What's new

New Stadium Details And Discussions

thfc1989

Well-Known Member
May 8, 2008
2,601
3,439
I'm a bit confused about the exterior for the stadium. I see that they have started to put up the glass paneling in some areas - but from the design pictures it seems that there is some sort of perforated steel as the external cladding. Does this go over the glass?

Also, I remember a while back that Haringey released proposals for the regeneration of the high road, including creating a stadium approach (link below)

https://tottenham.london/sites/default/files/12._the_high_road_and_west_hart_lane_pdf_506kb.pdf

I can't see any update whether this was ever taken forward. Has anyone heard / read anything to suggest it is?
 
Last edited:

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
I'm a bit confused about the exterior for the stadium. I see that they have started to put up the glass paneling in some areas - but from the design pictures it seems that there is some sort of perforated steel as the external cladding. Does this go over the glass?

Also, I remember a while back that Haringey released proposals for the regeneration of the high road, including creating a stadium approach (link below)

https://tottenham.london/sites/default/files/12._the_high_road_and_west_hart_lane_pdf_506kb.pdf

I can't see any update whether this was ever taken forward. Has anyone heard / ready anything to suggest it is?
In a word, yes! Under much of the cladding is glass, rather than being some concrete walled monolith. It is an approach which allows for increased light and visibility inside whilst maintaining privacy and appearance from the outside. It also helps to ensure the stadium is visually appropriate for its environment.
 

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,346
129,923
Obviously one is a photo and the other a visual but it's interesting to see the comparison of the distance from the pitch of these two north london grounds...

Screen Shot 2017-08-16 at 13.22.40.png


Couldn't fit the West Ham one in the same scale as the stands were nowhere to be seen.
 

duvfromabuv

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2005
174
356
Just my opinion of course in that our new stadium is amazing but it still doesn't quite look right without the cockerels on the roof.

They should put a replica of the old ones on one side and a new one of the current badge on the other side then it will be a Tottenham stadium.
 

thebenjamin

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2008
12,166
38,547
Obviously one is a photo and the other a visual but it's interesting to see the comparison of the distance from the pitch of these two north london grounds...

View attachment 31878

Couldn't fit the West Ham one in the same scale as the stands were nowhere to be seen.

As well as proximity to the pitch, what's really exciting about how much better ours is than the Death Star, is the upper tier. I've mentioned this before but you can really see it here -- our upper tier is really steep, so fans sitting up there will feel connected and invested in the action, whereas in many modern stadiums (like Wembley), you might as well not actually be there. The steepness (stepth should be a word) of ours is even more apparent in real life.
 

L.A. Yiddo

Not in L.A.
Apr 12, 2007
5,639
8,051
As well as proximity to the pitch, what's really exciting about how much better ours is than the Death Star, is the upper tier. I've mentioned this before but you can really see it here -- our upper tier is really steep, so fans sitting up there will feel connected and invested in the action, whereas in many modern stadiums (like Wembley), you might as well not actually be there. The steepness (stepth should be a word) of ours is even more apparent in real life.

In slight fairness to those bastards that photo is a fish eye photo of their place and distorts the view somewhat. From what I have seen I believe the steepness of the stands are in fact quite similar, just ours are closer to the action.
 

duvfromabuv

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2005
174
356
They should have made the lower tier as steep as the upper then it would look really imposing and have the fans closer but I guess they must have some restrictions on that as it seems a bit daft not to otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
In slight fairness to those bastards that photo is a fish eye photo of their place and distorts the view somewhat. From what I have seen I believe the steepness of the stands are in fact quite similar, just ours are closer to the action.
There are good engineering reasons for not doing that. It's no coincidence that the pitch of each tier at football stadiums is generally quite similar. You need to balance out the height, the footprint/size and the sightlines, ultimately that leads to designers/architects drawing similar conclusions.

What I find interesting is that The Emirates is rounder and more bowl shaped. They argue that the corners are the least preferable place to sit so they were happy to compromise by having fewer seats in the corners than the sides and ends, giving that sort of wavey effect. I'm interested to know whether that also effects atmosphere by having areas of dead space and open areas for noise to escape which we won't have.

I mean I know it's does that, but to a lesser extent and we don't have gaps in the sides!
 

joelstinton14

Well-Known Member
Aug 23, 2011
1,295
3,429
A couple of the cams have been moved into new positions. Unfortunately it is raining this morning and you can't see much.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
There are good engineering reasons for not doing that. It's no coincidence that the pitch of each tier at football stadiums is generally quite similar. You need to balance out the height, the footprint/size and the sightlines, ultimately that leads to designers/architects drawing similar conclusions.

What I find interesting is that The Emirates is rounder and more bowl shaped. They argue that the corners are the least preferable place to sit so they were happy to compromise by having fewer seats in the corners than the sides and ends, giving that sort of wavey effect. I'm interested to know whether that also effects atmosphere by having areas of dead space and open areas for noise to escape which we won't have.

I mean I know it's does that, but to a lesser extent and we don't have gaps in the sides!

What do you mean by we don't have gaps in the sides?
 

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
What do you mean by we don't have gaps in the sides?
I mean the corners really, when you look at each, you can see the stands drop down a lot at each corner, which is because the pitch of the stands is the same, but the oval shape of the stadium causes the corners to be cut off. That leaves a gap in the seating. We have a similar effect, but our oval is a different shape, it's not a true oval. This means we have more seating in the corners of the stadium as the actual distribution is different. By extension we have noise coming from those corners and perhaps, more importantly, behind the top tier at The Emirates, there is a glass wall, but it doesn't reach up to the roof, with that effect particularly noticeable in the corners. This means that noise generated in the stadium can escape there rather than being reflected back in.

Whilst this might seem minor, the benefit of noise being reflected can easily be demonstrated using a mobile phone. Simply by cupping your hand around a speaker you can hear the benefits. Whilst there are no certainties, I suspect that simply having gaps between the stadium bowl and the roof allows noise to be lost which would otherwise reflect around the bowl.
 

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
love the way they have made the running track/perimeter green to match the pitch, thinking that would camouflage the the fact that the stands are half a km from the pitch
It probably looks even more ropey with a running track half covered by some stands, highlights even more the temporary nature of a large part of their stadium.
 
Top