New Everton Stadium Discussion

[Huyton Layne]

Deffo think we should redo Goodison. Then somehow magic the roads to being wider, magic some parking that isn't extortionate and makes the club no money, and magically make a school disappear so we can fit a decent sized ground in. Oh and add some bus routes that don't go halfway around the world.

 

[Tom Hughes]

He is definitely not a RS. He has been takling about redeveloping Goodison for decades.

I was a fan of his work but now is the time to let go.

This is supposed to be a discussion forum on the stadium. If its all done and dusted why is it still open?

I merely responded to the assertion that GP redevelopment was not possible or viable. I'm sorry, but that's absolute nonsense and needed a response. Some people engaged, so I then tried to qualify my opinions and in the process stated some of my reservations about the proposals. It doesn't mean I'm anti-BMD per se, just that i have some concerns about some aspects that should've been clarified by now. When they have been, and the finances, planning and transport strategy are in place we can start letting go.... until then, my seat is still firmly bolted down in the Park end.

 

[Dr Baxter]

Back on topic, please. We are talking new stadium not doing up Goodison. To paraphrase Elvis Costello "I don't want to stay in Walton". Sorry.

 

[Dr Baxter]

Nor can we take seriously the possibility that BMD can readily accommodate 52,000 crowds in getting to the stadium in the first place. As Tom has pointed out, the Council is already in the process of reducing vehicle throughput capability right outside the proposed stadium. Shanks's pony will need to be the preferred method. The lack of attention given so far to transport issues is worrying.

We do need a proper transport plan. At the moment, the details are sketchy at best. Soccerbuses need to be the preferred method of travel. Black hackneys from town will do a bomb, too. Over time, it will become part of the city centre, but that will take 10/20 years.

 

[danefc98]

Back on topic, please. We are talking new stadium not doing up Goodison. To paraphrase Elvis Costello "I don't want to stay in Walton". Sorry.

In all fairness, the alternative to a new stadium is...

Although any talk of redeveloping Goodison should be avoided like the plague.

 

[The binman chronicles]

This is supposed to be a discussion forum on the stadium. If its all done and dusted why is it still open?

I merely responded to the assertion that GP redevelopment was not possible or viable. I'm sorry, but that's absolute nonsense and needed a response. Some people engaged, so I then tried to qualify my opinions and in the process stated some of my reservations about the proposals. It doesn't mean I'm anti-BMD per se, just that i have some concerns about some aspects that should've been clarified by now. When they have been, and the finances, planning and transport strategy are in place we can start letting go.... until then, my seat is still firmly bolted down in the Park end.

This thread is about the new stadium, it will still be open when we are sat in it.

Goodison can be redeveloped, but it still won't ever be a modern stadium. Unless we are willing to clear a lot of streets around it and then it totally changes what makes Goodison...Goodison.

I think most have agreed that while it will be gutting to see it go the benefits outweigh the negatives. The Kirkby one in hindsight was a blessing in disguise. If you add all the problems of that, it was in the wrong location, it looked basic as they come, we weren't the driving force of the build, against BMD it is totally different. The location. Check. The stadium design. Check. We are the ones driving this forward. Check. The only problem is the next door neighbours and that is what God invented trees and walls for.

 

[firefighterblue]

I don't disagree about the ship sailing, I am just a bit wary of fait accompli consultation processes that don't offer all the options for informed decision-making. I'd hoped Kirkby had at least taught us that much.

As regards planning issues, ask the people around Edge Lane, Smithdown, Paddington, Dingle, Garston and Kensington and god knows how many other urban development zones. Whole areas have been cleared in recent years.... some despite major protests and even including listed buildings. I'm not saying I'm in agreement with that, just that the powers that be can clear much larger sites than a few end terraces on Muriel and Diana Streets. Look how fast LFC moved once the decision was made.... Only a few years ago the city planners stated that they would be receptive to the view of a joint venture on the Walton Lane triangle. Put it this way, if the club offered say 20-40 houses double their current value, the cost would be less than Siggy's annual income and about 2% of the site prep costs of BMD. If they didn't want to take, no problem, we can move! I think they'd be forming an orderly Queue to sign up.

