New Stadium Details And Discussions

[gregga]

Aside from the fact we won the cpo, we have a £50m contract for the works to start and HSBC will cover us with a £350m bridging loan if needed. You are correct.

We didn't "win" the CPO - the council did. Clearly the compulsory transfer will take some time to go through - why else would we state that we're still looking to conclude a private agreement with the Josifs? Also, as and when a main contractor is announced for the stadium it will be announced publicly, and there is no way in hell Levy is going to finance the stadium using a bridging loan. Can you imagine the interest on that?!

Haha OK. The land will be ours by summer, if the design is complete or even mostly complete (which it should be by now) onboarding a contractor between now and November is more than feasible and how do you know the finance isn't in place?

The fact that we had to mention a bridging loan in the hearing last month suggests to me that proper finance isn't in place yet. I imagine finance is going to come from a variety of sources, of which a naming rights deal will be key. Once that deal is properly in place it is sure to be announced publicly (hopefully that's what Grey Fox's ITK is alluding to) - it's good publicity for the sponsor if anything.

I'm not saying the the ground isn't going to be built, but I think people are getting a bit carried away with how advanced things are. To suggest that there will be a need to move out of WHL in November is - to me at least - not credible.

 

[Spursidol]

We didn't "win" the CPO - the council did. Clearly the compulsory transfer will take some time to go through - why else would we state that we're still looking to conclude a private agreement with the Josifs? Also, as and when a main contractor is announced for the stadium it will be announced publicly, and there is no way in hell Levy is going to finance the stadium using a bridging loan. Can you imagine the interest on that?!

Earlier in the thread is posted a copy of the General Vesting notice which transfers title of the property to Harringey in 3 months from early March. Thereafter Harringey will transfer the property to Spurs.

Its Archway who have said that they hope to reach an agreement on the compensatiuon they will be paid, and its probably in both parties interests. But this is no longer going to affect the progress of the stadium. Additionally the compensation will now be 'market value' based so the amount being argued about can only be less than a £1m.

Also, as and when a main contractor is announced for the stadium it will be announced publicly, and there is no way in hell Levy is going to finance the stadium using a bridging loan. Can you imagine the interest on that?!

The fact that we had to mention a bridging loan in the hearing last month suggests to me that proper finance isn't in place yet. I imagine finance is going to come from a variety of sources, of which a naming rights deal will be key. Once that deal is properly in place it is sure to be announced publicly (hopefully that's what Grey Fox's ITK is alluding to) - it's good publicity for the sponsor if anything.

I'm not saying the the ground isn't going to be built, but I think people are getting a bit carried away with how advanced things are. To suggest that there will be a need to move out of WHL in November is - to me at least - not credible.

There is no way that a contract for naming rights or indeed full bank finance would be signed by the supplier of finance before all the land was in the ownership of Spurs.

That is not to say that there have not been substantial discussions with various parties, and that it maybe just a question of documenting it and signing it, which could be done in a month or so - but equally the discussions may take longer to finalise.

In the court case Spurs were able to show that they had bridging finance in place so that Archway's claim that the stadium could not be financed was shown to be incorrect. It was never meant to be the final financing.

Meanwhile work on the stadium is progressing under a contract for £50m financed by Spurs own resources - showing confidence that the remaining finance is in the course of finalisation..

 

[Bobbins]

I may have dreamt it but i'm sure i read Levy went shopping for steel and stuff when the arse crashed out of the economy and it was available cheaper.

He was down Screwfix in his Transit with his catalogue out the moment the BBC started showing bankers packing their stuff up into cardboard boxes.

 

[gregga]

Earlier in the thread is posted a copy of the General Vesting notice which transfers title of the property to Harringey in 3 months from early March. Thereafter Harringey will transfer the property to Spurs.

Its Archway who have said that they hope to reach an agreement on the compensatiuon they will be paid, and its probably in both parties interests. But this is no longer going to affect the progress of the stadium. Additionally the compensation will now be 'market value' based so the amount being argued about can only be less than a £1m.



There is no way that a contract for naming rights or indeed full bank finance would be signed by the supplier of finance before all the land was in the ownership of Spurs.

