Crystal Palace stadium re-development?

[JeeBee]

I would think that athletics fans are far more likely to be non-local than football club fans, and hence more likely to travel by car when you're considering a city-bound club like Crystal Palace.

Anyway, their plans leave more of the park as park land, and accessible, than the current state of the park. A small portion would be taken up by the stadium - so those saying half the park will be taken over aren't going to be winning any arguments with that line.

There are issues, I'm sure the club will be made aware of them in their meetings with the community, although how they deal with them is another question which we will find out in due course.

[Hill Dweller]

dickp » 25 Jan 2011 15:29

As Stuart has said, there are easy and affordable ways for the stadium to be improved or taken down if its facilities don't suit today's needs.

Yep, after how many years of building will this 'currently ugly' part of the park be more pleasing and what will it all be like in between? Syd has expressed concern about the depth they'll be digging down, can you imagine the blight on the lives of the people in Thicket Road if it's to be deep?

Yes the jobs aspect is interesting, as is the effect on present employees and neighbouring beneficiaries of their being in Crystal Palace i/o Selhurst or Croydon.

There are pros and cons to most things and there is little point imhoo in welcoming a football ground for the sake of a bit of fun (yep, that's just as important as jobs) but CPP being exploited by materialists, clever as they are about projecting as something else is not what I'd call being about fun.

There have been other projects to support, such as the cinema plans which was all happening while I was out of the country, it's another bit of the area's recent history that I'm clueless about.

Bully for both of us and our opinions ?
I hope the promised consultation with residents will be widely advertised.

--------------------------

Syd_Stone » 25 Jan 2011 16:21

Yep and ............... sigh ..... the glazed structure no longer exists.
The team was started as an amateur one, by poor blokes who probably stayed where the work was for however long the work lasted.
This is a list of teams and their grounds, I honestly wonder why CP isn't on it?
http://www.oldgrounds.co.uk/
(Edit: Oooops sorry, it is.)

As to your hope that the consortium have made any commitment regarding the park itself outside their proposed area, when / where?

My 'aesthetically pleasing' was really more about the cachet of the CP area. All of the facilities that the consortium need exist already, hotels and bars a-plenty in nearby Croydon etc and I reckon Norwood Jtn / Selhurst area need whatever advantages the consortium can provide even more. Some gratitude / loyalty to them would be appropriate imhoo.

[Hill Dweller]

Re the vote on pg 1 it's apparent that the second option was a pointless one (as described at the time, who on earth would approve the knocking down of the Olympic facilities)?

...... ..... fifteen people have voted for the first yet so few have posted.
Excuse my cynicism about what other threads or recent new memberships they're from

Rebuilt by CPFC as a football stadium 15 68%

Rebuilt by Spurs as an athletic stadium 7 32%

[Hill Dweller]

"We never wanted to buy it but you don't let your club go out of business," says Parish.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... -palace.do

Fans' faith is strong in the Parish of Crystal Palace

When Martin Long decided to call his daughter Crystal Alice, he never dreamed he would one day end up owning the football club that provided the inspiration for her name.

But blind devotion can make men do strange things and that is why four successful businessmen have seemingly taken leave of their senses by pumping their own money into Crystal Palace, a club that have been a financial black hole in recent times.

Long is one of those four men and is now co-chairman of the club he has supported for nearly 50 years. But if he and his fellow members of the CPFC2010 consortium had not joined forces, there would be no more Crystal Palace.

And having spent Saturday's game with Bristol City in the company of Steve Parish, the group's frontman and Long's co-chairman, you swiftly realise that the relationship these owners have with the club's supporters is unique - they are hailed as heroes, not treated with suspicion.

That much is clear from the moment that Parish is besieged by autograph hunters as he steps out of his Ferrari. This is a man who, by his own admission, has made mistakes, most notably in appointing George Burley as manager, a decision which was rectified on New Year's Day. Yet Parish and his fellow shareholders are lauded for ensuring there remains a club to support.

And for a group who insist they never wanted to own Palace and do not see themselves being in charge long-term, they seem to be enjoying themselves.

The story began last season, when the club were heading for liquidation. Chief executive Phil Alexander, brought wealthy supporters Parish, who works primarily in advertising, and Churchill Insurance co-founder Long together.

Stephen Browett, chairman of a fine wine merchants, was then brought in before Jeremy Hosking, a hedge fund manager valued as being worth £175million, contacted them to say he would also like to invest.

They saved the club before launching a series of ambitious plans, chief of which is the desire to build a new stadium. With Hosking away on business, on Saturday, Parish, Long and Browett went to Selhurst Park for the first time since those plans were announced.

In the centre of a busy boardroom an hour before kick-off, it quickly becomes clear why Parish is the frontman for the group as he bounds around the room, doing an interview with the BBC in one corner before working the room and speaking to every person there.

