New view of Lane re-development

[I should coco]

1st - Extend the South Stand to create more corporate and quality seats. The reason is very simple: Liverpool ROI with their new main stand was 3 to 4 years due to all the corporate spending. The ROI if they were to extend the Anfield Road stand would be 15 years which is why it has been postponed indefinitely.

2nd - to completely flatten the Kop and rebuild from scratch (and hopefully take the stupid little corner down with it). People over 6 feet tall find it difficult to sit down properly in the kop. The facilities are 19th century. Peterborough's facilities in their new stand we sat in last season are light years ahead of ours - even South Stand. The congestion under South Stand before a game is a joke - hence the 1st option above to improve those too.

Option 3 is of course the 'bank the TV money and do nowt' route.

Obviously not what anyone on here would want, but don't forget thet KM was around when we built the South Stand and then spent 15 years slipping down the leagues unable to pay for it. He may just want a bit of certainty about our PL status, before he chucks another £20-30m into the pot.

Just sayin' like....

 

[S64 Blade]

Indeed it does need razing - it belongs in the last century.

We have very few quality seats in our ground.

We need 2 developments - and my assumption is we have had 3 to 4 years of continued Premier League enjoyment before the start.

1st - Extend the South Stand to create more corporate and quality seats. The reason is very simple: Liverpool ROI with their new main stand was 3 to 4 years due to all the corporate spending. The ROI if they were to extend the Anfield Road stand would be 15 years which is why it has been postponed indefinitely.

2nd - to completely flatten the Kop and rebuild from scratch (and hopefully take the stupid little corner down with it). People over 6 feet tall find it difficult to sit down properly in the kop. The facilities are 19th century. Peterborough's facilities in their new stand we sat in last season are light years ahead of ours - even South Stand. The congestion under South Stand before a game is a joke - hence the 1st option above to improve those too.

Some of you should go on the Spurs website and have a look at the facilities for their new ground - for ALL fans. It sets the bar higher than probably anything in Europe. Yes it takes money, and United's would too, which is why Premier League/Sky/BT money should pay for it.

Quite confident CW will take us their too - lets just hope our joint owners can help out in some way, then perhaps better facilities will follow.

UTB

This!

The South Stand would have to come first for financial reasons and, to help alleviate the impact of the Kop being out of action for a season(at least).

I am sure there is still some temporary work that could be done to help with the Kop (more access, better facilities) at a fairly low cost, until a time when it could be flattened.

 

[ucandomagic]

I’m not that clear on our financial structure, but a lot of posts on here say that we need to be promoted and use PL money for any ground development. I thought that McCabe owned the ground and not the club, so PL money could not be part of a development project unless it was used to agree an increased future rent to the owner, which would then generate the necessary ROI on his investment.

Am I missing something?

 

[TJB.]

I'll preface this by saying I'm not a builder, or an architect, so whether this is cobblers I don't know, but in my head it makes sense.

I think the South Stand is alright unless we are solid low mid table premier league or better for a couple of years, and if we did do something to it, for me it'd have to be building backwards up, new insides, and a new front (that'd be great) because it'll be extending depth wise into the car park. Take row TT and add on. Another 10 rows is roughly 2000 extra seats based on my quick check of the ticketing site, seats are 1-193, so 15 new rows would be 3000, and 20, 4000, you can scale it, and the height change wouldn't be massively severe, probably a bit taller than the hotel (there may be some windows blocked though).

Stick in some new corporate stuff under the roof line perhaps.

I think that way it could possibly be almost done in a summer with minimal impact to a season, the roof would need to be rebuilt which would be I imagine the most pressing thing, and then you could block access to some rows at the back for game days while work continues during the week if need be. I think Man U did a stand this way, the stand itself remains largely untouched, stuff is added and joined.

The Kop though is a state, that needs doing ASAP, again, work from the back, so start building the new back and concourse areas in the little carpark about halfway through the season, and then final day start to demolish what you need to of the exiting Kop and start joining them up in the close season.

I've got it all worked out in my head haha, there'll be a mid height corner for the Kop and South Stand, and above it there'll be an office building thing to keep McCabe happy, and the Pukka Pies corner will be rebuilt to join neatly with something, with new TV facilities so you see the South Stand on TV, and corporate shite.

More disabled access is important too, it'd be nice if we designed that in, if people want to come, it'd be nice to be able to have them.

A good version of this hasty sketch

I particularly approve of the enormous Jamaican sound system filling in the corner.

Don Letts or David Rodigan at half time?

Easy skankin'.

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

I particularly approve of the enormous Jamaican sound system filling in the corner.

Don Letts or David Rodigan at half time?

Easy skankin'.

