New Stadium Details And Discussions

[Spursidol]

It sounds as if they have adopted a "construction management" procurement approach. That would be consistent with earlier statements and also with the already-let £49m structural contract.

Instead of appointing a general contractor, who procures all the specialist contracts at their own risk and adds (say) 10% "profit and attendance" to the lot, you appoint a firm to manage the project. They do the work in arranging the subcontracts, but the individual packages are contracted directly between the main employer (THFC's development company) and the specialist contractors. The construction manager gets paid a fee for services rendered, rather than a contract price for the whole building. The fee would probably include incentives related to out-turn price, quality and completion on schedule.

Advantages: it costs less and you retain better control over detail and quality than if you appoint a design-and-build contractor. Disadvantages: greater financial risk and a hell of a lot of work. Personal opinion: this will make it easier to produce a better building than a design-and-build contract.

Thanks David

Should we read anything into the timing of the appointment - almost 3 weeks before Harringey's planning meeting - perhaps that whilst there are still a few bits to be 'negotiated' with the planners, that we are expecting to get a reasonable amount consented to such that Mace can get going wit arranging a number of tenders and appointing various sub contactors ?

And even to make a point to Harringey - look we are ready to build the stadium, only thing left is the planning consent

 

[Roynie]

They've got one of their convenience stores just up the road from me. Always got a good deal on bargain booze if that's anything to go by.

Was going to add a similar comment until I saw yours. Must remember to look at their booze deals!

 

[thfc1973]

Thanks David

Should we read anything into the timing of the appointment - almost 3 weeks before Harringey's planning meeting - perhaps that whilst there are still a few bits to be 'negotiated' with the planners, that we are expecting to get a reasonable amount consented to such that Mace can get going wit arranging a number of tenders and appointing various sub contactors ?

And even to make a point to Harringey - look we are ready to build the stadium, only thing left is the planning consent

Its essential if you want to present a strong winnable case. That's the reason why we also got the NFL letter and the rest to state their public support for us, to ensure we are going in with all the big boys behind us supporting this transformation project - to make it harder to reject.

 

[Hoopspur]

I'm glad the club is putting some thought into pre-post match attractions, amazed me when I went into the new Wembley that it was not setup to take visitors early and keep them late, instead just felt bland.

I think football has really missed a trick with this - the match should not be only thing supporters should come for, there should be other amenities in and around the stadium for them to enjoy.

Having a local presence in the stadium is also an excellent idea, would be quite a difference to the usual generic/crap food outlets

Sorry, just going through this as it's been a few weeks since I've visited...

It could also be a good place to showcase relatively new bands on stages set up before the games?

 

[Spursidol]

New Spurs Stadium‏@NewSpursStadium 4m4 minutes ago
UEFA write to give their support to the new Spurs stadium and suggest it could be a major UEFA club final venue. pic.twitter.com/aaYCu6bDX0

Really like the para about UEFA considering the stadium as a potential place to hold a CL or EL final match - think it should have been further up the letter to give a bigger impact - as Harringey should see more visitors and significant publicity across Europe for Harringey in a way that Harringey could only dream of

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Guess this will probably delay things...?

New Spurs Stadium ‏@NewSpursStadium 13m13 minutes ago
Heritage organisations will demand a public inquiry&will consider a judicial review if THFC are allowed to demolish locally listed buildings

 

[Spursidol]

Guess this will probably delay things...?

New Spurs Stadium ‏@NewSpursStadium 13m13 minutes ago
Heritage organisations will demand a public inquiry&will consider a judicial review if THFC are allowed to demolish locally listed buildings

As I understand it, the fate of locally listed buildings are within the scope of Harringey Council to decide. They've already suggested moving the facades of these, so if Spurs do that I think the Heritage organisations will not have too much to contest.

Again not a lawyer but think a judicial review will only consider whether Harringey have followed a proper procedure and ensure that Harringey's decision was within its power - it would not consider the merits of Harringey's decision, only the process.

So a judicial review not likely to kill too much time.

Don't know anything about public enquiries - but think government or Mayor would need to appoint one if they were so minded

 

[davidmatzdorf]

The UEFA letter has obviously been drafted by THFC, after some negotiations about the "UEFA final venue", to add this lucrative inducement for the council and the local community.

@Spursidol is right to say that a judicial review could only consider whether the procedure was properly applied, not the merits of demolishing the buildings, but I don't agree that it would necessarily be a quick process. There are plenty of solicitors out there who specialise in fine bits of textual analysis to come up with new and arcane ways to claim that procedures were defective, as a screen for objections to the merits of the planning consent.

I'm not sure that they can "demand a public enquiry", or rather on what grounds they would insist upon one. Generally a public enquiry is associated with a planning appeal and you can only appeal a refusal, not an approval. Perhaps there are ways to do this at Mayor or Secretary of State level - I don't know.

What it does show is that this issue, as I predicted when the current planning application was submitted, is going to cause difficulty and delay.

 

[Deeyal]

What it does show is that this issue, as I predicted when the current planning application was submitted, is going to cause difficulty and delay.

