New Stadium Details And Discussions

davidmatzdorf · Dec 24, 2014

beats1 said:
I don't think the archways issue is stopping us from starting on the other parts of the stadium.

I'm sure that's right, if only because it's WHL that is stopping us from building the southern end of the stadium
- as we can see in Breezer's aerial photo, the ASM buildings are a bit of a blip, compared to the the way the outline of the new stadium overlaps with the existing one.

That leads me to consider how this £50m structural contract is going to be programmed. Obviously, for any given part of the building, you have to build the substructure first, then erect the superstructure, then clad it and fit everything out - the last two being done in a separate contract (or more than one).

But there's no way that Anderson are going to be able to do the main structure in one 'hit', even if the CPO is finally confirmed - they're going to have to work on the northern 2/3, then wait until we move out, then demolish WHL and build the rest. That suggests that the CPO delay isn't adding very much to the cost, only to the uncertainty.

It seems to me that the only way the stadium can be built in the most efficient and least expensive way, with trades working through the entire construction in sequence, is if we move out very early and stay away for two seasons - not something that the club is apparently considering. So I expect that the club - and Anderson - have factored in the extra cost of a phased build already and that the ASM issue isn't major in terms of increased costs.

Lilbaz · Dec 24, 2014

JimmyG2 · Dec 24, 2014

I've heard of parking the bus:
but the crawler crane thing?
That's just ridiculous.

THFCSPURS19 · Dec 24, 2014

davidmatzdorf said:
I'm sure that's right, if only because it's WHL that is stopping us from building the southern end of the stadium
- as we can see in your own aerial photo, the ASM buildings are a bit of a blip, compared to the the way the outline of the new stadium overlaps with the existing one.

That leads me to consider how this £50m structural contract is going to be programmed. Obviously, for any given part of the building, you have to build the substructure first, then erect the superstructure, then clad it and fit everything out - the last two being done in a separate contract (or more than one).

But there's no way that Anderson are going to be able to do the main structure in one 'hit', even if the CPO is finally confirmed - they're going to have to work on the northern 2/3, then wait until we move out, then demolish WHL and build the rest. That suggests that the CPO delay isn't adding very much to the cost, only to the uncertainty.

It seems to me that the only way the stadium can be built in the most efficient and least expensive way, with trades working through the entire construction in sequence, is if we move out very early and stay away for two seasons - not something that the club is apparently considering. So I expect that the club - and Anderson - have factored in the extra cost of a phased build already and that the ASM issue isn't major in terms of increased costs.

'Obviously'

And I have seen a few media articles saying we have considered/are considering two seasons away but just the one season is far more likely.

davidmatzdorf · Dec 24, 2014

I think a photo showing what looks very much like a piling rig, labelled 'Fussey Piling', settles the question of whether the substructure contract is underway.

It's way bigger than the ones I've seen on sites I've managed, but it does look like a piling rig.

We can also see that the outline of the new stadium that is visible in the aerial photo is shuttering, which has been sunk into the ground to retain the surrounding soil when they start to excavate.

Lilbaz · Dec 24, 2014

davidmatzdorf said:
I think a photo showing what looks very much like a piling rig, labelled 'Fussey Piling', settles the question of whether the substructure contract is underway.

You just know they got the spelling wrong and it was meant to be Pussey Filling.

Locotoro · Dec 26, 2014

davidmatzdorf said:
I think a photo showing what looks very much like a piling rig, labelled 'Fussey Piling', settles the question of whether the substructure contract is underway.

It's way bigger than the ones I've seen on sites I've managed, but it does look like a piling rig.

Can you explain what is a piling rig?

I haven't dealt with a construction contract for about 10 years.

davidmatzdorf · Dec 26, 2014

Locotoro said:
Can you explain what is a piling rig?

I haven't dealt with a construction contract for about 10 years.

Big, heavy piece of machinery that either drives piles into the ground (wham! x 100) or augers them in (giant screw).

We used a small augered pile rig to do the (8m deep) foundations for my house in 1999, because you can't use a piledriver near existing buildings, lest the repeated impacts and vibrations cause damage. Similarly, nearly all the housing developments I worked on with piled foundations were in built-up areas, so they needed augered piles. That enormous tracked vehicle in the photo looks like a rig for driving piles to me, but I'm not certain, because it's a different method than what I know from personal experience.

Most modern developments of any size in North London need piled foundations, because the clay soil tends to shrink in dry conditions and cause subsidence.

Locotoro · Dec 26, 2014

davidmatzdorf said:
Big, heavy piece of machinery that either drives piles into the ground (wham! x 100) or augers them in (giant screw).

We used a small augered pile rig to do the (8m deep) foundations for my house in 1999, because you can't use a piledriver near existing buildings, lest the repeated impacts and vibrations cause damage. Similarly, nearly all the housing developments I worked on with piled foundations were in built-up areas, so they needed augered piles. That enormous tracked vehicle in the photo looks like a rig for driving piles to me, but I'm not certain, because it's a different method than what I know from personal experience.

