Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

All you need to know about West Ham United FC's potential move to Stratford.

Moderators: Romford, Rio, Gnome, Northern Paulo, Lost Hammer, bonehead, chalks, goes2eleven, Alf Garnett's (Ex) Missus, bristolhammerfc, Wheels, sicknote

Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby paulhs1 on Fri May 11, 2012 2:42 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympi ... Games.html

A decision over the future of the Olympic Stadium could be delayed until after the Games following Boris Johnson’s moves to replace the chairman of the body that will make the call.

The recently reelected London mayor has appointed Daniel Moylan, a Conservative councillor, as chairman of the London Legacy Development Corporation.

The move is likely to see Baroness Margaret Ford, the chairman since its inception, leave in June, before her expected departure in September.

Moylan’s appointment is understood to have come as a surprise to the board, and Ford was informed by Johnson only on Tuesday.

The change in leadership could further delay a decision over the stadium.

The Daily Telegraph revealed this week that the May 21 deadline for a decision over West Ham’s tenancy was likely to be missed.
User avatar
paulhs1
 
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:32 pm
Location: Just north of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby e1hammer on Fri May 11, 2012 8:57 pm

He's a class act....

Image
User avatar
e1hammer
 
Posts: 1216
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:47 pm
Location: drinking tea with the taste of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby the pink palermo on Sat May 12, 2012 4:41 pm

If the Telegraph story is accurate , this could be hugely significant .

Someone is clearly asking why the Taxpayer is being asked to fund something that will effectively be given away , all to appease British Athletics .

To maximise value for the taxpayer , they need someone to buy the site .

Have Spurs actually spent any money on their development yet ?

Have we actually totally ruled out a groundshare ?

I've asked it before ,but why would Spurs pay £500m to build a new stadium , when they could pay less than half as much redeveloping the OS , with us as tennants ?
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27153
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby paulhs1 on Sat May 12, 2012 4:48 pm

What about the committement to the 2017 WAC pinky or do you think a possibility will be to demolish the stadium shortly after that event?
User avatar
paulhs1
 
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:32 pm
Location: Just north of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Rocketron on Sat May 12, 2012 5:20 pm

[quote="the pink palermo"]If the Telegraph story is accurate , this could be hugely significant .

Someone is clearly asking why the Taxpayer is being asked to fund something that will effectively be given away , all to appease British Athletics .

To maximise value for the taxpayer , they need someone to buy the site .

Have Spurs actually spent any money on their development yet ?

Have we actually totally ruled out a groundshare ?

I've asked it before ,but why would Spurs pay £500m to build a new stadium , when they could pay less than half as much redeveloping the OS , with us as tennants ?[/quote]
C U Next Tuesday, Pinky. :wink:
User avatar
Rocketron
 
Posts: 8341
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 7:45 pm
Location: Play it again, Sam

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby HamburgHammer on Sat May 12, 2012 5:28 pm

When do we reach the point where the two David's say: "We've had enough of this crap, we're sick of the goalposts being shifted time and time again. let's forget about it, we'll do up Upton Park instead!" This has gone beyond the ridiculous state now, so let's walk away and be done with it.

I'm sure Leyton Orient are still interested. Maybe then we can sue Hearn and Orient for trying to put our club out of business with their 5000 per game average attendance at the OS... :)
Last edited by HamburgHammer on Wed May 23, 2012 9:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
HamburgHammer
 
Posts: 2849
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby the pink palermo on Sat May 12, 2012 6:14 pm

paulhs1 wrote:What about the committement to the 2017 WAC pinky or do you think a possibility will be to demolish the stadium shortly after that event?


I don't think the Government would flinch at breaking out of that deal - we've done it before .

I posted a long, long time ago that I thought they would try and delay any real decision until after the Olympics - once they have been held , all bets are off imo .

FIFA humiliated the future King of England and out Prime Minister , our politicians won't hesitate to stick to fingers up to all and sundry once the Olympics have been held .

For sale : A prime site in East London with excellent transport links , a huge catchment area , a shopping centre next door , an international airport less than 10 minutes away..........

And people believe the taxpayer should not only effectively give it away , but pay for the priviledge of doing so ?

Is that really the best deal for the country ? Seriously ?
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27153
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby StiffUpper on Sat May 12, 2012 9:43 pm

My first thought was that this means a major change to the stadium is planned, one they don't want publicised worldwide during the games. I presumed this would be something to our advantage.

Now PP has reawakened a vast reserve of Spurs related anxiety - I had convinced myself they were out of it.

I do hope they have blotted their copybook too much to be involved.

