By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Redevelopment at LR has been covered tons of times on here and is not possible for so many reasons, mahoosive costs being one of them.
"just buy all the houses in Ellerslie Road" has been mentioned so many times as if it was like buying a newspaper from a corner shop.
SA Road would probably be easier especially as it would house a lot of what we desperatly need to improve upon (catering/non-match day facilities, players/officials changing rooms, media centre, trophy room [ok, that's tongue-in-cheek] and so on but any new stand would probably be twice the current height then you have right of light etc from the flats in the White city estate.
3
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 13:13 - Apr 16 with 6394 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 13:16 - Apr 16 by BAWHoops
Assumed it was to do with the light in houses opposite.
Had only asked as opposed to actually giving the ground a lick of paint I wondered if clever architecture could squeeze and extra 5-10k into the place
It's a ground that held 28,000 before it was redeveloped and had stranding. Clever architecture could easily get it to 25,000 and would we ever need more? Don't think so. But seems out of the question. I assume the real estate is worth too much to rebuild and so a cheaper option being sort elsewhere, or one with more options. But personally would get some innovative architects back in and see what they can dream up.
A long time since I went there but from memory one difference between Selhurst and LR is that Selhurst is not so constricted by surrounding housing (there are roads on two sides). However, at one end any new development is restricted by Sainsburys.
Air hostess clique
0
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 13:31 - Apr 16 with 6266 views
Re-developing the ground isn't just about capacity. There's massive amounts of background work (as mentioned in my previous post) that would need to be included too and all that costs a lot of money.
South Africa Road is probably the only viable stand as it doesn't have houses/school backing onto it. it would need to be quite high and that's where the right of light issues comes in. We'd probably have to have traffic on the road blocked off for months to allow the work done too.
If, for example, we were able to re-develop the other three stands within their current footprint I'm pretty sure they'd each have a reduced capacity so the SA Road stand would have to be bigger to compensate which brings us back to rights of light issues.
I suspect the whole thing is so complex and would be so expensive it's a non-starter hence the need to look at places like Old Oak, Linford Christie stadium etc.and build from scratch.
3
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 13:50 - Apr 16 with 6185 views
The value of the real-estate at LR is why they will not re-develop. LR will be sold and developed into high-end residential similar to the BBC development. I imagine the Board will have some interest in such a development. Only a matter of time before that happens and very dependent on finding a new location. Not sure the current Board have the patience to wait on an option in W10 or 12, so do not be surprised if options along the M40 corridor towards Ruislip are being considered.
0
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:02 - Apr 16 with 6128 views
Logistically its simply not possible.... The club should do everything in its powers to get the Linford Christie site and build a replica of the Boa Vista Stadium. The only change should be seats in each corner of the stadium (angled towards the pitch).
1
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:09 - Apr 16 with 6104 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:02 - Apr 16 by Rs_Holy
Logistically its simply not possible.... The club should do everything in its powers to get the Linford Christie site and build a replica of the Boa Vista Stadium. The only change should be seats in each corner of the stadium (angled towards the pitch).
For more limited sites, can they do a Boa Constrictor Stadium?
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:02 - Apr 16 by Rs_Holy
Logistically its simply not possible.... The club should do everything in its powers to get the Linford Christie site and build a replica of the Boa Vista Stadium. The only change should be seats in each corner of the stadium (angled towards the pitch).
Preach it brother, preach it. That would be my blueprint for a new stadium with hospitality squeezed between the upper and lower stands, which could be closed for games/ events with expected sub 20k crowds and opened up as required for anything requiring more capacity. National games even.
The grass is always greener.
1
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:12 - Apr 16 with 6081 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:01 - Apr 16 by BostonR
The value of the real-estate at LR is why they will not re-develop. LR will be sold and developed into high-end residential similar to the BBC development. I imagine the Board will have some interest in such a development. Only a matter of time before that happens and very dependent on finding a new location. Not sure the current Board have the patience to wait on an option in W10 or 12, so do not be surprised if options along the M40 corridor towards Ruislip are being considered.
They're going for Linford Christie in a big way.