Parish's eye for detail is valued by his fellow consortium members, which extends from the designs for the new stadium to the fact that he has overhauled the catering at Selhurst Park, saying it 'felt cheap' before.

"We never wanted to buy it but you don't let your club go out of business," says Parish. "Every fan creates a bond with their club and even though you might want to change it when things aren't going well, you can't.

"But I won't let my heart rule my head. I love Palace, and it's an important thing in my life, but my family and my other business interests are more important. I won't risk everything for a football club."

Yet unfortunately for men who are fans first and owners second, relegation is a looming prospect. The game itself is turgid affair and as time begins to run out, frustration shows and conversation ceases. A disallowed goal is celebrated prematurely, players are criticised, misplaced passes greeted with groans. In short, the reaction in the directors' box is the same as in the stands.

After the goalless draw, the over-riding feeling is it could have been worse but it proves that reinforcements are needed. The prospect of relegation is discussed, with the feeling among the board being that if the top earners are sold, the club will still be on a sound financial footing.

There are also reference to 'when' Palace return to the Premier League. As the stadium plans prove, ambition is certainly not dead here.

Tottenham's bid to develop Crystal Palace as the pay-off for knocking down and rebuilding the Olympic Stadium in Stratford could prove an insurmountable obstacle, however, and there is genuine anger that could be the case. In short, the club feel they should be given first refusal when it comes to developing Crystal Palace.

Ultimately, the board crave stability. The consortium talk openly at the bar after the game of putting the club on a secure footing before selling to someone who has Palace's best interests at heart.

If they were thinking clearly then they would have gone nowhere near the club. Yet if you call your daughter Crystal Alice, then you know from the start that your judgment may be skewed - and the fact it has been is entirely to the benefit of Crystal Palace.

-------------------

Quote ......
"Tottenham's bid to develop Crystal Palace as the pay-off for knocking down and rebuilding the Olympic Stadium in Stratford could prove an insurmountable obstacle, ........."

There is no way at all that that statement is true.

However ...... sob (no ref to sons of)

[Duke of Clarence]

Most reassuring to hear that Steve Parish hasn't ruled out staying at Selhurst Park. It sounds like a better solution for him as he will be able to include more retail and commerce.

What happens if you get refused permission?

SP: "If it looks like it is not going to happen I am not going to get bogged down in planning for the rest of my life. We will have to turn our attention elsewhere.

We have got a scheme for Selhurst Park as well, in some ways if we could get that scheme it would be more attractive as you can have more retail and more commerce there.

We know we won't be able to put shops and bars and restaurants, which most people do to supplement stadiums, in the park but we could do more of that in Selhurst."

http://www.croydonguardian.co.uk/news/8 ... ns/?ref=mr

[Hill Dweller]

There's a lot of controversy and opposition to the idea of the 2012 stadium being knocked down.

I've not understood the politics (or whatevers) of that having much to do with CPFC's plan.

I am, however, not very keen on their having anything to do with our park after changing their status to a Ltd company


.

[perryman]

who on earth would approve the knocking down of the Olympic facilities?

Well, that was the original olympic plan:
The upper tier is designed to be dismantled after the games, and is only a temporary structure. Then British athletics would have had their maintainable 25k legacy stadium, except they turned it down!

Anyway here, for what it is worth, are Tottenham's plans for Crystal Palace, should they be awarded the olympic site (notice the football pitch shaped grass in the middle:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 378785.stm

[stuart]

who on earth would approve the knocking down of the Olympic facilities?

Anybody who has not got emotional about this and looks at it cold and clinically!

If (and it is still a big if) Spurs do offer the taxpayer the greatest return (or rather defrays more of the loss) on the Olympic project then why should we not accept it? Surely it is Spurs concern and only their concern whether they convert or rebuild the stadium. Our interest is that the athletic sporting facilities are maintained. That appears to be part of the plan and if (again big if) that sorts the funding problems of the NSC in CPP then we benefit.

Moreover it is just not the buyout cost. It is the sustainability of the plan. No one appears to have yet doubted the economics of the Spurs plan. They are a major Premiership side and with enhanced facilities can generate considerably more on pitch and off pitch revenues to pay for the programme now and into the future with confidence.

Whereas it would appear West Ham can not finance their bid which would pay us (taxpayers) less, cost the good burghers of Newham (many of whom cannot afford it) £40m in support. West Ham have had a disastrous financial record over the past few years - mostly attributably to grabbing cash from dodgy Icelandic financiers and are not, sadly, a strong club. If they fail who picks up the tab for their stadium ... ?

As for CPFC. They were bust about 6 months ago. Are they going to mortgage themselves up to the hilt with whom to finance this? And are they relying on a transformation in performance to get the crowds and support to pay the bills?

You can't bank hope.

