St James' Park

[manorpark]

1 hour ago, Wandy said:

 

Disagree I'm afraid, I think it is true.

 

The 2nd point is very relevant too. It could quite easily come to a point where the owners come to the fanbase and say "we want to build a super-stadium, with amazing views, hospitality, facilities & accoustics but simply cannot do it on this site.. However just up the road..............."

 

At that point, the support will have a choice to make. And if they turn it down, it's not inconceivable that this could be the point at which the Saudis plot their exit.

 

All I can say about all of those points you make is "who writes your stuff"?

 

Honestly, your thought processes must be very odd, to produce such a collection of comments, particularly the last one.

 

You almost sound like you come from Sunderland !!

[Guest]

I think my head is going to explode......in short

 

1. The owners say we aren't moving and all vow to extend at James park

2. They buy back the land behind strawberry place 

3. They begin a feasibility study to expand fhe east stand

 

What bit do they mention fucking off and building a NEW stadium?? 

 

The 62000 (as mentioned by someone) is the whole realistic capacity including a EXACT replica of the leazes above the gallowgate. 

Level 7 leazes = 3500 roughly

Level leazes/milburn corner = about the same

That's 7000 seats, not even 60000

 

The rest of the capacity it is hoped will come from a East stand redesign, whether it's on the current footprint or not (hence the feasibly study) 

 

Yes the gallowgate doesn't have to be an exact replica of the leazes, it can go back further beyond the metro which was the casino project led by Freddy shepherd, this didn't include the gallowgate west corner and it was to remain the same height as the milburn and leazes just going back further like a gigantic kop. 

Anyway, my guess is that any plans the have for the gallowgate will DIRECTLY impact the east stand and that's why it's necessary to see what can be done.

The problem with the gallowgate going back further rather than a simple level 7 tier is likely to be that in its current form the gallowgate would need to be demolished and rebuilt, and I reckon that's not favourable at all. 

Also if you think the club are going to start knocking chunks out the milburn and leazes with all its infrastructure I'd think again. The milburn and leazes in its current form are going nowhere. 

 

Moving forward on the current site, i think we are very lucky to have a guy who owns all 4 houses and is willing to do business. A redesign would be more aesthetically pleasing and it's facilities would be on a different level even for a smaller part of the ground because we'd be starting from scratch on that footprint. 

 

[madras]

Not sure the Gallowgate would need to be rebuilt like. Liverpool have just built around and above a stand that was in use and we did that with Level 7 didn't we ?

[Wandy]

11 minutes ago, manorpark said:

 

All I can say about all of those points you make is "who writes your stuff"?

 

Honestly, your thought processes must be very odd, to produce such a collection of comments, particularly the last one.

 

You almost sound like you come from Sunderland !!

 

 

I'm a realist bud. Unlike you, who wears black and white goggles when it comes to literally anything to do with NUFC or the city in general.

[Tiburon]

I quite like the brutalistic external concrete design of the East Stand which sits nicely with the beautiful architecture of Leazes Terrace and the cobbled brick lane towards the Strawberry, it’s very unique. We can’t lose Leazes Terrace just for the sake of a few extra thousand seats, but we can’t loose St.James’ Park for that either. A compromise will have to be found in order to modernise and increase the capacity without losing what’s special about the stadium and Leazes Terrace. I’d be against relocation and a new stadium.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, madras said:

Not sure the Gallowgate would need to be rebuilt like. Liverpool have just built around and above a stand that was in use and we did that with Level 7 didn't we ?

I mean if they wanted to build the stand going back rather than up (foundations going behind the metro instead of directly through the metro) 

I'm nee architect but I'd assume that would be a redesign but until we see some plans then fuck knows really 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Tiburon said:

I quite like the brutalistic external concrete design of the East Stand which sits nicely with the beautiful architecture of Leazes Terrace and the cobbled brick lane towards the Strawberry, it’s very unique. We can’t lose Leazes Terrace just for the sake of a few extra thousand seats, but we can’t loose St.James’ Park for that either. A compromise will have to be found in order to modernise and increase the capacity without losing what’s special about the stadium and Leazes Terrace. I’d be against relocation and a new stadium.

I'd say you nailed it. The compromise is st James terrace and leazes remains with some considerations to light 

[madras]

1 minute ago, Pancrate1892 said:

I mean if they wanted to build the stand going back rather than up (foundations going behind the metro instead of directly through the metro) 

I'm nee architect but I'd assume that would be a redesign but until we see some plans then fuck knows really 

Back in the day, one of the Freddies said it was structurally possible but financially prohibitive. 20yrs of engineering advances have happened since then.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, madras said:

Back in the day, one of the Freddies said it was structurally possible but financially prohibitive. 20yrs of engineering advances have happened since then.

Amen bro 

[manorpark]

19 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

 

I'm a realist bud. Unlike you, who wears black and white goggles when it comes to literally anything to do with NUFC or the city in general.

 

I think that if you knew about my history on here you would know that what you have said is the opposite of the truth.

 

My most frequently used word always has been . . . R E A L I S T I C !!!!!

[midds]

Firmly in the 'prefer not to move but realistically we might need to' camp. A nice compromise that's been mentioned is to buy Leazes Terrace and convert it into a club museum with SJP. Rebuild the East stand to incorporate the whole thing into the ground and get as many corporate boxes in there as possible. 

