Tottenham Hotspur just got the green light for a "major" new £400M ($596.5M) stadium after a "long and often difficult path," that included years of planning to get the local authority and public on-side, according to Joanna Bourke of the London INDEPENDENT. Spurs is the "latest in a series of British football clubs playing the regeneration game." Clubs have to convince councils that a new stadium can "act as a catalyst for drastically improving an area, through the knock-on impact of creating jobs, increasing footfall and attracting private-sector investment." This stadium-led regeneration has "emerged as a large-scale model over the last 15 years," according to a report by the London Assembly. The report highlights that clubs "stand to get a major financial boost from a new home ground." It notes that since moving to the Emirates Stadium in '06, Arsenal’s annual match-day revenue "has almost tripled," from £33.8M in '04 to £100.2M in '14. While "logic indicates that more seats and therefore more ticket sales can boost the coffers of football clubs, how much do football stadium redevelopments really help their towns and local economies?" Tottenham is "convinced that upsizing from a 36,284-seat to a 61,000-seater stadium, with a retractable pitch that allows Premier League and American Football games to be played and broadcast, will help to transform a part of London that is sometimes dubbed as run-down and twice famously been blighted by riots." The club's plans "include a hotel and nearly 600 homes." Other areas "to see a housing supply boost as a result of stadium regeneration include the north London home of Arsenal, and east Manchester." But not everybody is "convinced that new stadiums are good for business." Dave Morris, of the campaign group One Tottenham, said that he is concerned that the plans for Tottenham "mean massive overdevelopment," adding that some businesses "are under threat" from demolition to pave the way for the project (INDEPENDENT, 12/23).