Most modern developments of anty size in North London need piled foundations, because the clay soil tends to shrink in dry conditions and cause subsidence.

Sounds to me, based on my memory, that this type of work would go beyond what would normally be included in the scope of services for enabling works. Does that sound right to you?

Lilbaz · Dec 26, 2014

Locotoro said:
Sounds to me, based on my memory, that this type of work would go beyond what would normally be included in the scope of services for enabling works. Does that sound right to you?

By enabling works are you talking about the Sainsbury's/college etc...? Cause they have been completed these are all stadium.

Guess this would come under site prep works.

Locotoro · Dec 26, 2014

Lilbaz said:
By enabling works are you talking about the Sainsbury's/college etc...? Cause they have been completed these are all stadium.

Guess this would come under site prep works.

No, by enabling works I mean the excavation and preparation of the site. It's effectively removing any obstacles, decontamination and ground improvement in advane of the actual building works.

Lilbaz · Dec 26, 2014

Locotoro said:
No, by enabling works I mean the excavation and preparation of the site. It's effectively removing any obstacles, decontamination and ground improvement in advane of the actual building works.

Yeah site prep works.

davidmatzdorf · Dec 27, 2014

Locotoro said:
Sounds to me, based on my memory, that this type of work would go beyond what would normally be included in the scope of services for enabling works. Does that sound right to you?

Yes, that's what I meant by "settles the question of whether the substructure contract is underway." It must be, because piles are a key part of the substructure, they are not preparatory works such as decontamination, etc.

Lilbaz · Dec 27, 2014

Hoopspur · Dec 27, 2014

Anyway, it's not that I've been watching a lot of espionage and war escape films over Christmas. But to summarise the last 7 pages, it's a fact that the perpetrators, who may, or may not have been chickens (I like the badge), the police, the fire brigade, Dr Evil or the owners (or indeed a combination of all) in fact tunnelled into Archway by first using a helicopter to bring down the electricity to the CCTV cameras after stealing their hard discs by sneaking above the lasers after being slung onto the base of Breezer's silent glider, first leaping over the perimeter on a motor bike and then playing football on Xmas Day with Sly Stallone (and Ossie Ardiles) on the waste ground that lies in between. It all ends terribly badly with the Spurs coach (not Poch) hanging over a cliff caused by the piling for the new stadium whilst they all escape in 3 Minis up the high road having left their juicy bits cartons behind which they bounced in from the undercarriage of Moschitoes* whilst setting fire to the cable car after being sneaked up the Lea Valley by submarine. And not a lot of people know that - fact(oid!). Simples innit - and every bit true I tell you.

*I wanted to put 'Harrykanes' in here, but that bit wasn't factually correct I'm afraid.

Adam456 · Dec 28, 2014

branchie said:
Crackin' picture. The supermarket looks lovely!

From that photo am I the only one that wonders why we didn't use the land that we built the Sainsburys on to enable building 3/4 if not more of the new stadium and avoid any issues with playing away for a season. Clearly there are all sorts of issues with access, planning and the the extra commercial revenue but it doesn't seem

Adam456 · Dec 28, 2014

Adam456 said:
From that photo am I the only one that wonders why we didn't use the land that we built the Sainsburys on to enable building 3/4 if not more of the new stadium and avoid any issues with playing away for a season. Clearly there are all sorts of issues with access, planning and the the extra commercial revenue but it doesn't seem

...like they would outweigh cost and inconvenience of delay and a big metal Saunsburys doesn't seen any better than a big metal stadium - except that you can't buy balsamic vinegar

Lilbaz · Dec 28, 2014

Adam456 said:
...like they would outweigh cost and inconvenience of delay and a big metal Saunsburys doesn't seen any better than a big metal stadium - except that you can't buy balsamic vinegar

Planning permission. You have to give to get in this country.

Adam456 · Dec 28, 2014

Lilbaz said:
Planning permission. You have to give to get in this country.

Sure but could we not have promised to build it on the other side near the flats when existing stadium was demolished. Seems obvious

Lilbaz · Dec 28, 2014

Adam456 said:
Sure but could we not have promised to build it on the other side near the flats when existing stadium was demolished. Seems obvious

Not sure. We had a couple that were turned down. We had to keep the listed buildings etc... You'd have to ask the architects. If you go on Skyscrapercity one of the posters is a friend of the KSS director so it's possible he might tell you.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

New Stadium Details And Discussions

Front Page Gadfly

Just call me Baz

SC Supporter

The Speaker of the Transfer Rumours Forum

Front Page Gadfly

Just call me Baz

Prince of Zamunda

Front Page Gadfly

Prince of Zamunda

Just call me Baz

Prince of Zamunda

Just call me Baz

Front Page Gadfly

Just call me Baz

You have insufficient privileges to reply here!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Just call me Baz

Well-Known Member

Just call me Baz

Similar threads