PP: If you don't stop your well reasoned and expressed pessimism I shall set you to 'FOE' for the sake of my sanity. Until you're proven right anyway.
User avatar
StiffUpper
 
Posts: 1637
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 10:41 pm
Location: Billericay

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby paulhs1 on Sat May 12, 2012 11:07 pm

the pink palermo wrote:For sale : A prime site in East London with excellent transport links , a huge catchment area , a shopping centre next door , an international airport less than 10 minutes away..........

If you take into account that throughout this whole process, the main goal of the OPLC and the government was to have an anchor tenant in place before the start of the Olympics, so as to allow enough time for the stadium to re-open for summer 2014, then you have to ask why they have so nonchalantly delayed the whole process and only two weeks before the final decision is due to be made, by taking Baroness Ford out of the process. And all of which less than a week after Boris is re elected for a new term. Are they seriously thinking about telling the UKA to do one?!

With the possibility of Hearn taking legal action and bringing about another judicial review as well as the lack of any other viable anchor tenant bidding ,perhaps Boris and the government are starting to wonder if keeping Stratford as an athletics stadium is worth all the grief for a few million per year, an event on 2017 which will not really do much for the economy and £95m coversion costs!

Surely it would make more sense to just sell the land and if so why only for sports?

The government have recently been putting a big emphasis on construction, in March they launched the Newbuy scheme and it’s commonly known that the government want more construction jobs to help push up GDP. In addition, the (Labour)mayor of Newham only last month complained that there was not enough social housing in the borough and was trying to ship people out to Stoke! Add in the warm up track and the surrounding area and all of a sudden you have a big patch of land which may only fetch a few hundred million but for the government it’s not just about that, it will be the jobs created, the additional housing that’s required and more importantly some much needed good PR at a time of austerity.

Spurs may not be out of it, but this announcement could potentially change the whole process!
User avatar
paulhs1
 
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:32 pm
Location: Just north of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby IronworksDave on Sun May 13, 2012 1:56 am

If West Ham or anyone else are appointed anchor tenants there is a cost to the council/government of some 110m in changes to the stadium, if it is sold or leased to Spurs or AEG the cost is nil (and indeed Spurs or AEG could pay 200m) so if you were in charge which option would you choose? Is an athletics event in 2017 really worth 300m?
IronworksDave
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 3:25 am

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Hammer110 on Sun May 13, 2012 9:11 am

I think it's nonsense to suggest the government are going to backtrack on the 2017 athletics championship, bring spurs back into the equation, just becuse Boris has changed the Chair of the board.

In fact:

guardian.co.uk, Friday 11 May 2012 16.12 wrote:The Olympic South Plaza, including the stadium and ArcelorMittal Orbit sculpture, will be open by Easter 2014, it was announced. Photograph: Tim Hales/AP
The Olympic Park will begin reopening to the public exactly one year after the London 2012 opening ceremony under plans unveiled by the London mayor, Boris Johnson.

Margaret Ford, the outgoing chair of the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC), said the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park would be the capital's version of New York's Central Park.

"It will be a local park but also a London park that will be a magnet and a destination," she said. "It will do both and be all the better for that."

The LLDC, the new vehicle in charge of redeveloping the Stratford park after the Games, said the so-called North Park – a river valley next to the A12 – would reopen on 27 July 2013.

It promised that the entire 230-hectare (560-acre) park – including the more urban 50-hectare South Plaza that includes the stadium, aquatics centre and ArcelorMittal Orbit sculpture – would be open by Easter 2014.

Ford said it was important to get part of the park open as quickly as possible.

"The fact the handball arena, the velodrome, all of the green spaces will be open then is great. To have replanted all of that, done the roads, the bridges, taken all of the Olympic overlay off within a year is fantastic. We thought it would be nice to get people in for the summer of 2013."

The handball venue will become a 7,500-capacity multipurpose arena after the Games, and Ford said concerts and events would begin immediately in July 2013.

Ford said the entire park would be finished by spring 2014 apart from the five neighbourhoods of housing that will be built in stages over the next 20 years.

She said the convoluted process of finding a legacy tenant for the stadium, beset by legal wrangling and controversy, was still on track to be completed by the end of May. Tense negotiations continue with West Ham to be the main tenant.

"The one thing that you have to have when you're selling a big public asset is patience. The world and his wife can review you, question you and so on. The key thing is to know that you will get to a good outcome. And we will, I've no doubt about that."

Following his re-election, Johnson decided to bring forward Ford's departure, replacing her with the Conservative councillor Daniel Moylan. She was due to leave after the Games, but said she agreed with the mayor's decision.
User avatar
Hammer110
 
Posts: 2482
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Looking forward to the new season, new league, new challenges, bring it on. 父 父

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby IronMaiden123 on Sun May 13, 2012 10:31 am

Seems that some of you guys are completely deluded about Athletics place in all this.

