Jump to content


Photo

Crystal Palace FC and the NSC


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 mikecrystalpalace

mikecrystalpalace

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 01 January 2006 - 03:25 PM

Apologies if this has been done before.

Have heard various "gossip" on the possibility of Crystal Palace FC taking a lease on the Crystal Palace NSC. My understanding is that Fc Chairman Simon Jordon has had preliminary talks with the LDA on this, who were reasonably interested.

Would be Greatfull of any input/opinions other forum users have on this. Thankyou. The view on various Supporters forums is mixed! :jedi:
The more i get to know people, the more i like dogs. (Oscar Wilde)

#2 Fang

Fang

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 02 January 2006 - 12:16 PM

Mike, I recognise you from the HOL site. As you know there has been a lot of talk about the NSC on that site and on the BBS site. Even those with strong nostalgic feelings towards Selhurst Park recognise that the place is a bit of a toilet and that the club needs to either develop the ground or move to a new one. My understanding is that the often quoted "planning problems" associated with the development of Selhurst Park are not insurmountable and Croydon Council are keen for The Club to stay in the borough. The problem is of course Mr Noades and his unrealistic price demands.

I'd love to see Palace move to the NSC (provided the athletics track is taken out). I know lots of people on that side of The Triangle may have different ideas but I think it would be great for the local economy , particularly pubs, bars and restaurants. It would also inject a bit of "Buzz" back into the area. There might be another advantage too. A chap from the LDA suggested (at the recent Park exhibition) that selling the lease of the NSC might reduce that need to sell off chunks of the Park for redevelopment.

"This is what we find, this is what we find, the hope that springs eternal, springs right up your behind."

#3 Palace Blue

Palace Blue

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 15 posts

Posted 02 January 2006 - 12:17 PM

Although not a Palace fan, I've lived here so long that I consider them to be my "second" team and I think it would be an excellent idea if done properly.

Palace have potentially a huge support that could easily support a successful Premier League team if they had the right facilities (i.e a modern ground holding 40,000 plus). The opportunities for upgrading Selhurst Park are limited (especially as the club doesn't own the freehold).

Whether it would get past the inevitable long list of objections is another matter. Personally, I wouldn't mind the disruption as it would only be once a fortnight plus the occasional midweek game, unlike the previously proposed multiplex where the traffic increase would have been constant.

Perhaps it could be wrapped up under the banner of "regenerating the area" as LB Bromley seem keen to do?

#4 jamesl

jamesl

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,016 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 11:49 AM

This has been discussed previously

http://www.virtualno...442&hl=Football

I would be surprised if the LDA were willing to entertain the idea given that their plans for thw park include raising £8 million from luxury apartment built at the triangle gate. I wouldn't imagine that buyers of luxury apartments would want to buy a property so close to a football ground.

#5 Fang

Fang

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 12:20 PM

I for one loathe the idea of The Park being nibbled to death, particularly the Triangle Gate proposal. If Crystal Palace FC were to move to the ( soon to be redundant) NSC, I'm sure it would result in the LDA equalling any income from selling the "Gate" site to Barrats or Wimpey or whoever. Bearing in mind the public reaction to the Triangle gate proposal, I'm sure The LDA would welcome a plan B to raise funds.

"This is what we find, this is what we find, the hope that springs eternal, springs right up your behind."

#6 matt

matt

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 12:38 PM

I think the LDA would find rather more public opposition to Palace moving to the park, than the housing.

#7 Fang

Fang

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:23 PM

Why? It would occupy the existing NSC site and remove/reduce any need for building on the park by providing funds for its rejuvenation. It would be a boon for local business's. It would be better served by public transport links-Rail, Bus and (soon) the tube than Selhurst Park. Would you really prffer blocks of flats at The Triangle Gate?

"This is what we find, this is what we find, the hope that springs eternal, springs right up your behind."

#8 weeble

weeble

    Moderator

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:27 PM

Surely providing the capacity for spectators (both seating and car parking) would require development of a larger scale than the current NSC (and much larger than the proposed new sports centre, which would have a reduced footprint).

And you'd be replacing a sports centre which is available for public use with a stadium with no/limited public provision for sport. I'd sooner we could play football than watch it!

I agree with Matt that moving CPFC to the park would be more controversial than the current plans.

But I'd be really surprised if it happened!

#9 James

James

    Member

  • Sponsors
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:43 PM

It would be a boon for local business's.

If it is such a boon then why does Sainsbury's in Selhurst close when there is a match on? The only beneficiaries I can think of are take-aways and pubs.

European.vote - EU Referendum


#10 matt

matt

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:47 PM

Fang said "Why? It would occupy the existing NSC site and remove/reduce any need for building on the park by providing funds for its rejuvenation."
I would consider a footy stadium in the park to be the last nail in the coffin of the area. Its wall to wall fried chicken from then on. Theres a reason why South Norwood is less expensive to live in than Upper Norwood.

"It would be a boon for local business's." Only the pubs and fried chicken establishments, which seem to do very well. I can't see a fishmongers opening up due to football - "I'm just off down the match love - want me to pick up a couple of hake on the way back?". erm...

