New Everton Stadium Discussion

Again.... i can't disagree about the beer factor or the glass versus fans.... but it also has a lot to do with the larger upper tiers and closing roof.

Spurs is also a different animal to the Emirates. Far better proportions.

The Dortmund analogy holds a lot of water but the roof geometry is different and the capacity is much larger with tread depths that allow 2:1 capacity uplift. We've gone with 750mm which can't yield that ratio.
Yes a closing roof would be a game changer in terms of reducing the impact on atmosphere from corporate boxes.. doubt premier league would ever let us take advantage of it though!

I think the Spurs stadium does look great inside but I don’t think I’ve heard many rave about the atmosphere?

Not sure about the technicalities in your last point, you clearly know more about it than me but I do know we have invested an awful lot in maximising the potential atmosphere so I’m hopeful it will be at least as good as anything in the uk?
 
Yes.... but it's a bit fur-coat-no knickers if the facilities are basic. 22 boxes, lower capacity, larger viewing distances in the upper tiers due to no overlapping, no closing roof meaning the front few rows get soaked and flexibility is minimal.... might also mean that that money could've been better spent.

I honestly don't think the externals add any real value or functionality tbh.
You insist that moving the fans further away from the pitch in the lower tier, making it a lot more shallow to enable overhanging upper tiers is better.

This is despite all the top stadium architects in the world all saying fans as close as possible in stands as steep as possible is the way to do it.

I know you’ll reply to this saying your way is correct but it’s simply not.

Acoustic engineers have been involved in every step of the way, i know it’s been of paramount importance, but you have a look at some CGI images and decide you can see lots of faults.

You continually mention that new home end is “only” 2 rows bigger than the Gwladys Street combined. Why not mention it’s nearly 3k bigger with the potential to be about 50% bigger with a change in safe standing regulation?

You are so, so negative about everything to do with BMD and it’s incredibly tiresome.

It’s a world class stadium in an incredibly location and i believe it’ll be better that Spurs NFL stadium.

Like Meis said, Spurs have built a Bentley, we’re building a Ferrari.
Yes.... but it's a bit fur-coat-no knickers if the facilities are basic. 22 boxes, lower capacity, larger viewing distances in the upper tiers due to no overlapping, no closing roof meaning the front few rows get soaked and flexibility is minimal.... might also mean that that money could've been better spent.

I honestly don't think the externals add any real value or functionality tbh.
 
moving the fans further away from the pitch in the lower tier, making it a lot more shallow to enable overhanging upper tiers is better.

I realise you were aiming your comments to Tom but I wanted to question this point. I don't pretend to be any architect just my observations and opinion.

Why does having double decker / overhanging stands have any bearing on "moving fans further away from the pitch in the lower tier" ? It's a bluff to shoot down the other opinion. Just one example look at Palace below. What's wrong with this? Would our north stand have been better like this or maybe it will
look like it when it's finished. Who knows?
Selhurst Park.jpg
 
I realise you were aiming your comments to Tom but I wanted to question this point. I don't pretend to be any architect just my observations and opinion.

Why does having double decker / overhanging stands have any bearing on "moving fans further away from the pitch in the lower tier" ? It's a bluff to shoot down the other opinion. Just one example look at Palace below. What's wrong with this? Would our north stand have been better like this or maybe it will
look like it when it's finished. Who knows? View attachment 170569
To have overhanging upper tiers, you have to have a shallower lower tier than what we will have at BMD. The first row has to be further away from the pitch too.

It’s all to do with sight lines, C-Values etc.
 


You insist that moving the fans further away from the pitch in the lower tier, making it a lot more shallow to enable overhanging upper tiers is better.

This is despite all the top stadium architects in the world all saying fans as close as possible in stands as steep as possible is the way to do it.

I know you’ll reply to this saying your way is correct but it’s simply not.

Acoustic engineers have been involved in every step of the way, i know it’s been of paramount importance, but you have a look at some CGI images and decide you can see lots of faults.

You continually mention that new home end is “only” 2 rows bigger than the Gwladys Street combined. Why not mention it’s nearly 3k bigger with the potential to be about 50% bigger with a change in safe standing regulation?

You are so, so negative about everything to do with BMD and it’s incredibly tiresome.

It’s a world class stadium in an incredibly location and i believe it’ll be better that Spurs NFL stadium.

Like Meis said, Spurs have built a Bentley, we’re building a Ferrari.

Most stadium architects? Dan Meis said exactly the same about his Roma design, which had 2 tier end stands with larger upper tiers and overlaps.... so the main determining factors are numbers of rows within reflective angle of those roof surfaces..... which is why some of the world's noisiest stadia are multi-tier.

However, I've said that a simple bowl effect can add unity and atmosphere repeatedly. However extrapolating that on 4 sides creates a simple bowl that won't necessarily satisfy other requirements that well. A larger St Marys etc. As I also said.... perhaps less is more and a basic bowl will suffice.

Moving the pitch 2-3 metres further away to lower the rake for the same c-value won't reduce the atmosphere at all. It can however bring the back rows of the upper several metres closer, to give them better views and the stadium greater intimacy. Or enable more rows in a larger upper tier directly beneath the roof to enhance the atmosphere as at say the Millenium. That's how sightline geometry works and that's what happens at most major large stadia.

I've mentioned the Gwladys Street, because the South stand is only 2 rows more than it, (and no-one would say the street end is a large home end). I also said that the extensions into the corner lifted its capacity.... but it's hardly the super-sized home end that was in the original proposals, and for comparison is approx 5k less than Spurs' South stand. Less than the Walton Hall Park stadium. 16 rows less than Anfield's Kop but with less roof capture...... I think that had far more to do with the architect's sketched concept than any acoustic engineers input.

I'm not sure if it's really world class tbh. The exterior yes.... the interior is almost as simple as it can be.

Ferraris are not particularly well known for their practicalityy or capacity, so you might have something there.
 
Most stadium architects? Dan Meis said exactly the same about his Roma design, which had 2 tier end stands with larger upper tiers and overlaps.... so the main determining factors are numbers of rows within reflective angle of those roof surfaces..... which is why some of the world's noisiest stadia are multi-tier.

However, I've said that a simple bowl effect can add unity and atmosphere repeatedly. However extrapolating that on 4 sides creates a simple bowl that won't necessarily satisfy other requirements that well. A larger St Marys etc. As I also said.... perhaps less is more and a basic bowl will suffice.

Moving the pitch 2-3 metres further away to lower the rake for the same c-value won't reduce the atmosphere at all. It can however bring the back rows of the upper several metres closer, to give them better views and the stadium greater intimacy. Or enable more rows in a larger upper tier directly beneath the roof to enhance the atmosphere as at say the Millenium. That's how sightline geometry works and that's what happens at most major large stadia.

I've mentioned the Gwladys Street, because the South stand is only 2 rows more than it, (and no-one would say the street end is a large home end). I also said that the extensions into the corner lifted its capacity.... but it's hardly the super-sized home end that was in the original proposals, and for comparison is approx 5k less than Spurs' South stand. Less than the Walton Hall Park stadium. 16 rows less than Anfield's Kop but with less roof capture...... I think that had far more to do with the architect's sketched concept than any acoustic engineers input.

I'm not sure if it's really world class tbh. The exterior yes.... the interior is almost as simple as it can be.

Ferraris are not particularly well known for their practicalityy or capacity, so you might have something there.

Can you just get a job designing stadia already?
 
Apologies if they’re already on this forum somewhere and I’ve missed them but, are there any images of the 60k version? Would be interesting to see them.
 

Top