That is not to say that there have not been substantial discussions with various parties, and that it maybe just a question of documenting it and signing it, which could be done in a month or so - but equally the discussions may take longer to finalise.

In the court case Spurs were able to show that they had bridging finance in place so that Archway's claim that the stadium could not be financed was shown to be incorrect. It was never meant to be the final financing.

Meanwhile work on the stadium is progressing under a contract for £50m financed by Spurs own resources - showing confidence that the remaining finance is in the course of finalisation..

All I'm saying is that I don't believe things will move so quickly that we will need to move out in November.

As you say, not having all the land has held up key things, like finance, sponsor, main contractor etc.. Clearly we have some sort of contract in place with a construction company, as the land to the north of WHL wouldn't have cleared itself, and more will have to be done in that regard once the Archway land is acquired, presumably by the same contractor.

I hope that things can move quickly, but even if you or I were looking to have a house knocked down and rebuilt, getting the right contractor in place would take a lot of time - months in fact!

There are many moving parts in this whole project - as made clear in all the press coverage that surrounded the wider regeneration of North Tottenham, including the High Road West redevelopment (which is clearly dependent on Spurs staying in the area, something which itself is dependent on the new stadium going ahead) and us looking for government support in this regard - and I don't think Levy is ready to push the button just yet. As we all know he is a very hard negotiator, and doesn't get deals done quickly.

 

[Lilbaz]

All I'm saying is that I don't believe things will move so quickly that we will need to move out in November.

As you say, not having all the land has held up key things, like finance, sponsor, main contractor etc.. Clearly we have some sort of contract in place with a construction company, as the land to the north of WHL wouldn't have cleared itself, and more will have to be done in that regard once the Archway land is acquired, presumably by the same contractor.

I hope that things can move quickly, but even if you or I were looking to have a house knocked down and rebuilt, getting the right contractor in place would take a lot of time - months in fact!

There are many moving parts in this whole project - as made clear in all the press coverage that surrounded the wider regeneration of North Tottenham, including the High Road West redevelopment (which is clearly dependent on Spurs staying in the area, something which itself is dependent on the new stadium going ahead) and us looking for government support in this regard - and I don't think Levy is ready to push the button just yet. As we all know he is a very hard negotiator, and doesn't get deals done quickly.

You're doubtful we will move out in November. That's fair enough so am I and I'm sure most of us on here (no offence Houds, not doubting your word). Everything might not be in place yet. But we have enough to be getting on with. The stadium is a go.

http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk...l_Club_agree_contract_deal_for_stadium_build/

 

[acky99]

How ever we look at it, with the eavesdropping on phone calls and second guessing, we now know that its all systems go for a new Stadium, that will be ready within 3/4 years COYS.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

All I'm saying is that I don't believe things will move so quickly that we will need to move out in November.

I think that's right, but not for any of the reasons you have provided.

As you say, not having all the land has held up key things, like finance, sponsor, main contractor etc. Clearly we have some sort of contract in place with a construction company, as the land to the north of WHL wouldn't have cleared itself, and more will have to be done in that regard once the Archway land is acquired, presumably by the same contractor.

I hope that things can move quickly, but even if you or I were looking to have a house knocked down and rebuilt, getting the right contractor in place would take a lot of time - months in fact!

There are many moving parts in this whole project - as made clear in all the press coverage that surrounded the wider regeneration of North Tottenham, including the High Road West redevelopment (which is clearly dependent on Spurs staying in the area, something which itself is dependent on the new stadium going ahead) and us looking for government support in this regard - and I don't think Levy is ready to push the button just yet. As we all know he is a very hard negotiator, and doesn't get deals done quickly.

I'm guessing that you don't live in London and don't actually visit Tottenham. But you also haven't read the thread. I've not only read the thread, I've also read the summary of the contract on a construction industry website.

The contract is for the construction of the foundations and the main superstructure. Now that the CPO issue has been resolved and the break clause in the contract has fallen away, the club is committed to erecting the main structural frame of the new stadium. This isn't preliminary clearance works, this is the bones of the building itself.

