devo85
Player Valuation: £950k
The height of the stadium only reduced 2 meters, from 54m to 52m. It was more to do with making the angled trusses all the same size to reduce costs and also to reduce the gap between the curved metal top and the brick base, so they are more in harmony with each other.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
No. The site might be called that by some for now, but the stadium is a different matter. There'll be no more imprecision over that. You're not factoring in recent developments or the obvious fact that selling naming rights isn't helped by the club in the prior period adopting that name for it.
devo85
Player Valuation: £950k
The capacity was always 52,888. The main changes to the original design were removing the riverside multistory car park, making the west side base dimensionally similar to the east side, adding the stepped plaza with the diagonal walls to the west side, and replacing the large wind baffles with trees.
I think UNESCO would have objected to any type or size of stadium built on that site.
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
The original 60k stadium was basically for if we had been awarded the commonwealth games (although it would only hold approx 40k for athletics). This was in an east-west configuration. As soon as that bid failed everything stalled for quite a long time, with various consultation phases while they made their mind up what to do.
Despite the majority of fans preferring the larger capacity, 60k was dropped and the smaller plan B north-south option was promoted (eventually having the roof lowered slightly). The games would've come with a lot of additional funding. As soon as that disappeared, so did the Vauxhall station and things were scaled back. At the second round of consultation when the lower capacity was questioned, the club even hinted that after people-movement modelling, it was shown that the site was even tight at 53k capacity. When the obvious follow up question of how would we ever expand to 60k+ (as promised), they simply said..... it should stretch to that.
In otherwords, the constraints were not so much due to UNESCO than they were the club's assessment of the size of the fanbase and the overall costs to satisfy that demand. Stadium Costs rise exponentially with capacity and ticket prices can fall quite sharply with excess capacity. They estimated that sweetspot to be less than 53k.
The binman chronicles
Player Valuation: £80m
Have you got any documentation to back up the east to west layout on the site for the games?
The image I saw was broadly similar to what we have now but the South stand was open and part of the track was on a raised platform above Nelson Dock.
There was a diagram posted in this thread a while ago which did indeed suggest that orientation change. I’ll see if I can find it…
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
It was posted a few pages ago..... it is impossible to fit an athletics track in the north-south without the stadium going into the neighbouring dock....
Could find the post @The binman chronicles - but I found the image elsewhere:
I’m assuming the image is in the standard north-south orientation, anyway, it looks that way. So that would make the stadium East-West.
I’m assuming the image is in the standard north-south orientation, anyway, it looks that way. So that would make the stadium East-West.
Tom Hughes
Player Valuation: £10m
The Echo also covered the differences between the proposals. A former colleague of mine did the outline structural assessment of both options.
How the Commonwealth Games would have changed Bramley-Moore
Everton's proposed Bramley-Moore Dock stadium was initially part of the city's Commonwealth Games bid
hope so
Mrtallywacker
GOT spiritual advisor
They're not adopting the name my son, it is the name (until is is remamed). That's the point you seem blinded to.
Potential sponsors won't be bothered about a dock that was named before Everton were even formed.
God bless.
Johnnytotal
Player Valuation: £10m
The address of the stadium will always be Bramley Moore Dock i think.