 

Next step would be to do the Gallowgate up to L7 and by the time that all happens then safe standing ratio of 1:1 will change to 1:1.8 as it is in Germany iirc. More capacity, more tickets, more boxes, more matchday income. 

 

No idea if that's possible but I think that would be my Plan A 

[Beth]

What is this "62k is too small" logic. It would take us to second in the country behind Man U and level with Spurs and West Ham. Is there any clamour/plans for Liverpool, Man City and Arsenal's grounds to be extended again anytime soon?

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Beth

[Chapo]

2 hours ago, Orphanage said:

Knock Leazes terrace down and rebuild it further up in Leazes park . Job done . Problem solved . 

Think this is by far the most realistic option. 

[Guest]

Early days, but I've been told by a very good top level secret source that they're planning on building a new stadium in Saudi Arabia. 

[NE27]

5 minutes ago, OCK said:

Early days, but I've been told by a very good top level secret source that they're planning on building a new stadium in Saudi Arabia. 

 

And then are they going to move the Kaaba brick by brick to leazes park, or Beamish?

 

The people demand things be dismantled and moved damnit!

[Wallsendmag]

1 hour ago, Tiburon said:

I quite like the brutalistic external concrete design of the East Stand which sits nicely with the beautiful architecture of Leazes Terrace and the cobbled brick lane towards the Strawberry, it’s very unique. We can’t lose Leazes Terrace just for the sake of a few extra thousand seats, but we can’t loose St.James’ Park for that either. A compromise will have to be found in order to modernise and increase the capacity without losing what’s special about the stadium and Leazes Terrace. I’d be against relocation and a new stadium.

 

It looks horrible from the outside. Inside, the concourse area is cramped, toilets barely fit for purpose and the seating area is also too cramped and it takes ages to get out at full time. The whole stand needs a revamp. It was built in the early 70s and is massively dated now.

[Wallsendmag]

38 minutes ago, Beth said:

What is this "62k is too small" logic. It would take us to second in the country behind Man U and level with Spurs and West Ham. Is there any clamour/plans for Liverpool, Man City and Arsenal's grounds to be extended again anytime soon?

 

 

 

 

West Ham up to 66k now.

[Tiburon]

Just now, Wallsendmag said:

 

It looks horrible from the outside. Inside, the concourse area is cramped, toilets barely fit for purpose and the seating area is also too cramped and it takes ages to get out at full time. The whole stand needs a revamp. It was built in the early 70s and is massively dated now.

All true, but again I like that brutalist architectural look. I’d demolish half (most?) of the buildings that were built during the T. Dan Smith era and a few from the later 70s and 80s, but a lot of people I know who aren’t originally from here note how contrasting our city is in terms of architecture and layout in that you have a good mix of the brutal grim grey concrete buildings, lovely Georgian and Edwardian buildings and then the more modern. Having said that almost all of the modern buildings that have been built and are being built are an eyesore too and look cheap and nasty and will date massively in the coming years.

[RodneyCisse]

27 minutes ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

West Ham up to 66k now.

Cheap as chips tickets to fill it too.

[Wallsendmag]

14 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

Cheap as chips tickets to fill it too.

 

The way forward.

[Tiresias]

18 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

Cheap as chips tickets to fill it too.

 

Helps being subsidized by our taxes lol

[TomYam]

3 hours ago, ohmelads said:

 

The stadium has infinitely more heritage value to the city than those terraces.

IThat's a moot point and isn't really relevant.

Specifically the discussion has been about building a new East Stand and the possibilities relating to that. I cannot believe any reasonable person could argue the current stand has more heritage value than Leazes Terrace.

 

 

[Wolfcastle]

1 hour ago, Beth said:

What is this "62k is too small" logic. It would take us to second in the country behind Man U and level with Spurs and West Ham. Is there any clamour/plans for Liverpool, Man City and Arsenal's grounds to be extended again anytime soon?

 

 

 

Liverpool and Man City are expanding.

We don't want to end up in a cylce started in the 90s with the expensive expansion proving to be too small then having to go for an even more expensive one after that's now too small and requiring another expensive expansion.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Wolfcastle

[TomYam]

I'd be happy enough with an improved and expanded St.James's Park, but we should be aiming for a minimum 65,000.

I still believe the best option for both the club and city would be to move to Castle Leazes.

There, we could build an optimal 72,000 stadium and, while it's not on the same historic site the club has resided at since it moved in 1892 and changed its name to Newcastle United, it'd be just a couple of hundred yards away and retain all those qualities that our present location possesses.

Once the present stadium is demolished, the club could manage and maintain and extended and enhanced Leazea Park

[Whitley mag]

2 minutes ago, TomYam said:

I'd be happy enough with an improved and expanded St.James's Park, but we should be aiming for a minimum 65,000.

I still believe the best option for both the club and city would be to move to Castle Leazes.

There, we could build an optimal 72,000 stadium and, while it's not on the same historic site the club has resided at since it moved in 1892 and changed its name to Newcastle United, it'd be just a couple of hundred yards away and retain all those qualities that our present location possesses.

Once the present stadium is demolished, the club could manage and maintain and extended and enhanced Leazea Park

Whisper it on here but I think this is what will happen. I just don’t see the East Stand redevelopment being viable in the end and we’ll be left with no other option.