Stadium Thread - ALL Kirkby/Stadium Discussion Here

Status
Not open for further replies.
i'm sure everybody recalls leahy saying that unless everton were offered the opportunityto own a £150 million stadium for around £35 million investment, in time for the 2010 / 11 season then it wouldn't be a realistic option. which seems to rule out kirkby proposal both in terms of cost & timing, unless we've suddenly become much more affluent since he made that remark.
 

What was it, the opposing counsel said?

It is rare indeed to be confronted by a proposal that fails every test that it should properly be measured against. That is even before any weight is attached to the local issues of detrimental impact on amenity. This indicates that the proposal is so fundamentally misconceived that on any weighing of the issues the scales must come down conclusively against the proposal.
Click to expand...

It's not going to happen.
 

Well.. here's what Knowsley Council said:


They quote St Helens rugby club:

“It is impossible to think that they (i.e. the rugby club) could prosper elsewhere, nor that the town would retain its identity, civic pride and self respect if they were to move. They are more intrinsically embedded into the social fabric of the town and local sub-region than any other entity, other than perhaps the Council.”
Click to expand...

This is what they say about EFC:

218. The key factors that KMBC draw attention to include the following:

(a) Everton’s Position
▪ EFC have concluded that a “do nothing” approach and stay at Goodison Park is not a realistic option;
▪ The unchallenged evidence is that there are deficiencies in the existing stadium that justify the approach above;
▪ The search for alternative sites has been extensive and extends beyond that of LFC;
▪ There has been support for the provision of an alternative stadium from the City Council. Serious consideration was given to the redevelopment of the Kings Dock that would have enabled EFC to develop a stadium there. However, that initiative produced no success;
▪ The only site identified that is suitable and available is the application site. No party to this Inquiry has challenged that key factual proposition with the exception of KEIOC;
▪ There is an imperative to facilitate the move as soon as possible. That is such in order to protect the future wellbeing of EFC;
▪ The proposals if they were to await the LDF process cannot be expected to be adopted before 2011 and any planning approval would be approximately 12 months thereafter.

It follows if there is no alternative site the consequences of a dismissal of the application or awaiting the LDF process would produce exactly the same result; namely:
▪ EFC would be consigned to a deficient stadium with the likely consequence that there would be a decline in their premiership status;
▪ It follows that all the benefits associated with the regeneration effect of a premier league stadium including Everton in the Community and the economic impact of the club will ultimately and inevitably fail.
Click to expand...

These are the benefits that Everton will bring to Kirkby say Knowsley's QC:

(a) £55m per annum gross added value being the measure of money gained to the Merseyside economy (MH 7.27/70);
(b) 670 construction jobs associated with the project over 4 years;
(c) A contribution of £7.6m per annum in terms of visitor numbers and in addition the contribution attributable to the Everton turnover;
(d) The benefits associated with the stadium including media coverage; (they attached a documents from Salford rugby, St Helens rugby and Liverpool FC saying how important the teams are to their civil identity)
(e) The refurbishment of the market for which KMBC will match fund the £250,000 provided as part of a Section 106 obligation;
(f) The replacement of affordable housing;
(g) The improvements to the public transport infrastructure both at the bus station and the railway station which will inure to the benefit of all users of public transport not simply those associated with the retail/stadium development.
Click to expand...
 

True. But isnt he just putting what there side of the case was over and what came back?

Not trying to get into it deep again but did KEIOC or LCC report anything that they found substancial to their cause from the enquiry minus the transport issue? I mean, didnt they say they were going to prove 35 viable sites in Liverpool to begin with (for eg)?
 
davek said:
I think that webchat the other day struck a nerve because Elstone has come out with an extrordinary classless attack on KEIOC, Liverpool City Council and anyone else standing in the way of his bonus payment: Kirkby: Setting The Record Straight ? ToffeeBlog ? News ? evertonfc.com - The Official Website of Everton Football Club I'll give him another 6 months in this job before he's certified and taken away. He just cant handle it. :blink:
Click to expand...

A throughly excellent article from Mr Elstone who continues to come across as a man who is clued up and wont take any rubbish from certain sections. Don't be so bitter dave, he has just put a dagger through the no voters hearts
 
kenada_blue said:
True. But isnt he just putting what there side of the case was over and what came back?

Not trying to get into it deep again but did KEIOC or LCC report anything that they found substancial to their cause from the enquiry minus the transport issue? I mean, didnt they say they were going to prove 35 viable sites in Liverpool to begin with (for eg)?
Click to expand...

You see, the thing about that is that - in terms of KEIOC's claims - he had the perfect right to pursue KEIOC on their 'inflated' and 'exaggerated' claims by cross examining them at the inquiry. But old Robert chose not to do so. He had them there for the taking according to this alarming blog he's just committed to the worlwide web, and yet failed to produce his rebuttal. Now, from the comfort of his office, he sees fit to cast aspersions on that group.

Says it all to me.
 
davek said:
You see, the thing about that is that - in terms of KEIOC's claims - he had the perfect right to pursue KEIOC on their 'inflated' and 'exaggerated' claims by cross examining them at the inquiry. But old Robert chose not to do so. He had them there for the taking according to this alarming blog he's just committed to the worlwide web, and yet failed to produce his rebuttal. Now, from the comfort of his office, he sees fit to cast aspersions on that group.

Says it all to me.
Click to expand...


But wouldnt have that just turn the whole thing into a ****ging match? From Elstone's blog he does say everyone went about their business in a respectful and professional manor at the inquiry. And it wasnt KEIOC or LCC who were being "inquired" but Tesco and EFC so he's no need to got at them - and why should he? All he's doing is re-producing the answers to the questions given to them by KEIOC and LCC linking in with the DK heavy webchat yesterday.

I can see why you see it as an unprofessional rant at both parties, and it does seem that way seeing it from that view. But he has put facts from the enquiry which are interesting to read, and does seem more of a dig at LCC than anyone else. And he hasnt labelled any group badly, he's just put the view/evidence of EFC across to questions.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top