• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

I do wonder whether they wanted cash to be put to them and then they find there own premises and not what Tottenham may have done in buying a ready made place. Could be that they wanted the money and then retired.
 
Superhudd said:
I do wonder whether they wanted cash to be put to them and then they find there own premises and not what Tottenham may have done in buying a ready made place. Could be that they wanted the money and then retired.
Click to expand...

Apparently the various members of the family have different ideas, so basically all of the above and then some.
 
Gutter Boy said:
But permission was denied then. They are trying some super super exceptional route, that will just be dismissed again in seconds.

I think to get a hearing in the court of appeal now, they will have to have substantial evidence that the high court judge was incompetent in his process.
Click to expand...

To succeed yes, but i would be amazed if they didnt, they have come this far, i think they are too far along to back down
 
imcallingbullsh*t said:
To succeed yes, but i would be amazed if they didnt, they have come this far, i think they are too far along to back down
Click to expand...

No - just to be granted an appeal they'd need evidence of negligence by the high court judge. It's not about backing down, they've just exhausted all their avenues.

They are just time wasting - there's no way they will be granted a hearing now
 
Sounds like we are proceeding with tendering. Narrowing it down to 4 sounds like we've done the PQQ and are now ready to put out the ITT as soon as 13/3 comes around


Tottenham Hotspur shortlists four contractors for stadium

Sir Robert McAlpine, Bouygues, Balfour Beatty and Laing O’Rourke await tender process for £400m scheme
Tottenham Hotspur football club has shortlisted four contractors to build its state-of-the art £400m stadium.
Sir Robert McAlpine, Bouygues, Balfour Beatty and Laing O’Rourke have been approached by Spurs about building the 58,000-seat stadium, Spurs’ project director for the stadium Paul Phillips has told Building.
Phillips said a tender process for the job would begin once the club has secured all the land necessary for the project.
Sources close to the project have tipped Sir Robert McAlpine - which built the Emirates Stadium for Spurs’ fierce rivals Arsenal, and the London 2012 Olympic Stadium - for the prestigious job, but Phillips denied there was a frontrunner.
He said: “Sir Robert McAlpine will be on anyone’s shortlist for a stadium, but to say they are lined up is totally incorrect.”
Spurs’ efforts to amass the land for the project moved a step closer last week when the High Court rejected an appeal by local landowner Archway Sheet Metal Works against a compulsory purchase order (CPO) for its site, which stands in the way of the planned stadium.
But Phillips cautioned Archway could appeal again to the Court of Appeal, and said the planned tender process would wait until this legal process had come to a conclusion.
He said: “We’re not able yet to go out to tender. I wouldn’t be credible as a client without the land confirmed, particularly as contractors are picking and choosing what they bid for.” One source close to the project suggested the construction contract would be worth between £275m-£300m. Phillips declined to comment on the potential contract value.
The legal wranglings with Archway Sheet Metal Works over the CPO have already forced Spurs to delay its move to its new stadium to the 2018-19 season, rather than the 2017-18 season.
The project team includes architect Populous, engineer Buro Happold and cost consultant EC Harris.

http://www.building.co.uk/news/tott...-four-contractors-for-stadium/5074084.article
 
It's just a shame some rich spurs fan didn't let it be known he was gonna set up a similar business undercutting them just to speed things along. It's a bloody galvanised building they've got, overshawdowed by a huge steel stadium, blotting out the sun. Not a family restaurant etc operating out of a quaint street location and much loved by loyal patrons.

I've got no problem with them trying to get as much as they could. But the extra millions they held out for are gone and then some.
 
They also seem to have lost the opportunity for continuity in their business. If they had agreed to move to the 500 WHL premises they could have asked for new equipment so the new site was operating before they closed the old one. Not losing production time is a reasonable request that I assume would have been granted if possible. Then by moving the old equipment they could have expanded capacity.

Instead they look like losing production time. The 500 WHL site isn't ready (or wasn't when google maps was last updated) so, unless they have found somewhere else, they are likely to be non-operational for a while.
 
It seems logical that the CPO eviction notice goes out now. The CPO has been issued, approved by the SoS, an appeal rejected by the High Court, and a request to appeal further rejected. As it stands there is no ongoing legal process, although we know there could still be a further appeal. Unless there is a further appeal, I see no reason not to send notice now and start the clock.

One the other hand, this is just speculation. Perhaps when the CPO was issued a letter was sent and all the times set out then, with all the rest automatic when appropriate decisions are made.
 
According to the court records, the 'stay of execution request' as part of their appeal was rejected

So I think Haringey can/will have issued their notice to vacate.
 
Gutter Boy said:
No - just to be granted an appeal they'd need evidence of negligence by the high court judge. It's not about backing down, they've just exhausted all their avenues.

They are just time wasting - there's no way they will be granted a hearing now
Click to expand...

Think we are saying same thing - Dont expect them to be granted an appeal but expect them to submit to try and do so
 
Weren't they supposed to make some sort of announcement in the "next few days" after they lost their appeal?
 
Gutter Boy said:
According to the court records, the 'stay of execution request' as part of their appeal was rejected

So I think Haringey can/will have issued their notice to vacate.
Click to expand...
Anyone know what time frame we are talking about before the bulldozers can start to flatten the piece of rubble that stands in our way?
 
Kandi1977 said:
Anyone know what time frame we are talking about before the bulldozers can start to flatten the piece of rubble that stands in our way?
Click to expand...
Their 3 week deadline to apply to the Court of Appeals expires a week Friday (13th) so that the key date. If they dont apply to make an appeal before then, we're home and dry
 
Kandi1977 said:
Anyone know what time frame we are talking about before the bulldozers can start to flatten the piece of rubble that stands in our way?
Click to expand...

I read they've been given 6-8 weeks notice to vacate, don't know how true that is.

The demolition will happen as soon as ownership is transferred, as otherwise Haringey/us will get lumbered with business rates
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back