New Everton Stadium Discussion

Looking at that images I wondering if the entrances to the lower tier can be placed further back, towards the back of the lower tier.

They could do but that would involve significant costs. As it stands people would hit ground level with a minimum amount of steps (or any) once in the vomitory. This way it allows people to disperse quickly instead of needing multiple staircases filling up the available lower concourse area or having a raised concourse.
 
Maybe the engineers here can explain why the north facing stand doesn't go straight at the rear of the upper tier? They have lost a couple of thousand seats there.

Still, I think the overall design is excellent.
Indeed. I dont understand that at all.
If anyone can explace this, it would be most help
Maybe the engineers here can explain why the north facing stand doesn't go straight at the rear of the upper tier? They have lost a couple of thousand seats there.

Still, I think the overall design is excellent.
I have to say Ive been asking myself the same Q.
But that doesn't make sense.
The notch is at the rear, and only in the centre area.
Im confused too.
 
But that doesn't make sense.
The notch is at the rear, and only in the centre area.

From a birds eye view it looks like this:

Screenshot_20190725-132830_Chrome.jpg


The larger side stand upper tiers slope down so it cuts into a straight line with the back of the north stand. This is all to keep the building on the BM plot, if it was the same height all around it would overhang into the wastewater works land.
 
add to the fact that if safe standing 1:2 ratio does come in , then every club will be able to increace capacity, not just us … so spurs and arsenal could go to 75,000 if we up ours to 65,000

essentially we will always be at least 10,000 seats behind 'the competition'
I think it would be harder and expensive to convert older grounds to safe standing.
 

I don't think so, its quite a simple process from what ive seen

Celtic lobbed theirs up in one Summer, and when Bristol City were mucking about with their ground they installed a few rows to show the council or the planners how they would work.

Relative to most things stadium related, pretty straightforward. Now if the plan would be to actually expand the ground to have them, then obvs, a bit more complicated.
 
I don't think so, its quite a simple process from what ive seen

What we've seen so far is a 1:1 conversion on a relatively small scale. Not all stadia will be compatible with even 1:1 and I doubt there are many, if any pre Tottenham, that will support 1:2.

It's not just the terrace conversion it's also the expansion of facilities, entrances, exits, toilets, catering etc. If not futureproofed those stadia will have to build all the additional stuff also.
 
What we've seen so far is a 1:1 conversion on a relatively small scale. Not all stadia will be compatible with even 1:1 and I doubt there are many, if any pre Tottenham, that will support 1:2.

It's not just the terrace conversion it's also the expansion of facilities, entrances, exits, toilets, catering etc. If not futureproofed those stadia will have to build all the additional stuff also.

most stadiums , well the lower league ones , were already standing .. so your point is invalid.

only the newly built stadiums MIGHT have issues.. not enough issues to not make standing and capacity increace viable
 
That would be the Keith Harris who is no longer part of the club.. who never actually said anything publicly about the stadium project he was supposed to be heading up... who at the last AGM referred to the Gwladys Street as Gwladys Road and the same Keith Harris who was part of the Wembley reconstruction mob that ran way over budget and was late with delivery... and worst of all, the same Keith Harris who is a rabid Man United fan... ???

Unfortunately, it is very, very unlikely that either the football authorities nor the police will agree to anything other than safe standing on a 1:1 ratio.

With all due respect and as things stand at this moment in time, anybody thinking or believing otherwise is in cloud cuckoo land.

It seems to me that my posts annoyed you - apologies for that, not my intention if so. Allow me to explain.

My thoughts on the safe standing are based on the second stage consultation site, I've just copied this below as a screen-grab;

65114


Based on this it seems to me that this is how the club plan to increase capacity in future, which I think was @Taff 's question.

To clarify, I mean to say that this is apparently the club's plan, not that Safe standing will definitely happen with a greater than 1:1 ratio and will definitely increase the capacity of any new stadium.

You have strong doubts about the chances of this happening and that's fair. As for Keith Harris, I don't know much about him.

Personally I like sitting at the game, and wouldn't like standing all game. On a more cynical note, I'm not sure that the 'Premier League' have anything to gain from approving Safe Standing, perhaps someone can enlighten me?

Good to talk about it ;)
 

It seems to me that my posts annoyed you - apologies for that, not my intention if so. Allow me to explain.

My thoughts on the safe standing are based on the second stage consultation site, I've just copied this below as a screen-grab;

View attachment 65114

Based on this it seems to me that this is how the club plan to increase capacity in future, which I think was @Taff 's question.

To clarify, I mean to say that this is apparently the club's plan, not that Safe standing will definitely happen with a greater than 1:1 ratio and will definitely increase the capacity of any new stadium.

You have strong doubts about the chances of this happening and that's fair. As for Keith Harris, I don't know much about him.

Personally I like sitting at the game, and wouldn't like standing all game. On a more cynical note, I'm not sure that the 'Premier League' have anything to gain from approving Safe Standing, perhaps someone can enlighten me?

Good to talk about it ;)
Didn't annoy me at all mate.
The club has said the stadium will be built to 52,000 seats.
If safe standing does get approved and at the expected 1:1 ratio, it simply means x number of seats come out and the same x number then get the opportunity to stand.
I don't see where or how the club intends to implement this alleged increase to 62,000.

Safe standing as I see it is a method of helping to improve crowd atmosphere, seems to work massively well in that respect in Europe, particularly Germany.

I also think that if the club think there'll be a demand for 62,000 (by whatever method) in the future, why not build to that capacity straight away?

Some say a not full stadium would be bad. But if we built to 60,000 and got 56,000, that's an extra 4,000 over and above the conservative capacity they've settled upon.

Obviously the footprint of BMD might not allow for 60,000 to be built but nobody, to my knowledge, has actually come out and said this. I suspect financing the project is more of a factor than the footprint of the site.
 
I am curious how we might expand. Safe standing is surely only part of the story. I suspect we might find out more when planning goes in or am I being naive?
 
Celtic lobbed theirs up in one Summer, and when Bristol City were mucking about with their ground they installed a few rows to show the council or the planners how they would work.

Relative to most things stadium related, pretty straightforward. Now if the plan would be to actually expand the ground to have them, then obvs, a bit more complicated.
20190815_185942.jpg
 

Top