St James' Park

[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.

[TomYam]

36 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

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.

Possibly.

Fans have a visceral wish/need to stay at St.James's Park. I totally understand that, it's just that I think the club, and especially the city, would be better off with a move to the northern side of Leazes Park lake. 

Sure, it's not the EXACT same footprint but, other than that, so what? The stands stadium has been renovated numerous times over the years, the pitch too.

We could build the state-of-the-art stadium that this club and city deserve. A stadium that can house all our supporters, with room to grow, optimising commercial possibilities and with outstanding acoustics. We have owner that have a track record of delivering such civil engineering.

Imagine accessing such a stadium via a new Leazes Park entrance at Strawberry Place? 

As I said before, I'd be happy enough with staying put, but I just think we'd be selling ourselves short when the aforementioned propsal could easily be realised.

[manorpark]

2 hours ago, Whitley mag said:

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.

 

I'm surprised to see you say that.

 

I can understand the logic of what you say and how that could come about, but I absolutely feel that (uniquely) we have owners that want to make St James' Park give us everything we want and need, and that they are well capable of "making it happen".

 

What a place our famous SJP will be then !!!

[nufcjb]

A new but 'traditional English stadium design with modern facilities' at Leazes Park is my next favoured option if the current site is not feasible for expansion. 

 

The current stadium can possibly be turned into a mini community park and leisure area. Let's face it, the state of the current park can be so much better and no one in this day of age would want to invest and maintain it if there was no payoff or benefits coming their way too.

 

If say the owners can pledge investment into a newly modernised and sustainable green space with the city council at the current site of SJP while moving a few hundred yards up the road for a new stadium, it'll be a win-win for all. Matchday experience won't change much for the whole city.

 

Atmosphere in the stadium will be down to how it is designed. Keep the traditional 4 stands as close to the pitch, exterior can even match how SJP looks now if you wish so, facilities insided can be upgraded and modernised. Just move it up the road a bit.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2023 by nufcjb

[Guest]

Ok. Let's demolish everything and move to leazes park. 

Move leazes terrace and st James terrace brick by fuckin brick to Beamish. Job done! Easy.

 

These cunts who run our club are clearly talking shit and need to listen to us. 

[Yorkie]

I doubt there's a single bullet point in any planning policy document anywhere which would support the demolition of those perfectly decent homes at St James' Terrace. That's before you've even considered the permanent loss of assets of historical value. Destroying houses just isn't on anyone's agenda.

 

It would take the mother of all Section 106s* to overcome it just for the sake of extending SJP.

 

*a legal agreement which commits developers/landowners to providing something to ensure that their scheme can be considered acceptable (e.g. an affordable housing contribution/contribution to physical infrastructure/specifically in this case: replacement housing and some form of offsetting re the loss of a heritage asset, if that's even possible)