Future stadia in pictures, including Tottenham

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,626
It's not just the fact it already goes through tunnels, it's all about potential disruption and the fact that it makes the line far more difficult to look after as access becomes substantially more limited. There's so many different factors at play here that it is much more difficult than building over a chunk of line in the countryside or whatever. Beyond that, there are issues like the collapse that happened when Tesco were building on top of that train line, imagine that happening when a train full of Nuclear Waste is travelling through, there's the potential to make a 9 square mile area of Central London a no-go zone for the next 10,000 years. The odds of it actually going wrong are very slim, but Network Rail are given the authority to say yes or no because they are the best qualified to do that job and you would think of all the places in all of the country, this is going to be one of the hardest to say yes to.
One of the main problems is that a fire in a tunnel would reach temperatures that would melt the containers of the nuclear waste.
 

tottenmal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
640
I know it's only wikipedia, and therefore potentially unreliable, but this article says differently:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_flask
I think the most important point that Phischy touched on, was that of access. Safety around nuclear waste is obviously important, but I think a lot of the perceived risks are perhaps overblown. For Network Rail, being able to schedule repairs and upgrades on their track is a very complicated and costly process, with any scheduled, let alone emergency work requiring lots of time and money, disrupting a very important artery into London.

Now you add a third party into the mix, and any scheduled weekend closures for example all have to work around there being a game at Stamford bridge. It's the little things like that, plus engineering decisions (how much access will Chelsea's design allow for equipment and repairs on the rails) that network rail will want to be a part of but the architect won't have really considered.
 

Roynie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
2,823
I think the most important point that Phischy touched on, was that of access. Safety around nuclear waste is obviously important, but I think a lot of the perceived risks are perhaps overblown. For Network Rail, being able to schedule repairs and upgrades on their track is a very complicated and costly process, with any scheduled, let alone emergency work requiring lots of time and money, disrupting a very important artery into London.

Now you add a third party into the mix, and any scheduled weekend closures for example all have to work around there being a game at Stamford bridge. It's the little things like that, plus engineering decisions (how much access will Chelsea's design allow for equipment and repairs on the rails) that network rail will want to be a part of but the architect won't have really considered.
Oh I know you are right, that sort of organisation involves bringing a lot of different elements togther even for simple jobs and, for what it's worth, I don't think Chelscum will get permission to build over the railway line next to the stadium.
 

Roynie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
2,823
They can withstand 800c temperatures. There was an article that said the temperatures in that tunnel could reach well over 1000c.

How reliable the article was i don't know.
I read a different one which said the temperature in a tunnel fire was less than 800c, but I don't know if it's right either!

I think we are both agreed though that the railway authority should not allow building over the line and that's what counts.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,626
I read a different one which said the temperature in a tunnel fire was less than 800c, but I don't know if it's right either!

I think we are both agreed though that the railway authority should not allow building over the line and that's what counts.
Even in the wiki page it says that the testing is flawed as temperatures go higher than 800c.

"However, critics[who?]consider the testing flawed for various reasons. The heat test is claimed to be considerably below that of theoretical worst-case fires in a tunnel"

We'll have to see what tfl has to say. But can't see residents of chelsea being too happy about it. Hopefully it takes a while for a resolution and we can be happily in our new stadium by then.
 

Cravenspurs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
2,864
When I see the Chelsea stadium I just picture masses of people running into those brick pillars and having massive log jams. So many traffic cones of sorts.
 

Roynie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
2,823
Even in the wiki page it says that the testing is flawed as temperatures go higher than 800c.

"However, critics[who?]consider the testing flawed for various reasons. The heat test is claimed to be considerably below that of theoretical worst-case fires in a tunnel"

We'll have to see what tfl has to say. But can't see residents of chelsea being too happy about it. Hopefully it takes a while for a resolution and we can be happily in our new stadium by then.
The temperature of the fire would obviously depend on what materials were involved and so could vary considerably. One thing is for sure, if a nuclear flask ruptured it could get to multiples of 800c! :eek: That said they haven't managed to break one yet!
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
9
Good lord that's bad, no wonder they originally released highly stylised, obscure renders. The massing of the roof is particularly horrendous, from the sharp lines of the brick piers and external elevations, to a random oval apex ring at the roof opening, what are they thinking?

Abramovich seems to want to create his own piece of Soviet Brutalism in London, and sadly he probably has enough money to pull it off.


reminds me of a potato peeler or cheese grater my mum used to have when i was growing up early 70's (or some sinister KGB premises )
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
I'm probably in a small minority here but I'd take Chelsea's brutalist volcano over our airport terminal any day.

We had these discussions elsewhere in general football, specifically around some of the french stadiums built recently (Lille, Lyon, Nice, Bordeaux, Marseille etc)

I'm really disappointed we didn't go for something with some architectural interest or integrity. Massive opportunity missed to create something that could be talked about around the world, googled by fans around the world etc.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
Mate used to live there.
When I was a kid in the seventies we had a family friend that lived really high up in the Barbican, it was like a different world to me, I'd spend hours just fucking about in the elevators and mooching about the whole estate, the interior was super cool as well, she had one of those futuristic tv's built into a white plastic ball and futuristic 70's furniture, it was like being in a Space 1999 pod.

 

soup

Fly Ride Electroglide
Joined
May 26, 2004
Messages
2,749
Love Trellick tower too:

Hehe, well, I used to live there!

Had a nice flat there for a couple of months before moving under it's shadow into St. Ervans Road. Really nice location, bang next to Portobello Road and when carnival came to town I had the best view in town.

Moved away though to Bayswater after having a bit of a run in with some local knife wielding hoodlums one night. All good fun.

I'll give myself a spam rating later.
 

HotspurSam

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2003
Messages
148
I'm probably in a small minority here but I'd take Chelsea's brutalist volcano over our airport terminal any day.

We had these discussions elsewhere in general football, specifically around some of the french stadiums built recently (Lille, Lyon, Nice, Bordeaux, Marseille etc)

I'm really disappointed we didn't go for something with some architectural interest or integrity. Massive opportunity missed to create something that could be talked about around the world, googled by fans around the world etc.

I doubt we would have had snythingblikevthst approved. The English Heritage and especially CABE were dead set against the designs of the first two submitted plans as they messed up the historic and architectural line of the High Rd conservation area, and not in keeping with a dense urban area.
The first submission didn't even make it to the planning committee, with its amphitheatre, and interactive lightpoles and no listed buildings. The old consented had its difficulties too from CABE who basically wanted a red brick box.
The present scheme adhered better to the needs of CABE (who are now defunct) with the line of the Hotel and escalator box giving the impression of a continued straight line to the High Rd, but even that caused consternation to the Council planners and so that has changed.
The more modern external designs would never have got thru planning because of the density of residential housing,mane the conservation area restriction. Besides the Allianz Arena with its changing colour wouldn't look good with Warmington House stuck out front - our H&S mob were dead set against the external screen as it would distract drivers and pedestrians crossing the road.
With all this to contend with, I think they have done a great job with the external design and the perforated cladding should look spectacular at night with the light escaping through the various sized perforations.
 

Phischy

The Spursy One
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
933
Top