Stadium Thread - ALL Kirkby/Stadium Discussion Here

[Goat]

You have both pointed out bad things about Goodison. I agree we cant stay at GP in its current state, so your saying we should take a below standard stadium, in a place that would be difficult to get to, that might not even produce more cashflow than GP? Just so people dont have to watch a game with a post in the way?

 

[GrandOldTeam]

You have both pointed out bad things about Goodison. I agree we cant stay at GP in its current state, so your saying we should take a below standard stadium, in a place that would be difficult to get to, that might not even produce more cashflow than GP? Just so people dont have to watch a game with a post in the way?

You agree we can't stay at Goodison so advocate a move.
Kirkby for me, and the majority of fans isn't a below standard stadium. It will be if they reduce the capacity. I can't see how it is difficult to get to, its on the arse end of a motorway for one, and a minute from the Lancs.
It would produce more cashflow.
More obstructed views = less attendance = less money.

This is why I locked this thread, pretty certain all this has been discussed at length!

 

[davek]

Reduction of the proposed capacity to below 50,000. If that's true, I cant wait for the club to account for that. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the transport infrastrucure servicing a town of...err...40,000...cant cope? Hold on, they were told that.

Permission to use the word 'shambles'?

 

[davek]

It surprises me that people who oppose Kirkby still think sound bites are FACTS.

Anyway, just to re-iterate (and keep on the subject without opening world war 4 again), I can't see the rationale for reducing the stadia capacity if true. No new stadia has been built with less than 50,000 capacity that I know of. If true, I can see this being the basis of an appeal as the main issues have been about the retail element of the scheme and the football club has not been a central part of the enquiry, as much as we would want it to be.

Perhaps he hear wrong, and it meant the retail foothold was being reduced as it would seem strange to keep the same footspace, but reduce the stadia size.

Unbelievable statement. The Inquiry gave over days to debate the social, environmental and economic effect of a stadium on the locality.

 

[best little spaniard]

Whats the bloody point of moving to another stadium that's the same size?

Another thought I've had is that, if us getting investment depends on having planning permission for Kirkby, why don't we put in permission for another site. Surely having permission for a stadium (that isn't Kirkby) would help?

Or am I being a [Poor language removed]?

 

[BlackToffee]

Unbelievable statement. The Inquiry gave over days to debate the social, environmental and economic effect of a stadium on the locality.

True, but the essence of the enquiry was whether the plan, and in particular Tesco's plan and its size broke planning regulations. It was never about if the Kirkby stadia broke planninng regulations, but it was considered as part of the whole scheme, quite rightly as there was an objection from many local people.

Despite KEIOC and its supporters attempting (very badly) to use it as an opportunity to put Everton on trial, the central rationale for the enquiry was about Tesco, not Everton.

 

[BlackToffee]

Keep Everton In Our City - Our Position Explained

Read that, ignore the "sound bites" and read what experts have to say.

Mike, with the greatest of respect, once the chairman of KEIOC (admittedly in a "person capacity") tries to frighten residents with video's of so called Everton violence, for me the whole organisation losses my respect.

Close the thread, we're gonna go round in circles (again)

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Mike, with the greatest of respect, once the chairman of KEIOC (admittedly in a "person capacity") tries to frighten residents with video's of so called Everton violence, for me the whole organisation losses my respect.

Close the thread, we're gonna go round in circles (again)

Absolutely spot on. Although, to be fair they did make an apology;

http://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/e...hreatens-keioc-legal-action-2.html#post122209

Strangely enough, it wasn't kept in their archive for very long

And yep, round in circles

 

[teppic]

i think this reduction in capacity moves the goal posts a fair bit.

for me thats kirkby finished as i see little point in moving for similiar capacity.

 

[Goat]

Mike, with the greatest of respect, once the chairman of KEIOC (admittedly in a "person capacity") tries to frighten residents with video's of so called Everton violence, for me the whole organisation losses my respect.

Close the thread, we're gonna go round in circles (again)

If you read what I said, I said ignore the soundbites and suggested you read what the experts had to say.

I meant the many experts that they had got information from on the site.

I dont support keioc, I find them anal, but they have done a lot of work and found out a lot of important info.

But I agree, its boring, you arent going to change your view and im not going to change mine.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

could it be that our new stadium proposal turns out to be no more than a stalking horse? merely a vehicle to hang the proposed redevelopment on? will we now see a conditional approval whereby the scale of the retail development is temporarily restricted & the stadium capacity is restricted to a level that makes it no longer viable for the club (if it ever was) & tesco simply swap it for another community leisure facility of some kind? surely not!

i can only assume that anybody who still claims this is a good idea made their mind up some time ago & refuses to consider the possibility that they could be wrong. there's plenty of information out there now, much of it from the club & it's "partners" in this scheme, it doesn't take a lot of working out. anyway, hopefully we'll never see it happen.

 

[kenada_blue]

Soooooooooooo....

Overall he's saying that the build "could" go ahead mainly down to the recession, so the Government can say "hey look, we're still pumping cash and creating jobs".

To be fair, I've (and the arle man) have said that from day 1. The reason why it could go through is down to the regeneration and job opportunities in a "deprived" area. Red tape gets cut in half, especially due to the recession. Major redevelopments that probably wouldnt get through 3 years ago can be bulldozed through now it seems.

I WAS pro for the move having lived in Kirkby and have family and friends there. But (apart from giving me a headache whenever its mentioned) the rumour that its could be less that 50,000 is a bit hard to take.

But saying that.....does it mean the KEIOC lot may lighten up to the fact the ground would be lower capacity? After all they did say we dont have 50,000 fans to fill it anyway.

 

[davek]

could it be that our new stadium proposal turns out to be no more than a stalking horse? merely a vehicle to hang the proposed redevelopment on? will we now see a conditional approval whereby the scale of the retail development is temporarily restricted & the stadium capacity is restricted to a level that makes it no longer viable for the club (if it ever was) & tesco simply swap it for another community leisure facility of some kind? surely not!

i can only assume that anybody who still claims this is a good idea made their mind up some time ago & refuses to consider the possibility that they could be wrong. there's plenty of information out there now, much of it from the club & it's "partners" in this scheme, it doesn't take a lot of working out. anyway, hopefully we'll never see it happen.

Spot on. Only because they've taken up a fixed position could anyone now still support this move. Imagine if that'd have been in it from the begining: "We're moving to Kirkby because it'll be a facility led improvement in our position...What capacity is the new stadium? Erm 40,000".

Elstone stated that only with a 47,000 gate average would a stadium up there bring in the region of £6M extra for Moyes per season. £80m for the pleasure of the same capacity would see Moyes selling every year. Mind you, no change there then.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

A reduced capacity obviously kills the proposal, Everton wouldn't press ahead.

 

[davek]

True, but the essence of the enquiry was whether the plan, and in particular Tesco's plan and its size broke planning regulations. It was never about if the Kirkby stadia broke planninng regulations, but it was considered as part of the whole scheme, quite rightly as there was an objection from many local people.

Wrong. When the project was called in last August the government spokesman stated:

"We recognise that there have been strong views expressed about this complex proposal. Ministers thought long and hard about the case and decided the only appropriate decision was to call it in. There is a long-established process in place where less than 0.01% of all planning cases are called in. A case is considered to have more than local significance if it triggers one or more of the call-in criteria such as conflict with national policy, or if it causes national or regional controversy."

Despite KEIOC and its supporters attempting (very badly) to use it as an opportunity to put Everton on trial, the central rationale for the enquiry was about Tesco, not Everton.

That's right, you dont want to start WW3 do you? You really should get over all this KEIOC bogeyman stuff.