The Government made an absolute commitment to holding the Athletics World Championships at the OS in 2017. The history of bringing WC Athletics to Britain is fraught. Picketts Lock, Wembley, broken promises etc. It only happened this time because of total Government commitment, the fact that the stadium was already built and the IAAF wanted to reinforce and protect the athletics legacy of the OS. The moment the IAAF voted for London the whole game changed.

Now UKA will have a 99 year lease, they will use the stadium for their 20 days/events a summer, they will throw hammers, shots, discuses and javelins all over the pitch, they will not allow heavy structures (such as retractable seating, temporary stands) to place load on the precious track and run-up areas. For the time being they have the whip hand.

It may well be that UKA hope WHU or the Legacy company will offer them a large sum of money to f*** off post 2017, but in the meanwhile they call the shots.

With all this in mind it seems more likely that the change in Legacy Board Chairman will coincidentally involve dropping the plan to spend large sums on the stadium and is bad news for those supporting the move to the OS.
IronMaiden123
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:49 am

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Hammer110 on Sun May 13, 2012 1:14 pm

Don't know where you have been mate but UKA has always been a factor, nothing has changed, they have no more sway than they did before, because they cant afford the O/S in it's current or reduced to 25,000 seats form and need other tenants to pay a substantial proportion of the costs, its the prospective tenants that hold all the aces!

And according to Margaret Ford there is no delay, we will know the outcome at the end of the month.
User avatar
Hammer110
 
Posts: 2482
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Looking forward to the new season, new league, new challenges, bring it on. 父 父

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby the pink palermo on Sun May 13, 2012 6:46 pm

Hammer110 wrote:I think it's nonsense to suggest the government are going to backtrack on the 2017 athletics championship, bring spurs back into the equation, just becuse Boris has changed the Chair of the board.

Well, I for one, think there may be moves afoot
Hammer110 wrote:Don't know where you have been mate but UKA has always been a factor, nothing has changed, they have no more sway than they did before, because they cant afford the O/S in it's current or reduced to 25,000 seats form and need other tenants to pay a substantial proportion of the costs, its the prospective tenants that hold all the aces!

And according to Margaret Ford there is no delay, we will know the outcome at the end of the month.


Well she's no longer in the driving seat is she ?

And, young Danny chose to write a few interesting words in the Spuds matchday programme today which read to my eyes suspiciously like a negotiating ploy being laid out .

"With a commitment to invest in the area around the stadium from the Mayor and Haringey council, an investment of some £90m in land and planning by the club and with planning applications granted, we are now pushing ahead with what is widely acknowledged to be the single most important development capable of delivering social change in the area – an iconic new stadium at the heart of a true sport-led regeneration scheme, delivering new homes, shops, restaurants, jobs and opportunities," Levy said. "The scale of demolition around the stadium should leave no one in any doubt as to our intent to forge ahead with this project and we shall devote our full attention and energies to it."

Subtle as a brick ..........
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27153
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Sun May 13, 2012 8:26 pm

the pink palermo wrote: quote="Hammer110"I think it's nonsense to suggest the government are going to backtrack on the 2017 athletics championship, bring spurs back into the equation, just becuse Boris has changed the Chair of the board.

Well, I for one, think there may be moves afoot
Hammer110 wrote:Don't know where you have been mate but UKA has always been a factor, nothing has changed, they have no more sway than they did before, because they cant afford the O/S in it's current or reduced to 25,000 seats form and need other tenants to pay a substantial proportion of the costs, its the prospective tenants that hold all the aces!

And according to Margaret Ford there is no delay, we will know the outcome at the end of the month.

Well she's no longer in the driving seat is she ?

And, young Danny chose to write a few interesting words in the Spuds matchday programme today which read to my eyes suspiciously like a negotiating ploy being laid out .

"With a commitment to invest in the area around the stadium from the Mayor and Haringey council, an investment of some £90m in land and planning by the club and with planning applications granted, we are now pushing ahead with what is widely acknowledged to be the single most important development capable of delivering social change in the area – an iconic new stadium at the heart of a true sport-led regeneration scheme, delivering new homes, shops, restaurants, jobs and opportunities," Levy said. "The scale of demolition around the stadium should leave no one in any doubt as to our intent to forge ahead with this project and we shall devote our full attention and energies to it."

Subtle as a brick ..........


Mr Pink when the whole Olympic stadium debate stated a few years back I always argued that Stratford was Spurs first choice you argued against why are you changing your mind now?
MEM
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby brownout on Sun May 13, 2012 8:52 pm

I can't see the Government breaking their commitment to the 2017 World Championships. If conversion to a 'football / athletics' stadium is too expensive so the Government choose not to fund it and our owners honour their pledge only to move to a 'world class football stadium', perhaps it will be kept in current form and use for occasional athletics meetings, concerts, cricket etc until 2107. Then maybe the political postion will be less sensitve and it can be knocked down.
User avatar
brownout
 
Posts: 6611
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 9:26 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby the pink palermo on Sun May 13, 2012 9:55 pm

MEM wrote:Mr Pink when the whole Olympic stadium debate stated a few years back I always argued that Stratford was Spurs first choice you argued against why are you changing your mind now?