0
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:12 - Apr 16 with 6081 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:02 - Apr 16 by Rs_Holy
Logistically its simply not possible.... The club should do everything in its powers to get the Linford Christie site and build a replica of the Boa Vista Stadium. The only change should be seats in each corner of the stadium (angled towards the pitch).
Like that. Wouldn't it just be cheaper to sell Loftus Road and just bus us all there every couple of weeks?
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:16 - Apr 16 by bob566
was it hoos who said LR wasn't a viable option as it's making no money off other events.
It used to. McGuigans fight, the recent Grenfell concert I know it was for charity but it showed that LR could be used for other things.
That's one of several reasons.
By 'money off other events' he doesn't mean the big one off stuff on the pitch. He means that most stadiums have conference areas, restaurants, space that's used seven days a week. We don't even have anywhere to host our own POTY dinner. FFP makes it even more vital for a stadium to be producing some money for you and ours does the opposite, it costs more to run/police/upkeep than it brings in in ticket money.
The dreaded Green Code and health and safety regulations are changing and tightening all the time. Pinch points like the entrance to the Upper Loft from SAR mean that even if we could somehow increase capacity (with safe standing) we wouldn't be allowed to do it. We're putting 18,000 on a four and a half acre site. They'd consider double that a "tight site" for a stadium of that size if it was built now.
1
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:23 - Apr 16 with 6036 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 13:26 - Apr 16 by bosh67
It's a ground that held 28,000 before it was redeveloped and had stranding. Clever architecture could easily get it to 25,000 and would we ever need more? Don't think so. But seems out of the question. I assume the real estate is worth too much to rebuild and so a cheaper option being sort elsewhere, or one with more options. But personally would get some innovative architects back in and see what they can dream up.
"Clever architecture could easily get it to 25,000"
That wouldn't just be clever architecture Bosh, that would be genius architecture in squeezing nearly another 7000 seats onto basically the same footprint. As a general rule of thumb template you're talking of 2 x 7,500 capacity stands along the sides of the pitch and 2 x 5,000 capacity stands behind the goals.
As somebody else pointed out, H & S regs would mean larger concourses, exits etc. It's not physically possible. Had Wright bought the land behind the School End where the Jack Tizard school is 20 years ago, we'd have had a bit of wiggle room to expand but not now.
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:23 - Apr 16 by CamberleyR
"Clever architecture could easily get it to 25,000"
That wouldn't just be clever architecture Bosh, that would be genius architecture in squeezing nearly another 7000 seats onto basically the same footprint. As a general rule of thumb template you're talking of 2 x 7,500 capacity stands along the sides of the pitch and 2 x 5,000 capacity stands behind the goals.
As somebody else pointed out, H & S regs would mean larger concourses, exits etc. It's not physically possible. Had Wright bought the land behind the School End where the Jack Tizard school is 20 years ago, we'd have had a bit of wiggle room to expand but not now.
You could physically do it, putting a second tier on Ellerslie, taking the offices off the back of SAR and building out over the road, but you'd never ever get planning permission, because you couldn't safely get that many people in and out, and you can't leave the White City flats shrouded in permanent darkness.
0
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:27 - Apr 16 with 6020 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:01 - Apr 16 by BostonR
The value of the real-estate at LR is why they will not re-develop. LR will be sold and developed into high-end residential similar to the BBC development. I imagine the Board will have some interest in such a development. Only a matter of time before that happens and very dependent on finding a new location. Not sure the current Board have the patience to wait on an option in W10 or 12, so do not be surprised if options along the M40 corridor towards Ruislip are being considered.
"LR will be sold and developed into high-end residential similar to the BBC development."
High-end opposite White City Estate? No amount of clever marketing could convince me of that. London property really is bonkers.
0
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:30 - Apr 16 with 6015 views
Re-devloping Loftus Road on 14:12 - Apr 16 by Northernr
They're going for Linford Christie in a big way.
It's a very obvious option. I assume the Council own the site and enough of the adjacent space to make it a viable negotiation rather than working through multiple stakeholders? I would also assume that the Council will be looking for major investments (Section 106) from the Board in return for a deal.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
