What's new

New Stadium Details And Discussions

camaj

Posting too much
Aug 10, 2004
8,195
883
Columns starting to go up. Props to MatSpur on SSC.

I'm pretty sure I've seen similar looking things in the past, although they seem to have disappeared now.

I've just noticed the appearance of two large holes on the bit that's at ground level.
 

L.A. Yiddo

Not in L.A.
Apr 12, 2007
5,640
8,053
Updated pics from SSC. Props to Wine Gum here

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=132069449&postcount=14134

5KBnoQH.jpg


EWhDiz4.jpg


fgBQb9t.jpg


FJSIJnW.jpg
 

L.A. Yiddo

Not in L.A.
Apr 12, 2007
5,640
8,053
Thanks, you beat me too it before I could post links my own pics LOL

Ah sorry, I completely forgot you posted here too!! I can take them out if you want to post them. No problem :D Thanks for the pic updates, as always. Great to see the work in detail rather than the clubs cameras.
 

mightyspur

Now with lovely smooth balls
Aug 21, 2014
9,815
27,150
Random question, but did they ever get to the bottom of the Archway Steel fire? It was being treated as "suspicious" at the time, but was anything ever decided?
 

Mr-T

Well-Known Member
Jan 24, 2006
2,603
563
Something I've not noticed before - but should have been obvious really - is that they're not just pouring concrete from the spider-truck on the pitch area, but also from lorries around the perimeter.

It's great we're getting these extra pics as the unreliable webcams are missing so much.
 

mightyspur

Now with lovely smooth balls
Aug 21, 2014
9,815
27,150
Random question, but did they ever get to the bottom of the Archway Steel fire? It was being treated as "suspicious" at the time, but was anything ever decided?
@266in379 why are you disliking a question? Did it upset you? I'm asking because someone was suggestion spurs were indirectly behind it and I wanted to prove them wrong, so wondered if there was any official investigation.
 
Last edited:

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,384
130,359
They're right. Any influx of new homes should come with the necessary amenities. They cite the lack of playgrounds among other things. Luckily there's a great big public space being planned just over a mile away. It's got a climbing wall and everything!
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
Residents are restless. NIMBYism - rather have an old industrial unit I guess.....

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk...plan_housing_development_on_White_Hart_Lane/?

They're right. Any influx of new homes should come with the necessary amenities. They cite the lack of playgrounds among other things. Luckily there's a great big public space being planned just over a mile away. It's got a climbing wall and everything!

The concerns quoted in the article aren't unreasonably NIMBYish. Of course, the obvious reply to all of them is that existing central and local government planning policies are already required to take into account every one of the issues mentioned: accessibility, transport, local shopping, scale and character of the existing neighbourhood, pressure on local services such as schools and medical facilities - the lot.

The whole point of the Community Infrastructure Levy is to ensure that new development contributes financially to local provisions for transport, education, medical care, etc., in proportion to its size (CIL is charged per square metre of new/additional floor area). Any new development increases pressure on local facilities and London is growing, so it isn't a valid argument to prevent new development on the basis that the existing facilities cannot cope - the council has the power to collect the money to improve those facilities.

But there is also pressure on councils to meet targets for new housing, especially affordable housing, and there is sod-all funding available to deliver those targets. So it's no surprise that council officers and councillors sometimes bend over to accommodate over-scaled, over-ambitious new development, especially when it represents inward investment and makes no demand on their own financial resources.

The decision will depend on how highly Haringey value delivering housing numbers and sucking up to THFC, compared to how they value keeping constituents in the affected ward happy. Politics will be a factor, as much as policy.
 
Last edited:

stevenurse

Palacios' neck fat
May 14, 2007
6,089
10,022
Not sure how I'd feel about screens in the back of seats for replays etc. Depends what is shown I guess. Could lead to some pretty nasty behaviour if contentious decisions are replayed. Would get tourists just watching the screen constantly too.

Our stadium really is gonna be the nuts isn't it? Can't wait
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2006
12,762
16,942
Not sure how I'd feel about screens in the back of seats for replays etc. Depends what is shown I guess. Could lead to some pretty nasty behaviour if contentious decisions are replayed. Would get tourists just watching the screen constantly too.

Our stadium really is gonna be the nuts isn't it? Can't wait

They say replays, but you can guarantee it will be 95% for marketing and generating even more macth day revenue.
 

shelfmonkey

Weird is different, different is interesting.
Mar 21, 2007
6,690
8,040
Not sure how I'd feel about screens in the back of seats for replays etc. Depends what is shown I guess. Could lead to some pretty nasty behaviour if contentious decisions are replayed. Would get tourists just watching the screen constantly too.

Our stadium really is gonna be the nuts isn't it? Can't wait

One thing's for sure it's gonna be fecking mahoosive. The first row of the top tier is as high as the roof on the current stadium. Can't wait meself.

Has anyone ever posted the max height and compared it to the haemorrhoids?
 
Top