"It would be better served by public transport links-Rail, Bus and (soon) the tube than Selhurst Park." Forgive me if my prime concern isn't how away fans get to watch Palace. At the moment they are well away from me, in an area where they have been for decades and so everybody who lives there knew that it was close to a football ground.

"Would you really prffer blocks of flats at The Triangle Gate?"

Yes. a few flats would be far less disruptive to the ambiance of the Triangle.

And never mind the loss of public amenity that weeble mentions. Will my gym be in the new football stadium?

#11 Axean

Axean

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 895 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:49 PM

Arguably the majority of people living around the park or using it see Crystal Palace Park as a park. Not a Sports or Events centre. The current NSC is considered to dominate the park, cutting it in two and imposing an ugly view. The park users wish to see the NSC reduced in size and impact.Constructing a footy stadium goes against this wish.

But there is also another important issue that makes the football stadium idea a non-starter. Most of Crystal Palace park is designated as "urban green-belt" belt. The NSC lies in a section of the "geen-belt" that construction was allowed on, but it cannot be added to. And I believe the new construction must have no more impact than the old. This means if you want to build something new, something else has to go.
The proposed ideas involve shifting building around so they are concentrated next the the railway station. You wouldn't be able to build a stadium without taking up more land, and impacting on the surrounding park. The stadium could not happen

If the CPFC wished to move into the proposed stadium with only 5000 seats I don't think this would have much of an impact on the park. I wouldn't be against that.

note: Just incase your wondering, I think the proposed building of flats just happens to be on land that can be developed.

Edited by Axean, 03 January 2006 - 01:57 PM.


#12 Fang

Fang

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:49 PM

And what other business's do we have up here? Agreed, Hollybush Stores, The Pound Shop and Bradleys are unlikely to benefit but like it or not our (local) economy is dependent on the food and drink trade.

"This is what we find, this is what we find, the hope that springs eternal, springs right up your behind."

#13 jamesl

jamesl

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,016 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:51 PM

When this idea was first floated I was for it but having thought about the actuallity I just don't think it would work

I think the idea is a non starter because of the congestion it would cause. It would also , in my view , kill local traders rather than help them

On a match day the Police could not close the approach roads to traffic as they do around Selhurst Park because they are all major roads - this would mean constant interuption of traffic flow as fans on foot crossed the main roads.

Equally the one way system would become totally gridlocked with buses and coaches and side roads congested with drivers trying (and failing) to find a car parking space.

The car park at the stadium could take coaches and cars but getting in and out of it would be a nigtmare - the tail back from the turning both up and down Anerley Hill would make central CP inaccesible

Shoppers in Westow Hill and Westow street would also have to negotiate hoards of fans going in and out of the various pubs and fast food outlets - I can just see how anyone pushing a buggy or with small children would look forward to trying to negotiate all of this.

All of this would take place at a key trading time (i.e Saturday Afternoon) and would probably destroy a lot of the local traders except the fast food outlets and the pubs.

Over time shoppers would just avoid CP on a match day

A good example of the chaos even a small incident could cause was the incident last year when trouble kicked off in the wetherspoons pub in Westow Street between Charlton and Palace Fans. About 7 vans , dozens of officers and half a dozen Police dogs lined both sides of the road, traffic drew to a standstill as drivers after rubbernecked or the buses could not get passed the vans and shoppers (especially those with kids) got away from the area a.s.a.p.

As a Palace fan I would love to see the club having the last laugh on Ron Noades by finding a ground elsewhere but I think the practicalities outweigh the pipedream.

#14 matt

matt

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 01:53 PM

Well, the Crow, and various boutiques (South of the river) etc for a start. Also the aquarium, chemists, stationary shop, Woolworths. None of which I have ever visited on the way to or from football.

#15 Fang

Fang

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts

Posted 03 January 2006 - 02:35 PM

Bookshops, Chemists, even Woollies may not benefit directly but as I have said before they are not the main contributors to the local economy. Any new stadium would be within the current NSC footprint and that is the basis on which discussions between The LDA and CPFC have taken place. Yes James, I'm sure traffic would be heavier on a match day but of all the problems currently facing this area, the volume of people visiting it is not one of them. Lets remeber also that when the One Way System was being mooted, Croydons Planners were confident that it could cope with the additional traffic generated by The Multiplex. We need to make this area a destination again not somewhere to avoid or get through as quickly as possible. I'm not suggesting A Football Stadium is the solution, indeed I think CPFC moving to the NSC is unlikely and in the short term a replacement for Morrisons is much more important. But to be blunt, we do not have either the range or quality of shops to draw in visitors and shoppers from other areas. As a shopping district we trail East Dulwich, West Norwood, even Penge!
Axean, I simply do not understand how you can say that blocks of flats would not effect the ambiance of The Triangle. You would lose any sense that you were on the highest point of South London, or that you were on the borders of parkland and what about the additional traffic the flats and car park will cause? I have a problem with of selling of public swimming pools school playing fields etc and I don't understand why other parks in London can be maintained without being built on. So if it's a choice between a football stadium on an existing sports facility and blocks of flats at The Triangle gate I know what gets my vote.

"This is what we find, this is what we find, the hope that springs eternal, springs right up your behind."