Dan Meis Workshop

[bluestevon]

I have you so wrong on this capacity issue. You are putting too much on that number, it’s irrelevant really.

55k would be perfect I feel.

So would 59k be no ambition, and 60k be ambition ??

Its not the number, its the whole project. The fact that we are moving into the cityc entre and not to cheaper easier land outside, says more.

same people who get hung up on the attendance are the similar to the people obsessing about 61878 numbers i reckon.

Like the number actually matters when you're watching the match - rather than the atmosphere at the ground...

 

[bluestevon]

I have you so wrong on this capacity issue. You are putting too much on that number, it’s irrelevant really.

55k would be perfect I feel.

So would 59k be no ambition, and 60k be ambition ??

Its not the number, its the whole project. The fact that we are moving into the cityc entre and not to cheaper easier land outside, says more.

same people who get hung up on the attendance are the similar to the people obsessing about 61878 numbers i reckon.

Like the number actually matters when you're watching the match - rather than the atmosphere at the ground...

 

[MickA]

I wasn't a fan of the shape from the original plans and I'm not impressed by design of the east stand but the rest of the stands I am happy with and the comparisons with other stadiums is pretty mind blowing. It probably means we will have the least leg room of any new build but looks like it will be worth it to have the fans as close to the pitch as possible.

Be interesting to see the outside renders. Apart from the smaller north end there needs to be a statement all around given the views.

when are they expanding the kop mate? Is it even possible for them to expand it - wouldn't that entail a complete re-diverting of Breck road? Given that they are redeveloping that soon i believe - any future Kop expansion would have had to have been done prior so the road could then be re-diverted, it isn't gonna happen once they have redeveloped it is it?

the rs are focusing on the areas of the ground they can stick more boxes in more than 'fan experience' - and even should they get around to redoing the kop - 100% they would slap luxury exec boxes right into the middle of it as has been done at some other grounds that prioritised the execs over atmosphere or the average fan.

I believe Tottenham have a few rows of premium right in the middle of their home end which to me personally is sacrosant.

The only way to deal with the kop is to demolish and rebuild and you're right it'll be awful. Let's hope they do it.

 

[bluestevon]

The next step is the Anfield Road, which they already have planning permission for, however it isn't financially viable under current ticket prices.

Once they've paid for the Main Stand (within five years) from increased hospitality revenue and current ticket revenue then maybe they will.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no concrete plans for any major building work on the Kop within the foreseeable future - only the above.

to make the kop a viable extension they'd have to slap the exec boxes right in the middle of the 'new stand', can imagine how that would go down, so they will extend the areas that give most bang for the buck exec wise

 

[bluestevon]

The next step is the Anfield Road, which they already have planning permission for, however it isn't financially viable under current ticket prices.

Once they've paid for the Main Stand (within five years) from increased hospitality revenue and current ticket revenue then maybe they will.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no concrete plans for any major building work on the Kop within the foreseeable future - only the above.

to make the kop a viable extension they'd have to slap the exec boxes right in the middle of the 'new stand', can imagine how that would go down, so they will extend the areas that give most bang for the buck exec wise

 

[MickA]

same people who get hung up on the attendance are the similar to the people obsessing about 61878 numbers i reckon.

Like the number actually matters when you're watching the match - rather than the atmosphere at the ground...

Yeah the design is as important, if not more so, than numbers. Stoke is often cited as being the noisiest ground and I don't see their home end bigger than the kop/holte/nwhl etc etc. It's getting the right blend of acoustics, architecture and facilities for me, get that right and the rest will follow naturally.

 

[PhilM]

I have you so wrong on this capacity issue. You are putting too much on that number, it’s irrelevant really.

55k would be perfect I feel.

So would 59k be no ambition, and 60k be ambition ??

Its not the number, its the whole project. The fact that we are moving into the city centre and not to cheaper easier land outside, says more.

I've always been an advocate of a similar figure as I feel we can realistically achieve it week in, week out, while maintaining an intense atmosphere.

Obviously the larger the better if near or full capacity can be consistently maintained, but it shouldn't be the be all and end all of our design.

to make the kop a viable extension they'd have to slap the exec boxes right in the middle of the 'new stand', can imagine how that would go down, so they will extend the areas that give most bang for the buck exec wise

The Kop is almost a part of their USP: it's a central component of the whole image they sell, so they'd be stupid to inadvertently damage that.

If they really wanted to attract much larger crowds - don't forget they've got a huge waiting list - then they'd be doing the Anfield Road now.

However, they're not simply because they (FSG) aren't willing to pay for increased capacity and their fans aren't willing to increase ticket prices.

What we need to learn from this, and it's what I think Meis was alluding to, is that increased capacity needs to be balanced against cost for fans.

I'd rather we had a 55k stadium with slightly increased ticket prices rather than 60k, which we may not consistently fill, and larger price rises.

