facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Feedback

Tuesday22 July 2014

Tottenham Hotspur plans demolition of 2012 Olympic stadium

  • Email
  • Comments (17)
  • Save

Architect working for club says Populous-designed structure not suitable for football

The architect working on football club Tottenham Hotspur’s plans for a new stadium has revealed it would demolish the Olympic stadium if it won the bid to take it on after the 2012 games.

KSS Design Group’s David Keirle said most of the Populous-designed structure - which is close to completion and was specifically designed for re-use - would be replaced because it was not suitable for football with most of the seats too far from the pitch.

“It’s not entirely demolition,” he said. “We will be using some of the undercroft (cellar) but we’re not using much.”

Tottenham are up against London rivals West Ham United to take over the stadium after the Games.

The Olympic Park Legacy Committee will recommend which of the two has been successful by January 28, which will then be ratified by the mayor of London and the government.

Keirle said that it would be simpler and cheaper to redevelop the Olympic stadium than remodel Tottenham’s existing ground at White Hart Lane under controversial plans drawn up by KSS, Make and Martha Schwartz.


Share

Readers' comments (17)

  • This beggers belief. How many countries demolish their Olympic Stadiums after the games are over?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Image title correction - That is the Aquatics Centre not the Velodrome

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Genius, anither great examples of the British forward planning.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • ones that never had a scooby do in planning a genuine legacy.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • sums up our throw-away culture to a tee. Absolute disgrace if this happens...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If ever there is a case for the ODA and the government their money where their mouth is to put sustainability first this is it. Tottenham, at the top of the table are sure to have more money on the table. Whereas West Ham have been the underdog through out.

    I hear the argument that the sight lines aren't good enough, but this is put in context when you hear that they are still better than at the new Wembley Stadium.

    If the clubs architects can't produce a scheme for conversion of a stadium that has pursposely been design so, then they need to look at employing another architect.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Everybody knows that an athletic track stadium is not ideal for football. This has always been known and always will be known.

    The decision makers must justify their actions and the public purse reimbursed. Destroying the stadium is not an option as it will have to stand for at least 50 years to justify its build and environmental costs. Another solution has to and will be found.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • “It’s not entirely demolition, we will be using some of the undercroft (cellar)" - Class! Could I use this in a Design and Access Statement?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • not that I'm a Manchester City fan but how bad is Eastlands for football [ the former commonwealth games stadium ]

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Rather gives the lie to these being the 'greenest games in history'!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register
  • Email
  • Comments (17)
  • Save
Latest
News
Sign in

Email Newsletters

Sign out to login as another user

I'm searching for in
Desktop Site | Mobile Site