It seems that THFC is not necessarily going to procure this contract by appointing a single main contractor - they may decide to finish the job with a single contractor, or they may let separate contracts for the cladding, for the fitting-out, for the external works and landscaping, etc., etc.

Doing it that way incurs more administrative complexity and comes with defects-liability issues and other additional risks, but it enables them to build what they have funding for at the present time - it enables them to get on with it, despite the fact that everything is not yet nailed down. It's a sign that THFC is eager and keen to build it and is finding ways to do so that increase the risk to the club, just so they can get on with it a bit faster [Knob, are you listening?].

The main point here is that the stadium is being built - right now. Not demolition and clearance. The stadium.

 

[shelfmonkey]

I can atest to this too, there's provisions in almost all new developments in the suburb area i live in (40 mins north on a train from Liverpool St) for social housing which is set aside from inner city london (mostly hackney council) relocation.

Apparently Bobbins thinks my post was 'creative', fuck knows how he came to that conclusion!

 

[L-man]

From the financial results. I assume this means archway are all gone by June 5th and it's just a case of waiting to build?

Haringey Council has now started the legal CPO process that will culminate with the land price being determined by the Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal. On 6 March 2015 the Council published and served a Notice of Intention to execute a General Vesting Declaration in respect of the CPO land (which includes the Archway land). Service of this notice allows Haringey Council to execute a General Vesting Declaration from 7 May 2015. This will allow the Council to take possession of all remaining parcels of land under the CPO from 5 June 2015.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

From the financial results. I assume this means archway are all gone by June 5th and it's just a case of waiting to build?

Pleased to see that this confirms the time scale in my post of a few days ago. There's still a possibility that ASM might come to a deal to stay longer, but that would only happen if it is to the benefit of all parties.

As I said above, we aren't waiting to build, we're already building on the northern end of the site.

 

[worcestersauce]

Pleased to see that this confirms the time scale in my post of a few days ago. There's still a possibility that ASM might come to a deal to stay longer, but that would only happen if it is to the benefit of all parties.

As I said above, we aren't waiting to build, we're already building on the northern end of the site.

In which case, as I've said before, I really can't see why the club would accept any deal that doesn't get them off ASAP, it just doesn't make sense to me.
I have never doubted that we are building the new stadium, I don't know why anybody would, and I've always felt that we've been moving forward continually but I have to admit that this week is the first time I've allowed myself to get excited, it really is within touching distance now, the home straight, a long run in maybe but the home straight nevertheless.

 

[Wine Gum]

Some new planning docs have been issued for the Southern Development.

http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=280475

Cannot see anything new on a first glance. Just further information about the existing plans.

 

[Lilbaz]

In which case, as I've said before, I really can't see why the club would accept any deal that doesn't get them off ASAP, it just doesn't make sense to me.
I have never doubted that we are building the new stadium, I don't know why anybody would, and I've always felt that we've been moving forward continually but I have to admit that this week is the first time I've allowed myself to get excited, it really is within touching distance now, the home straight, a long run in maybe but the home straight nevertheless.

It might be Haringeys decision though. They will be doing a few more of these in the future possibly for Tottenham Way and other sites. They cannot be seen to be to heavy handed as they still need to be elected in future. I think it will move quickly though.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

So can we do whatever the fuck we want from the 5th June?

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Some new planning docs have been issued for the Southern Development.

http://www.planningservices.haringey.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=280475

Cannot see anything new on a first glance. Just further information about the existing plans.

I had a look at the drawings and a read through the planning statement. The outline planning consent for the Southern Development required, as a condition of consent, that details including the scale, appearance and landscaping should be submitted by 28 March 2015. This application covers the scale.

it looks like a thoroughly uninspiring pile of standard-issue 1 bedroom flats in four blocks. Meh.

 

[Bobbins]

Apparently Bobbins thinks my post was 'creative', fuck knows how he came to that conclusion!

Because 'the powers that be' have little to nothing to do with the price of property in central London - it's a natural effect of the city itself, is mostly down to foreign private investment, has been happening for years, and will continue to happen. There are not secret lizardmen or Eton toffs wearing monocles and top hats dividing up slices of London and pushing poor people out of them.