 

[camaj]

What makes you think it's going to cause delay? It might take time to resolve but it's not a key part of the build, the club can continue with the old plans, until they come to a resolution. The new plans might be agreed but without these buildings inclusion, and we can take our time fighting that if we wish but ultimately it doesn't effect the stadium itself.

 

[gregga]

The UEFA letter has obviously been drafted by THFC, after some negotiations about the "UEFA final venue", to add this lucrative inducement for the council and the local community.

@Spursidol is right to say that a judicial review could only consider whether the procedure was properly applied, not the merits of demolishing the buildings, but I don't agree that it would necessarily be a quick process. There are plenty of solicitors out there who specialise in fine bits of textual analysis to come up with new and arcane ways to claim that procedures were defective, as a screen for objections to the merits of the planning consent.

I'm not sure that they can "demand a public enquiry", or rather on what grounds they would insist upon one. Generally a public enquiry is associated with a planning appeal and you can only appeal a refusal, not an approval. Perhaps there are ways to do this at Mayor or Secretary of State level - I don't know.

What it does show is that this issue, as I predicted when the current planning application was submitted, is going to cause difficulty and delay.

As well as procedural irregularities / ultra vires decisions, applications for judicial review can be brought on the basis of irrationality - i.e. the decision by the public body was so unreasonable that no reasonable body could have come to it. It's high bar but I imagine could form the basis of a challenge here, so let's hope no claim is brought!

 

[spursfan77]

What's the chance of these listed buildings also catching fire?

 

[davidmatzdorf]

What makes you think it's going to cause delay? It might take time to resolve but it's not a key part of the build, the club can continue with the old plans, until they come to a resolution. The new plans might be agreed but without these buildings inclusion, and we can take our time fighting that if we wish but ultimately it doesn't effect the stadium itself.

As well as there being a limit to the amount of work that can be done under one set of plans that will be suitable for a revised design, there will be a limit to the value of contractual commitments that THFC will be willing, or even able under rules of proper financial conduct, to incur 'at risk', i.e., with no valid planning consent. The lenders may also have something to say about the level of exposure.

I don't think work will grind to a halt on 9 Dec if there is not a favourable decision on 8 Dec, but they won't be able to hammer on with it, full-tilt.

The important specific point, the one that makes this 'a key part of the build', is that the revised transport assessment, which is the key to the increased capacity, depends on the pavement being widened, which in turn depends on the removal of the locally listed buildings.

 

[Hoops]

As well as there being a limit to the amount of work that can be done under one set of plans that will be suitable for a revised design, there will be a limit to the value of contractual commitments that THFC will be willing, or even able under rules of proper financial conduct, to incur 'at risk', i.e., with no valid planning consent. The lenders may also have something to say about the level of exposure.

I don't think work will grind to a halt on 9 Dec if there is not a favourable decision on 8 Dec, but they won't be able to hammer on with it, full-tilt.

The important specific point, the one that makes this 'a key part of the build', is that the revised transport assessment, which is the key to the increased capacity, depends on the pavement being widened, which in turn depends on the removal of the locally listed buildings.

Cant believe the agro over some buildings that nobody cared about until we decided to knock them down.

 

[ryantegan]

Ive got to be honest. I find the listed buildings protection in this country laughable.

If its old and haggied, get it gone. Just like we did to aunty Eileen

 

[mk_spur]

wonder how much that letter cost.

 

[worcestersauce]

As well as procedural irregularities / ultra vires decisions, applications for judicial review can be brought on the basis of irrationality - i.e. the decision by the public body was so unreasonable that no reasonable body could have come to it. It's high bar but I imagine could form the basis of a challenge here, so let's hope no claim is brought!

And would anybody reasonably conclude that this decision is so unresonable that no reasonable body could have come to it? I don't believe that anyone could reasonably conclude that.

 

[fridgemagnet]

Cant believe the agro over some buildings that nobody cared about until we decided to knock them down.

I'm kind of the same onions TBH, if EH were that worried about old buildings they would stump up some funds to stop them becoming decrepit and smelling of tramps piss and therefore people wanting to knock them down/turn them into/yuppie apartments or Irish theme pubs.

 

[greaves]

Careful. That's a listed door you're banging your head against...

 

[davidmatzdorf]

I'm kind of the same onions TBH, if EH were that worried about old buildings they would stump up some funds to stop them becoming decrepit and smelling of tramps piss and therefore people wanting to knock them down/turn them into/yuppie apartments or Irish theme pubs.

With what funding stream are they supposed to do that? Try to familiarise yourself with the system before criticising it so airily.

I think EH are largely full of shit, that they fetishise mediocre historical buildings at the expense of important developments and that they often permit buildings to be listed on political grounds, instead of architectural grounds, which ought not to be their remit, but they don't have funding to save buildings, repair them or protect them from dilapidation, they just the have power to protect them from demolition.

And, of course, the government is restricting their powers and cutting their funding, because they interfere with the unfettered greed of the government's big-developer supporters.