Gwladys St had houses on both sides for almost the first 50yrs of Goodison Park. The Upper tier was only added after all those houses were demolished in the late 30's. There were also houses on Goodison Rd facing the mainstand/church plus ones on the corner of Spellow. All now long gone.

Worked in those areas that got cleared. Edge lane was held up by one house for about 5 years so these things happen. I'm sure the majority would move if you offered them.double the value. But some mainly older people don't like change and might dig their heels in. Think.the council were taking about some of Stanley park and there was uproar from locals taking away park land same as the park off the Lancs. I'm not old enough to remember the 30s phew. But how many houses are we talking about here. The school then Gwladys Street, goodison road houses at least. Even then there will not be space in the areas around the ground. I love goodison and would have loved to stay there. But BMD has captured my imagination and for me gives us the chance to move on and upwards. Firmly believe this area will grow with us being there.
Will still be sad to leave goodison with all my memories but was sad when I moved house to a new house and area. Now a few years later I don't really give it a thought.
But I understand there are a lot of blues who wana stay at goodison. Was a great stadium and great memories. Wanted kings dock, hated Kirkby and the one in East Lancs rd but think BMD will be great and a great stadium

 

[Barry Rathbone]

Deffo think we should redo Goodison. Then somehow magic the roads to being wider, magic some parking that isn't extortionate and makes the club no money, and magically make a school disappear so we can fit a decent sized ground in. Oh and add some bus routes that don't go halfway around the world.

As opposed to going into monumental debt that could sink us forever for an identical capacity - what a plan

 

[Brisan123]

As opposed to going into monumental debt that could sink us forever for an identical capacity - what a plan

Bit over the top that lad

 

[Dr Baxter]

As opposed to going into monumental debt that could sink us forever for an identical capacity - what a plan

It's about income. We will have far more opportunities to make far more money on 365 days a year. That is far more important than capacity being a bit lower than we might ideally like.

 

[The binman chronicles]

As opposed to going into monumental debt that could sink us forever for an identical capacity - what a plan

Ultimately the stadium will probably (or nearly) pay for itself through naming rights. Once it is 10/15 years old what is left of the debt will seem surprisingly affordable especially when compared to what a new stadium will cost at that time.

It is the way it works.

 

[Brisan123]

Ultimately the stadium will probably (or nearly) pay for itself through naming rights. Once it is 10/15 years old what is left of the debt will seem surprisingly affordable especially when compared to what a new stadium will cost at that time.

It is the way it works.

40m a year for 20 yrs naming rights will more than cover it

 

[wainy]

I'm affraid that's where you're wrong yet again and even your sweeping generalisations are innacurate. GFE were nothing to do with me and predated the KEIOC stuff. They had the temerity to commission the people who designed Twickenham in response to PJs earlier desire for Kirkby. Where once again it was proven by experts that GP could be redeveloped. They resubmitted it when Kings Dock was on the table. I actually wanted KD and so I voted for that.... but that was a larger and superior stadium on a far better site with transport in place. So it is you who who is polluting with crap...... how apt so close to a sewage plant?

Never said you had anything to do with them did I? Just said your talking about stuff that was put forward by then. So now you’re on about the Kings Dock which has now been built on as, let’s be honest, Everton in them days never had a cat in hells chance of funding that stadium. Another kenwright scheme that fell by the wayside. Excellent. Any other previous prospective sites you want to discuss? Nobody, even the majority of the fans, have the appetite to redevelop Goodison when we can move onto the waterfront.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Deffo think we should redo Goodison. Then somehow magic the roads to being wider, magic some parking that isn't extortionate and makes the club no money, and magically make a school disappear so we can fit a decent sized ground in. Oh and add some bus routes that don't go halfway around the world.

Or you could go to a site with only a tiny fraction of the roads serving it, with no car parks, half the surrounding catchment as water and next to no busses whatsoever?

If you're spending £100m just to prep BMD, you could rebuild half the schools in Walton while you're at it.....