Return of the old "On U Sound System", for me. They had a great football track. Can't remember its title.

 

[bromtom]

There’s a problem with that sketch.

The current Kop goes well past the corner flag, so joining the Kop onto the South stand means a reduction in capacity.
The club are hardly going to spend millions to “reduce” the capacity.

Like the idea of a Chris Wilder stand though, it may well happen one day.

It does, but I'll be honest, trying to draw that with perspective and a such an early hour was wrinkling my brain haha...

That's why the building looks like an Argos entertainment unit

 

[TJB.]

Would in the prem 80 k turned up to watch spurs play a very poor Liverpool ensemble

At Wembley, aye. And we're not Tottenham or Liverpool.

Unless we become some sort of internationally recognised 'brand' like Spurs & Liverpool are, and spend a couple of decades building up a bigger fanbase, there's not a cat in hells chance of us drawing a crowd anywhere near that size in Sheffield. And I'm not fussed about becoming a 'brand' myself!

 

[Worksop II]

Would be nice to shoot for the Stars ........ $1.1Billion

 

[Sheffsteel]

) at a fairly low cost, until a time when it could be flattened.

It would cost multiple milions extra to flatten the land and would take up to 100 years to get it back.
In other words unless someone comes up with a radical money making idea then it’s not a realistic option.

For starters flattening the land would mean shutting down the Kop for a full season, immediately losing millions before even laying a brick. With the bolt-on design the Kop stays open season with only the seats at the rear closed off, means less lost revenue.

When thinking about stadium expansion you need to picture the “Dragons Den” tv programme interview scenario.
Imagine having your idea then asking the millionaire panel to give you a loan.
They’d rip our idealistic notion of what we’d like to see, to bits.

Unfortunately I think option 3 is more likely.
Think we’ll sit tight for 2 or 3 seasons in the PL before even considering expanding.
Also I’m sure the club are keeping an eye on the movement towards possible safe standing.

 

[Grizzly blade]

I’m not that clear on our financial structure, but a lot of posts on here say that we need to be promoted and use PL money for any ground development. I thought that McCabe owned the ground and not the club, so PL money could not be part of a development project unless it was used to agree an increased future rent to the owner, which would then generate the necessary ROI on his investment.

Am I missing something?

Depends I suppose what the build is. Rental income for the club could be raised yes, but the plan is for the stadium to be multi use. Be that for business or student let’s. So he could of course take the income generated from that as the return on his investment.....or sell the ground back to the club with a tidy profit for his trouble.

 

[TJB.]

Would be nice to shoot for the Stars ........ $1.1Billion

Or the $1.5billion Mercedes Benz Stadium, home to Atlanta United FC (and the Atlanta Falcons).

 

[INTAKE BLADE]

I wonder if the tunnel will get filled in.

 

[ucandomagic]

Depends I suppose what the build is. Rental income for the club could be raised yes, but the plan is for the stadium to be multi use. Be that for business or student let’s. So he could of course take the income generated from that as the return on his investment.....or sell the ground back to the club with a tidy profit for his trouble.

Apart from your sell-back suggestion, it still means that McCabe would be finding the capital for the development, rather than the club. The only way that I can see that PL money could fund the capital outlay is if the Club loaned McCabe the development capital and then paid no rent until the debt was repaid, or else took a share in the ownership of the ground.

 

[Lawrence]

When the then old cop was upgraded to the one we have now, they took the roof off during the season, leaving it open, the rest was completed during the off season. Liverpool (Anfield) built their new second tear at the back of

Apart from your sell-back suggestion, it still means that McCabe would be finding the capital for the development, rather than the club. The only way that I can see that PL money could fund the capital outlay is if the Club loaned McCabe the development capital and then paid no rent until the debt was repaid, or else took a share in the ownership of the ground.

Or took it back completely! What’s the ground worth?

 

[S64 Blade]

It would cost multiple milions extra to flatten the land and would take up to 100 years to get it back.
In other words unless someone comes up with a radical money making idea then it’s not a realistic option..

Read my post properly, you have misquoted heavily (cutting out the first half of my sentence to create something that is the opposite of what I was saying).

I said interim works on the Kop could be achieved at a low cost; for example, building better toilet blocks, adding more turnstyles etc.

I'm aware that the demolition would cost millions, hence my post suggesting the South Stand being developed first as this would offer a more realistic return. Once (if) we were in a better position, then go ahead with a large scale Kop redevelopment.

 

[Sean Thornton]

When the then old cop was upgraded to the one we have now, they took the roof off during the season, leaving it open, the rest was completed during the off season. Liverpool (Anfield) built their new second tear at the back of

Or took it back completely! What’s the ground worth?