I really fear the Olympic decision - which is probably key to all this - will indeed be made on emotional grounds. Coe and others speak of a promise about the Olympic Stadium. The same people who promised a games for £2.4 billion but delivered one for £9 billion of our money. Playing fast and loose with our money and then saying WE should honour HIS promise that athletics should be played at ground A rather than ground B even when ground B might be a better, cheaper and more sustainable option.

But as others have pointed out I appear to be in a minority. Does that make me wrong?

Stuart

[Hill Dweller]

There's much more to the Olympic stadium's fate than a little local disagreement between a couple of footie clubs. Where were they both in the early 21C before the site had been tidied up and an infrastructure put in, were they competing to buy or build on it then?

Can't stand Seb Coe, Ovett was always the one to support as far as I was concerned but about this (knocking the thing down) Coe's right. We might as well say Hoey was right to campaign for 2012 games to go to Paris. We got it, we've all paid for it, if it's sold on it must be to someone that will allow its economical use by the whole community, not to a conglomerate that will require its use by others to boost its own business profit.

If the stadium is smashed down after the 2012, and especially if done so for bl**dy materialists, imagine the message that that sends to recent hosts of Olympics/Commonwealth Games. Western media salivated and BigO'd / wet itself just before the Delhi Games, mocking and whingeing about labourers actually (my mockery here) having the nerve to stay indoors at night through the monsoon season. Thank heavens the British team had the commonsense to calm it all down and state no harm had been done.

I wouldn't blame any of the campaign team that won the bid on July 6th 2005 if they were feeling prostituted now. A lot of water's gone under the bridge but we can't be the host that would smash a recent build to bits so soon after builders elsewhere were deemed unfit to even sleep on the floor of the build they'd worked on. I don't suppose it's likely they'll read about it, so what?

.

[Hill Dweller]

You can't bank hope.

Must be why they've gone for limited liability?

[The Commander]

Tottenham are playing a game of brinksmanship with Haringey Council in order to redevelop White Hart Lane.
Decision on the Olympic stadium put back to next week. , . . . .no douobt giving time for the 'incentivising' cheques to clear.

Are CPFC2010 doing the same with Croydon council inorder to redevelop Selhurst Park more extensively?

[The Commander]

I think the Palace move to the park would be great myself, if West Ham get to go the Olympic stadium.
Selhurst is a dump of a stadium and should Palace get back in the Premier League they could do with something better. Local NIMBYS should remember that they bought their houses next door to a huge public venue that should be utilised more, not less.

Public and park being the operative words. Not private commercial 40,000 seater football club. There is no correlation

[The Commander]

I'm sure that all the pubs in the area are really upset with the prospect of filling their pubs on Wednesday nights and Saturday afternoons! It's probably far enough from Sydenham to not have a noticeable effect in the town itself.

I am sure all the independent traders in Crystal Palace are really upset with the prospect of losing their trade on Saturdays - the best trading day .i.e. those traders who stick it out during the week so that those of us who live and work in the area can have a sustainable town centre.

The perceived additional trade for pubs and fast food joints will not make up for the actual loss of trade from those shops from people who would otherwise shop there but will be put off due to traffic and parking and hoards of football fans. However, you spin it, a stadium in the park is not the sustainable model that the local population are seeking to achieve for Crystal Palace Park, the Trinagle or perhaps Sydenham or Penge. Not everyone is a football supporter, not everyone wants the park to be associated with a mega stadium with football and rugby matches every saturday and huge concerts during the summer. Quite a few people think this is a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
Perhaps when CPFC starts to talk about funding for the masterplan and a revenue stream for maintenance of the park they will be taken more seriously. At present this proposal is all me me me me me i.e. CPFC2010 - all the community stuff is just lip service.
Could you see this happening in any other park in London!

[Syd_Stone]

To be fair, The Commander, other parks in London don't have huge, unused all-seater stadiums sitting slap bang in the middle of them! That aside, there's no question that traffic and parking control are big, unanswered questions.

I went to Selhurst Park yesterday, my second visit this season. Observations:

1) Surprised at how quickly the crowd of 17,000 arrived and departed. Within half an hour of the end of the game, the area was deserted. Obviously, more people hang around in the hour leading up to the game, but it's not like they're thronging the streets.

2) Norwich City brought 3,000 fans — but more importantly, ten chuffing great coaches, all of which lined up end to end on the road next to the stadium. Where do these coaches go in the CPFC2010 master plan? Thicket Road? No way. Crystal Palace Parade? Good grief, imagine the traffic. So, coaches in the same place as currently allocated to the sports centre? Fine, (well, probably not) but where is that on the graphic? Road control in Crystal Palace and a realistic parking plan are priorities for CPFC2010 if they're serious.