They are not fit for purpose. If you haven't sat in one of those seats go ahead and tell me afterwards if it was worth the 40 odd quid to watch half a game. If you were redeveloping Goodison then taking those away would be a good start. With the space left from the seats being taken away you could add more concourse space or boxes/lounges. By lowering the capacity of the stand by a couple of thousand there will be more space in the concourses for more food outlets/toilets which in turn is what a more modern stadium provides.

Sticking a tight extension on top does not equate to having a better stadium. It is doing a bodge job. If you clear away enough houses and the school then you may as well build a purpose built stand in its place. If you lose BR and GS stands or radically change how it looks you lose the essence of Goodison and we may as well move.

The 250 million is just pulling a figure out of a hat. Our (albeit small) PE stand cost 2 million in 1994, the SoL 20 million a few years later. The 6,000 seat third tier extension at the Etihad cost 60 million. The hole punch well over 100 million. You tell me what it will cost to replace say the main stand in 2040? You can spend 600 million now or you can keep spending bit by bit over a lot of years and see inflation quickly mean that each bit is more expensive than the last. The bloke who is championing finding what it would cost to stay at Goodison was saying it would be 30 or so million to extend the BR stand. Poppy cock! For a start they would need to sort it so the wood is removed, the pictures show a compact extension which presumably means we wouldn't be tearing down everything behind it, so that means tight working conditions and more cost.

If we stay at Goodison and redevelop it will still cost at least 300 million and you won't get the income coming in all in one go as you would with BMD as when they go through various stages there will be a reduced capacity, further increasing the cost. We won't get a stadium sponsor as it will always be known as Goodison and we won't get the pull of having the stadium front and centre of the city.

 

[Tom Hughes]

They are not fit for purpose. If you haven't sat in one of those seats go ahead and tell me afterwards if it was worth the 40 odd quid to watch half a game. If you were redeveloping Goodison then taking those away would be a good start. With the space left from the seats being taken away you could add more concourse space or boxes/lounges. By lowering the capacity of the stand by a couple of thousand there will be more space in the concourses for more food outlets/toilets which in turn is what a more modern stadium provides.

Sticking a tight extension on top does not equate to having a better stadium. It is doing a bodge job. If you clear away enough houses and the school then you may as well build a purpose built stand in its place. If you lose BR and GS stands or radically change how it looks you lose the essence of Goodison and we may as well move.

The 250 million is just pulling a figure out of a hat. Our (albeit small) PE stand cost 2 million in 1994, the SoL 20 million a few years later. The 6,000 seat third tier extension at the Etihad cost 60 million. The hole punch well over 100 million. You tell me what it will cost to replace say the main stand in 2040? You can spend 600 million now or you can keep spending bit by bit over a lot of years and see inflation quickly mean that each bit is more expensive than the last. The bloke who is championing finding what it would cost to stay at Goodison was saying it would be 30 or so million to extend the BR stand. Poppy cock! For a start they would need to sort it so the wood is removed, the pictures show a compact extension which presumably means we wouldn't be tearing down everything behind it, so that means tight working conditions and more cost.

If we stay at Goodison and redevelop it will still cost at least 300 million and you won't get the income coming in all in one go as you would with BMD as when they go through various stages there will be a reduced capacity, further increasing the cost. We won't get a stadium sponsor as it will always be known as Goodison and we won't get the pull of having the stadium front and centre of the city.

The actual construction cost for LFCs mainstand was £74m. There were additional costs for ancillaries.
Their new Anfield Rd stand will cost approx £60m. The result will be a 61k stadium increased from 45k for a construction cost of just £134m.

In my article (which is a few years old) I also cited other existing redevelopments using actual costs. Taking off the upper Bullens, reprofilling the lower adding capacity in an extended lower tier and larger upper stand would be transformational and not piecemeal in any way. It would cost less per seat than Anfield because the lower tier is shallower and the construction volume would be proportionally less. Yes, my figures are broadbrush for the purpose of discussion.... but if anything I'm inflating what was ratified by several stadium architects at the time.