Think the original deal for all the property was around £25m and remember talk of an option for the FC. To buy it back when finances permitted. At the moment it's highly unlikely the FC could finance any major improvements let alone buy the ground back as well as running the club and giving CW a decent budget.

 

[blade too long]

At Wembley, aye. And we're not Tottenham or Liverpool.

Unless we become some sort of internationally recognised 'brand' like Spurs & Liverpool are, and spend a couple of decades building up a bigger fanbase, there's not a cat in hells chance of us drawing a crowd anywhere near that size in Sheffield. And I'm not fussed about becoming a 'brand' myself!

That's now .We could be a different entity in 3 years time . People have got to stop putting us in the small time category for ever

 

[TJB.]

That's now .We could be a different entity in 3 years time . People have got to stop putting us in the small time category for ever

I'm not quite sure how to respond to that, frankly.

Let's get the points total needed to stay up then take it from there!

 

[snootyfenooty]

It would cost multiple milions extra to flatten the land and would take up to 100 years to get it back.
In other words unless someone comes up with a radical money making idea then it’s not a realistic option.

You're 100% right. I've gone through this in previous threads and it's not just the cost involved in disposing of hazardous waste (which is what the rubble heap under the kop is made up of) but also getting a landfill operator to accept it. Also consider the excavation process - every time something dodgy was unearthed then work would be halted and the whole area would be quarantined, match days included. If the excavation was ever completed then there would be another stagnation period whilst the site was cleaned up. It would take fucking years.

The extension at the back is the only option. The stuff under the kop was dumped as a free tip over 100 ago and you can only imagine what went in there considering the environmental laws (or absence of them) of that day. Better get used to them squashed knees chaps because what we've got is here to stay.

 

[Grizzly blade]

Apart from your sell-back suggestion, it still means that McCabe would be finding the capital for the development, rather than the club. The only way that I can see that PL money could fund the capital outlay is if the Club loaned McCabe the development capital and then paid no rent until the debt was repaid, or else took a share in the ownership of the ground.

Depends if either party can realistically be considered separately from the other.
The club needs the ground, and KM needs the club.
Though commercial income could be claimed by the owner of the property.
It’s certainly not simple, and lots of other factors to be considered too. But for the high cost and financial outlay, there will also be a tidy return of commercial income on top of what the development will bring into the football club.

We could speculate on the numbers, but it would be guesswork. What I do believe, is that shared ownership is fraught with problems going forwards, as is someone else owning the club separate to the land owners. I would much rather it was one company....the club. At the moment, with Km owning the property it’s fine, but long term it worries me.

 

[blade too long]

I'm not quite sure how to respond to that, frankly.

Let's get the points total needed to stay up then take it from there!

Take it as its meant . Not many clubs could see needing 60 k capacity grounds prior to sky . Spurs arsenal both in 60 plus grounds soon and if you'd said that to them mid seventies they'd say what you have

 

[stringer]

You're 100% right. I've gone through this in previous threads and it's not just the cost involved in disposing of hazardous waste (which is what the rubble heap under the kop is made up of) but also getting a landfill operator to accept it. Also consider the excavation process - every time something dodgy was unearthed then work would be halted and the whole area would be quarantined, match days included. If the excavation was ever completed then there would be another stagnation period whilst the site was cleaned up. It would take fucking years.

The extension at the back is the only option. The stuff under the kop was dumped as a free tip over 100 ago and you can only imagine what went in there considering the environmental laws (or absence of them) of that day. Better get used to them squashed knees chaps because what we've got is here to stay.

Good post. How many wanting the Kop flattening would object to another £10-15 on their ticket prices each game? At least while no-one over 5ft 10 can comfortably sit there, it shouldn’t send ticket prices skyward if/when PL football arrives

 

[stringjunior]

If the problem is rake, leg room, pillars and facilities on the kop, and realistically the earth mound can't be moved, how about this (String, turn your eyes away now):

Why don't we build over the existing structure, remove the current concrete terrace and build a new structure on steel frame at a sensible rake and with better leg room. AND extend at the back to increase capacity and improve the facilities.

I'm no architect mind......

 

[Sean Thornton]

Depends if either party can realistically be considered separately from the other.
The club needs the ground, and KM needs the club.
Though commercial income could be claimed by the owner of the property.
It’s certainly not simple, and lots of other factors to be considered too. But for the high cost and financial outlay, there will also be a tidy return of commercial income on top of what the development will bring into the football club.

We could speculate on the numbers, but it would be guesswork. What I do believe, is that shared ownership is fraught with problems going forwards, as is someone else owning the club separate to the land owners. I would much rather it was one company....the club. At the moment, with Km owning the property it’s fine, but long term it worries me.

