The latest update in the saga regarding the future Old Trafford is the completion of an initial feasibility study by the Old Trafford Regeneration Task Force. This report presents “options” for consideration and seems to boil down to a choice between re-building the current stadium or building a completely new stadium on adjacent. The first option would result in a revised capacity of 80,000 and cost around £1.2bn) whilst a new stadium would accommodate a capacity of 100,000 and cost around £2bn).
A little history
Old Trafford takes its name from the local neighbourhood and ultimately derives from Old Trafford Hall which was the residence of the historic land-owning Trafford family. The Hall was strategically located close to the crossing point of the River Irwell. Today, the stadium stands at the crossing point between residential Old Trafford, industrial Trafford Park and the redeveloped waterfront on the banks of the Manchester Ship Canal.
After several false starts over the last two decades, the project seems to have found the correct starting point. Formulating a wider masterplan is literally the textbook approach to initiating a stadium project. As well as meeting the needs of its users, the other fundamental principle of stadium development is that it should be in harmony with its surrounding environment and community. Therefore, it makes absolute sense to consider the site’s wider context before proceeding with any major development project.
A new direction
A new stadium option is being given serious consideration with the plans shared so far apparently show the new stadium on land just to the northwest of the current stadium. This would address the constraints of the current stadium which is hemmed in by a heavy rail line to the south, the Bridgewater Canal to the northeast and the (now pedestrianised) Sir Matt Busby Way to the east. Images show how an expanded east forecourt area could be developed to create a better supporter and visitor experience. Not only would this help with the physical constraints of the current footprint (previous re-development proposals have included building in the space above the rail line), but it could facilitate the creation of a sterile zone around the stadium for security purposes.
Therefore, it is interesting to note the drawings issued appear to show residential buildings close to the stadium. These residential buildings would obviously help with the housing shortage, which is high up the agenda for local stakeholders, not to mention providing a commercial boost to the overall project. Such close integration of stadiums with neighbourhood developments is becoming increasingly common and can be seen in a number of European cities including London- although often in stadiums of a smaller scale.
This is a significant change in direction and one that comes from considering the stadium in its wider context and the surrounding neighbourhood. Making better use of the available land and factoring in the needs of the local community have seeming become at least as important as aspects designed to mitigate security risks that were prioritised in previous development proposals.
The other (welcome) change is the inclusion (or clearer prioritisation) of a transport hub- notably an enhanced rail link to the site. This should be factored-in regardless of whether the current stadium is re-built or a new stadium is initiated. Matchday journeys to Old Trafford are currently dominated by private cars causing congestion and parking pains for residents and other visitors. Supporter travel is the largest contributor to carbon-emissions over the on-going life of a stadium. The enhanced rail-link will also serve the proposed residential development throughout the year.
Old or Young Trafford?
In terms of the debate over re-build or replace, surveys run by United appear to show that older fans favour the new stadium option whilst younger fans would prefer to re-build the current stadium. This leads me to draw a couple of conclusions. Firstly, given that the existing season ticket holder base is significantly skewed towards older supporters, the majority of those attending Old Trafford on a regular basis seemingly favour a completely new stadium. Becoming a United season-ticket holder is no easy feat- the stadium expansions of the late nineties and early noughties being the last major opportunity to do so. Many season-ticket holders have been in situ ever since and consequently their tenure is at least ten years and, in many cases, closer to 25 years. This explains how the over-50s dominate United’s season-ticket holder profile. Indeed, United’s own profiling has identified an ageing demographic along with a tendency to be affluent, male and based around the northwest.
The second conclusion is that older supporters appear to value the comfort and enhanced practical aspects (such as better legroom, better access, less-steep inclines, clear sightlines) that a new stadium promises. Comparatively, younger supporters place more value on traditions and associations with the past of the current Old Trafford. This is a fascinating insight into the relative priorities of different groups of supporters. Whilst older supporters will want there be a loud (and hostile) atmosphere in the stadium- they appear to prefer to experience it from a little distance away. Meanwhile younger supporters want a link to the past despite the currently stadium containing little of historical character (the Munich clock being an obvious exception).
The way forward
The re-built Bernabeu (left) is constrained by the original concrete whilst the new Tottenham Hotspur Stadium (right) affords more space and comfort with less-steep inclines.
I believe that United should take the opportunity to make a fresh start in a new stadium. The Tottenham Hotspur Stadium is a great example of the impact a new stadium can have on spectator experience, comfort, commercial opportunities and also sit nicely in its local environment. The parallel of building a new stadium adjacent to the site of the old one (and indeed parts of the old stadium removed whilst still in use to make way for the new stadium) is also relevant. When compared to a major stadium re-build like the Bernabeu in Madrid, a complete new build offers much more flexibility and longevity. Whilst the re-built Bernabeu has an impressive shiny new façade and state-of-the-art halo screen, large parts of the stadium bowl feature the original concrete which restricts the spectator experience in terms of tight legroom and narrow concourses.
A key challenge for United is how to create vibrant atmosphere in its new stadium (or improve that in a re-built version). Alongside factoring in design features to help retain and amplify any sound generated, there are two key aspects that need incorporating. The first is to ensure that there is a good provision of “safe-standing in seated areas”- particularly at ground level behind each end. The second is to ensure that some younger supporters can enjoy this section. The inclusion of standing areas is already an area of focus for the project team. The allocation of tickets, however, is trickier. Even if there is a push to include younger supporters, unless there is a mechanism to prevent these tickets being retained, there is a risk that these initially younger supporters will grow old in their places and history will eventually repeat itself.
A warning
Whatever path is ultimately taken by United; it is unlikely that things will move at the same speed as in 1909 when Chairman John Henry Davies announced the intention for United to move to “the finest stadium in the North”. Less than twelve months later United hosted Liverpool in the first fixture at Old Trafford! As well as the promise of better facilities and an increased capacity, United were keen to vacate their former home at Bank Street with its uneven pitch, foul fumes and smells from nearby factories and half-a-mile trip to the nearest pub for both player changing and spectator refreshments!
Given that it is doubtful that anything close to the 1909 timeframe can be achieved this time, United shouldn’t neglect paying attention to the current stadium as it enters its final years. It is increasingly becoming an outlier in terms of the lack of spectator comforts. The absence of video screens means that supporters in the stadium are frozen out during VAR deliberations. Whilst there will be plenty of handwringing when the old place is demolished (or even if it is re-built), moving with the times in terms of stadium facilities is part of United’s history just as much as its succession of trophies.
Let’s hope those in charge at Old Trafford can live up to the vision and legacy created by John Henry Davies!
コメント