You've answered your own question .

I haven't said it would be Spurs first choice . I have, however argued , consitently, that Levy will do what is the best financial deal for his club , and frequently posed the question why Spurs would want to spend half a billion quid building a stadium when a lower cost option could be available .

They've never wanted the OS, the site however is desirable .Equally , if someone is giving him a huge hand out to stay where he is , that's fine by him as well .

All he is doing is trying to get a 60k seat football stadium at least cost to Spurs .Where it is located , within reason, is of little consequence .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27153
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Pedant on Mon May 14, 2012 12:46 am

Have Spurs actually spent any money on their development yet ?
I have been told by an exceptionally reliable source that Boris and Cameron had a meeting a couple of weeks back to discuss moving some civil servants to Haringey specifically to pump-prime the Spurs redevelopment (more than just a football ground is need to get it to stack up).

And Spurs have spent a packet acquiring land.
Pedant
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby IronMaiden123 on Mon May 14, 2012 12:59 am

the pink palermo wrote:You've answered your own question .

I haven't said it would be Spurs first choice . I have, however argued , consitently, that Levy will do what is the best financial deal for his club , and frequently posed the question why Spurs would want to spend half a billion quid building a stadium when a lower cost option could be available .

They've never wanted the OS, the site however is desirable .Equally , if someone is giving him a huge hand out to stay where he is , that's fine by him as well .

All he is doing is trying to get a 60k seat football stadium at least cost to Spurs .Where it is located , within reason, is of little consequence .


Spurs used the OS bid and subsequent legal challenges mainly as a bargaining tool to minimise planning gain demands at Northumberland Park, to oil the wheels and ultimately to coax some public money in their direction. Demolition has been going on at Northumberland Park for months in preparation for the development. Did Spurs ever have serious intentions to move to the OS? Their main motives seemed to be to either deny us the OS, or ensure that it remained unsuitable as a major football stadium by making sure the athletics legacy would be legally binding. Daniel Levy played a great game. We should walk away and be relieved that we have avoided getting involved in an athletics stadium that will never be a satisfactory football stadium.
IronMaiden123
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:49 am

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby the pink palermo on Mon May 14, 2012 7:15 am

Pedant wrote:And Spurs have spent a packet acquiring land.

Yes, we know, Levy quoted a number in his programme notes yesterday .

We spent a packet aquiring Rush Green for a new training complex .Not seen too much building forging ahead yet .

IronMaiden123 wrote: Spurs used the OS bid and subsequent legal challenges mainly as a bargaining tool to minimise planning gain demands at Northumberland Park, to oil the wheels and ultimately to coax some public money in their direction. Demolition has been going on at Northumberland Park for months in preparation for the development. Did Spurs ever have serious intentions to move to the OS? Their main motives seemed to be to either deny us the OS, or ensure that it remained unsuitable as a major football stadium by making sure the athletics legacy would be legally binding. Daniel Levy played a great game


Levy did indeed play a great game, ensuring a rival gained no competitive advantage over his club .That, however, does not mean he wouldn't be interested in pursuing the Stratford site if it was to his clubs commercial advantage .

I'll ask , again, where is the money going to come from to redevlop WHL , and before everyone says "billionnaire Joe Lewis" , stop and consider three things .Firstly he has never attended a home game at WHL , despite being a frequent visitor to London .Secondly he is 75 years old , and thirdly he is purely an investor , and as such will seek a return on his investment .

Buying land in London is relatively risk free .Building a football stadium is not .The former can, subject to planning permission, be used for a multitude of activities, the later has but just one .So far, he has authorised Levy to do the first stage . Spurs will announce significant losses for this season , and possibly next unless Bayern win the CL or a couple of star players are moved on .

IronMaiden123 wrote: We should walk away and be relieved that we have avoided getting involved in an athletics stadium that will never be a satisfactory football stadium.

Oh, I entirely agree .

My hunch though is WHU will be groundsharing with THFC in a purpose built football stadium at Stratford in around 5 years time , the Boleyn will be blocks of flats, and WHL a combination of housing, retail and commercial development .

Joe Lewis will make a fortune redeveloping that area , Gold and Sullivan will clear their debts by sellling the Boleyn , and we'll be living in a rented home forever .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27153
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Next

Return to The Olympic Stadium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bengeo, Google Adsense [Bot] and 15 guests