hundreds of billions or whatever (the metro reroute) but so what. It has to be on the same land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111
35 minutes ago, STM said:

Sure it's been mentioned before but NUFC don't own the land that SJP is on, it's currently leased to them by the freemen of Newcastle.

 

I presume their would be no objection on their part but bare that in mind.

 

@LFEE will know this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, POOT 2.0 said:

A quick mock-up (I know, it's been done many times before...and better :lol: ) shows you can keep the amount of land the park has and just move it around. Easier said than done, but not that difficult. It's just landscaping. 

Er24Zbj.jpg

 

This is how the proposals were illustrated in 1997 . . .

 

Newcastle_United_FC_-_1997_New_Ground_Pl

 

 

Edited by manorpark

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope that if there is a new stadium built in the future that it remains in the City, Exhibition Park or the site of the Arena seem to be mentioned as possibilities...  The central location has always made our stadium special, not only to us but, also to visiting fans...  It would be a disaster to move out of town to some former industrial repurposed site, I dunno....  like the mackems soulless hell hole!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with a title challenging Newcastle, I don't think we'd need more than 60,000. 

 

If you're getting into the realm of 65,000+, I think you'll see a lot of empty seats for less important games. Surely we want people fighting to get in, but enough chance for people to get in. 

 

I'd be overjoyed if they keep SJP where it is, but extend over the Gallowgate. I'm sure they can make it happen, and it will cost a hell of a lot less than relocating. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, STM said:

Sure it's been mentioned before but NUFC don't own the land that SJP is on, it's currently leased to them by the freemen of Newcastle.

 

I presume their would be no objection on their part but bare that in mind.

 

As I understand it, the freehold of the stadium site belongs to Newcastle City Council. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TheGuv said:

Even with a title challenging Newcastle, I don't think we'd need more than 60,000. 

 

If you're getting into the realm of 65,000+, I think you'll see a lot of empty seats for less important games. Surely we want people fighting to get in, but enough chance for people to get in. 

 

I'd be overjoyed if they keep SJP where it is, but extend over the Gallowgate. I'm sure they can make it happen, and it will cost a hell of a lot less than relocating. 

 

Yeah, as much as I'd like to see a 65,000+ capacity stadium full for big games, when we were playing in the champions league we struggled to fill the stadium. Even the first time round when we had 36,000 capacity it was easy to get tickets for those matches, even Barcelona.

 

 

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...