 

[Gardocki]

Meis did discuss the overhang issue.

Basically if you had the overhang then the top deck needs to be steeper to maintain viewing angles at the back of the top deck, and they’re already at maximum steepness within current regulations.

Makes sense. You'd be compromising the steepness of the lower tier to accommodate an overhang.

 

[brieverton]

Compromise can be a dirty word, but I'd be more than happy to settle for 55k on the basis of the new designs.

Waterfront location is a unique plus point for us, the RS or others cannot rival that no matter how big they build.

I don't see any chance of 60k but I think they'll push out towards 55k themselves as far as possible and meet in the middle.

I certainly would not trade a raucous, intimidating atmosphere for increased capacity, that's for sure.

Nor would I be looking to squeeze another 5-10k capacity if it endangers the viability of the build. Safe standing will also be a factor anyway.

My main concern is whether this gets built at all, discussions about 60k are a bit moot whilst things exist only on PowerPoint presentations.

The most important thing is that we are at BMD by 22-23, I'd like the biggest capacity possible but if it means something in the 50k range in a waterfront stadium, I'll accept every time.

 

[H.H.]

Thanks for your post mate. Appreciate you taking the time to post it in here.

Regarding the part of your post I bolded above, and going by the pics Dan Meis provided to compare our stadium design with your NWHL (see below), it appears that our main stand will be steeper on the bottom leading up to the corporate boxes. Above that the top sections seem on par.

No idea how that is going to transpire in real life. And in fact with all the comparisons to all the other stadium blueprints, I can't see how 55,000 is achievable with these blueprints. More I'd say around the 58-60k range.

However, these are the architects "initial drawings". If the Everton Board do what we all fear and reduce the capacity, the blueprints will probably need to change.

Kit, I was wrong regarding the main stand comparisons. My excuse, at 5am last night/this morning I'm still badly suffering from the effects of Sunday's win.
In the above diagram the two stands are very very similar so the people in the upper tier won't be further away but here is my different/non hungover reason of why I still think Evertons stadium will be smaller.
The single tier stand is due to hold 4,000ish less and the tier behind the opposite goal (with the massive scoreboard) has what looks like around 25% less rows of seats?

Still think it looks great but I hope your architect wasn't paid millions just cos he got on the phone and asked Spurs to send him our blueprints .

I look forward to seeing more detailed stuff about the outside (not that important really as we only really look at the inside) and hope they don't change the inside renders to much.

 

[Big Neville Southall]

Certainly looks like they have gone for steepness as a priority, maybe it's also a consideration of the site itself. Personally I think that having everybody under one roof for the first time will be a decent trade off for being slightly further away.

The back of the South Stand does line up nicely in the corners with a good flow to the upper tiers, and you do need steepness to reach that high. So I do have to accept some compromise over steepness. There are a fair few boxes ticked off.

Part of it though was intimacy as in more fans close to the action, yes two rows on the front are closer to the action but the rest will gradually be further away. The stands will look imposing but I'd guess that fan to pitch distance ratio is further than others, or at least, not as close it can be.

I'm not convinced that fans completely knew what they were asking for when asking for steepness, followed by fans close to the pitch and intimacy. It's a contradiction.

Yes they look imposing but in actual fact it just means fans are further away from the action and the pitch and from each other.

Newcastle's ground is the closest example I can think to what the views will be like in terms of distance to the pitch, and you don't hear fans go on about that away end saying that they love it.

Just needs a bit of tinkering, you'd get more seats in, save money on concrete just by scaling in the steepness a little bit. Keep the general design the same though. It is good as a whole though.

 

[bignev23]

Looks like something I did in my GCSE design class when I was 15.... He's forgot to put a roof on as well.

 

[Wat Tyler]

All this talk of atmosphere, we don’t even Sing 2 songs at Goodison now, even if we are winning.

 

[kithnou]

Kit, I was wrong regarding the main stand comparisons. My excuse, at 5am last night/this morning I'm still badly suffering from the effects of Sunday's win.
In the above diagram the two stands are very very similar so the people in the upper tier won't be further away but here is my different/non hungover reason of why I still think Evertons stadium will be smaller.
The single tier stand is due to hold 4,000ish less and the tier behind the opposite goal (with the massive scoreboard) has what looks like around 25% less rows of seats?

Still think it looks great but I hope your architect wasn't paid millions just cos he got on the phone and asked Spurs to send him our blueprints .

I look forward to seeing more detailed stuff about the outside (not that important really as we only really look at the inside) and hope they don't change the inside renders to much.

All good my friend. I realised your time of post as I was in Australia during the middle of the day responding

I agree your beautiful stadium will be bigger. Just hoping ours is as good as we are promised, as on field our Board and new ‘majority shareholder’ have proven to be complete fluffity fluff.

 

[Sir Alan]

That stand on a European night at Goodison would be something else.

Have to say Dan that stand has got me excited again.