3) Sat in the Holmesdale End, one row from the top. Pigeons were flying at full pelt way below us! A good exercise would be to superimpose the dimensions of a typical new 40,000 seater on top of the schematics for the existing athletics stadium. That, more than anything, will tell us what the environmental impact would be.

[Duke of Clarence II]

Just to say I am the Duke of Clarence (!!) but have had to open a new account as DoCII because I have been having problems logging in...

First obeservation re Syd's comments is that at Selhurst the adjoining Sainsbury's closes at 1pm allowing it's car park to be used by fans. Ther's no such car parking facility in CP. Plus the plans for this move are to utilise a stadium twice the size of Selhurst for more than just football.

The CP athletics stadium is underused but the NSC and the park are well used throughout the year. Just because the athletics stadium is under used should not mean it needs knocking down and replacing with another stadium for twice the capacity.

Traffic and parking are one of a number of serious issues. To accomodate what could be up to 8,000 cars if a 40,000 capacity crowd with just 20% car use desends on the area, there's talk of introducing a 1 mile car exclusion zone to facillitate event day traffic. This will mean that those who live approximatley 1 mile from CPP will feel the impact of event traffic. Although the details are sketchy the proposal expresses the intention to run rugby league, music concerts and large scale corproate events along side football. The proposed stadium will be utilised much more than 30x a year and nearly every Saturday.

However the predicted car use of CPFC is actually 70% according to premier and football league travel surveys http://bit.ly/fWyQU5 (page 27) The largest capacity crowd at Selhurst last year was just under 25,000. 70% of 25,000 is 17,500. If 17,500 people arrive 2x2 then this will still bring 8,750 cars to the area. We still need to factor in the predicted car use of the rugby league crowd, the music crowd and the corporate conference crowd.

So how much space will 8,750 cars need. The average car is 4M long. 8,750 x 4=35000. That tells us that the approach roads will be gridlocked and that at least 35 kilometeres of parking space will be needed.

The exclusion zone will require all living within 1 mile of CPP to purchase parking permits. It will create an unofficial free car park for event traffic by encouraging events traffic to seek parking spaces as near to the 1 mile CPZ boundary thus displacing residents and shoppers[/b] the other side of the zone. This will spread the impact further as displaced vehicles are forced to park elsewhere on weekends. So people living in Sydenham, Penge, Beckenham, Forest Hill, Dulwich, West Dulwich, West and South Norwood will also be affected by stadium traffic.

The impact of this proposal to sell off Selhurst, stadium and all will badly affect the Selhurst area]. The shops and high street in SE25 have been shaped by their proximity to Selhurst and the influx of football footfall on their key trading day.

The level of event traffic and exclusion zones will discourage people from using the surrounding area for anything other than access to Messers Parrish and Long's private commercial sporting mecca. So far there is no investment for the park. It's all directed at the stadium and corpoarte complex.

[Eagle]

Good to have a member of the aristocracy on our site and hope he is not drowned in wine like one of his ancestors.

I agree will a lot the Noble Gent says. I have attended matches at SP with 60,000 crowd but this was before the namby pamby days of all day seating

I do wish our club all the best wherever they end up.

[Robin Orton]

Good to have a member of the aristocracy on our site and hope he is not drowned in wine like one of his ancestors

.
Predecessor but not ancestor. The last descendent of the Clarence who was drowned in a butt of malmsey died in 1499. The title is traditionally conferred on junior members of the royal family. I assume the present Duke, whom we are honoured to have among us, is a descendent (hitherto unknown to history) of the last known Duke, the eldest son of Edward VII, who was born and died without issue (or so it was thought until now) whilst his father was still Prince of Wales.

[JeeBee]

Must be why they've gone for limited liability?

What else would they be? A charity? They're not listed publicly so they wouldn't be a Plc.

[JeeBee]

Public and park being the operative words. Not private commercial 40,000 seater football club. There is no correlation

It's not like the NSC area is that public at the moment - sure you can go for a swim, cup of coffee or a game of squash or climbing in the main building, but the stadium and the pitches are pretty much off limits right now.

They're not taking over currently public areas of the park, Indeed, they're turning tarmac to parkland with their plan (in conjunction with the masterplan), and also providing a proper public running track where the fenced off covered pitches are.

Have you actually been to the park?

[JeeBee]

2) Norwich City brought 3,000 fans — but more importantly, ten chuffing great coaches, all of which lined up end to end on the road next to the stadium. Where do these coaches go in the CPFC2010 master plan?

They could probably park on the circuit road by the new stadium and the sports centre. I'm sure even twenty coaches could be easily accommodated, although more details are required from CPFC, and we will see how the plan changes over the next year as a result of local consultation.

Traffic impact is the major worry, but as pointed out already, football fans are far more likely to be local, and thus use non-car methods of travelling than athletics fans. However there will still be a significant number, and they will need to be accommodated by schemes such as a park and ride.