To think so is creative thinking (which is a positive rep, btw).

 

[Graysonti]

Because 'the powers that be' have little to nothing to do with the price of property in central London - it's a natural effect of the city itself, is mostly down to foreign private investment, has been happening for years, and will continue to happen. There are not secret lizardmen or Eton toffs wearing monocles and top hats dividing up slices of London and pushing poor people out of them.

To think so is creative thinking (which is a positive rep, btw).

This is the truth unfortunately

 

[longtimespur]

This is the truth unfortunately

Aren't the new money Chinese reported as buying large amounts of property in London as well as the sheiks and it seems et al.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Because 'the powers that be' have little to nothing to do with the price of property in central London - it's a natural effect of the city itself, is mostly down to foreign private investment, has been happening for years, and will continue to happen. There are not secret lizardmen or Eton toffs wearing monocles and top hats dividing up slices of London and pushing poor people out of them.

I wish you were right, but you aren't. There are political policies, implemented by the Mayor and by central government, which are having the direct and often intentional effect of encouraging "foreign private investment" to build flats for the very rich, whilst reducing their obligations to provide affordable housing. This created another bubble in land prices last year.

Along with other policy-related factors, such as the "bedroom tax" and the ceiling on benefits, the concentration of development on flats for the very rich is causing local authorities to export poor people to outer London and the suburbs, where rents and property values are not quite so inflated.

There is also an effect from the perverse planning system, which makes it impossible to develop smoothly or quickly. Otherwise well-informed housing campaigners often accuse developers of land-banking sites and restricting supply in order to inflate values. Prior to the latest boom, there was some justification for this, but right now developers would be building like mad, except that their schemes are perpetually stuck in the planning system, sometimes for years of successive redesigns and renegotiations.

It isn't just the unfettered capitalist marketplace that is causing a shortage of housing. Government policies designed to unfetter that market and to concentrate development on the upper end of the market, combined with policies that have the effect of delaying supply, all conspire to drag upwards the values of even modest housing.

Under the previous Mayor, all new housing developments in London had to include 50% affordable housing and there was grant support to subsidise its provision, which meant that developers could get a decent amount of money from housing associations for the product. Developers resented it, but there were few loopholes and they generally went along with it. Development wasn't impeded by these requirements - the value of development land adjusts itself to accommodate changes in policy.

Now developers are required to provide a "flexible" amount of affordable housing, which generally means 30% or less, there is no more grant support, which means that developers receive much less for the affordable flats, and there is a raft of loopholes that enable developers to avoid providing any affordable housing at all.

None of that is the market. It's political policy and it's intentional: designed to drive poor people out of areas with rising property values. They're trying to turn London into Paris. Bad idea.

 

[Bobbins]

None of that is the market. It's political policy and it's intentional: designed to drive poor people out of areas with rising property values. They're trying to turn London into Paris. Bad idea.

I'm aware of everything you mention, David, I work in social housing in London (for a limited number of months a year).

I just don't agree that things like the benefits cap and the remove of the spare room subsidy are ideological ideas designed to drive the poor out of central London. I think they're designed to stop giving people who don't work tens of thousands of pounds in rent every year, which ultimately ends up in the hands of private landlords, because it's simply morally wrong.

A side effect of this is that the poor can no longer afford to live in townhouses in Kensington (etc). I honestly don't see this as a problem.

The counter to this is that in order to maintain a balance of society in London's most affluent areas, the taxpayer should be willing to fund individual families to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds a year, purely to support an ideological definition of what a community should look like.

I would like to see a social housing or affordable housing requirement attached to builds as under Livingstone, but doesn't London already have the highest concentration of social housing of any city in the country? Doesn't it already have some of the poorest communities in the country? This idea that there will soon be no poor people living in London is a myth. The very central/fashionable/already expensive areas are becoming exclusive zones, yes, but most of them have been like that for years. But Arab and Russian billionaires are not buying 1 bed flats in Southwark. Who knows, perhaps in another 50 years they will be.