The club already pays rent to SU Ltd which includes the ground etc on its balance sheet. That rent currently doesn't cover that company's running costs ( unless things have changed dramatically since the 2016 accounts.

 

[madeinsheffield]

The Kop steps are directly on top of the old steps which explains the rake being too shallow as it the same as when it was all standing, there is/was a subsidence issue a few years ago (a mate was doing the drilling).

I agree they would be better getting rid of the whole lot, meaning shops/bars/offices could also earn the club rent money the rest of the time, I suspect this will be the plan rather than do it 'on the cheap'

 

[The Crab]

We'd all love to see the Kop and the corner stand re-developed but it won't happen unless we get promoted as there isn't the need for it capacity wise, but it will happen one day, of that I'm sure, especially if we carry on like we are. I don't find the Kop as bad as some say and I'm 6.2ft tall so I know leg room is tight. The toilets are packed and aren't the best and the catering facilities aren't the best in the land but its not like the old John Street is it!?[/QUOTE]

I like people who are easily pleased. Before you book your next holiday, allow me to send you a Crab Package Holidays brochure. Guantanamo Bay, one way from £14.99

 

[String]

If the problem is rake, leg room, pillars and facilities on the kop, and realistically the earth mound can't be moved, how about this (String, turn your eyes away now):

Why don't we build over the existing structure, remove the current concrete terrace and build a new structure on steel frame at a sensible rake and with better leg room. AND extend at the back to increase capacity and improve the facilities.

I'm no architect mind......

Yeah you could technically bro, but I think to keep cost acceptable adding the extra seats at the Kop back/top is the right way to go, simply on cost. You have to remove the columns of course which means quite a bit of roof strengthening work on new trusses etc. Id have thought that would be a significant cost in its own right and a big sight line improvement which may negate the legroom issue for many anyway if given the choice....At the end of the day even on the South Stand the legroom is a bit tight for anybody over 6' (but reasonable).

the bit that annoys me the most is not the seats, but the downright stupid catering arrangements, condiments 'looks like a bombs hit em' stations and the totally bonkers process of buying a drink. Quick fix answer, have those guys stationed around (outside on the stand approach 'ramps' for example) with draught beer packs on their backs like you get at the horse racing / gigs etc,....remove congestion get people served quicker......but caterings another story altogether...

 

[Booker4]

I really don’t see the issue with the current plans. The kop extension includes new indoor facilities and a steeper rake for the new 3,000 seats. It gets rid of the supporting pillars too.

Demolishing and rebuilding will be hideously expensive and likely to not even increase the capacity at all. The kop has a huge capacity because of the little leg room. Get rid of that and there goes your ROI entirely, forever.

So you're saying that the extended seats will be at a different pitch? Can't see that myself, but if you're right fair enough. I've never picked up on that from the pictures I've seen or reports read on it but not saying its not true.

 

[stringjunior]

Yeah you could technically bro, but I think to keep cost acceptable adding the extra seats at the Kop back/top is the right way to go, simply on cost. You have to remove the columns of course which means quite a bit of roof strengthening work on new trusses etc. Id have thought that would be a significant cost in its own right and a big sight line improvement which may negate the legroom issue for many anyway if given the choice....At the end of the day even on the South Stand the legroom is a bit tight for anybody over 6' (but reasonable).

the bit that annoys me the most is not the seats, but the downright stupid catering arrangements, condiments 'looks like a bombs hit em' stations and the totally bonkers process of buying a drink. Quick fix answer, have those guys stationed around (outside on the stand approach 'ramps' for example) with draught beer packs on their backs like you get at the horse racing / gigs etc,....remove congestion get people served quicker......but caterings another story altogether...

In fact I was thinking about the boozing at the Lane fiasco only this morning. How difficult would it be to get a few sturdy gazeebos made up in our current branding, with a matching cooler and a couple of peeps serving bottles of lager and cider to the masses? Lets say a quarter of the SS have a beer before the game, thats about 2k beers. Lets say the existing catering outlets serve half of these leaving 1000 beers to be sold by the gazeebo boys (not to be confused with the Vengaboys). 4 gazeebos each needing to serve 250 beers in the 45 minutes before kick off. Thats just over 2.5 beers per gazeebo boy for 45 minutes

 

[snootyfenooty]

If the problem is rake, leg room, pillars and facilities on the kop, and realistically the earth mound can't be moved, how about this (String, turn your eyes away now):

Why don't we build over the existing structure, remove the current concrete terrace and build a new structure on steel frame at a sensible rake and with better leg room. AND extend at the back to increase capacity and improve the facilities.

I'm no architect mind......

It's because the existing rubble heap wouldn't serve as a suitable foundation for any structure built on it.