New Everton Stadium

Jacko93 said:
Because of the way the deal is formed, they cant agree a final price on the land until they have a plan as to what is going there. The price of the land is based upon the land value post planning. Basically, the better use we make of the land, the more Peel will want. Teams are working on the Planning documents now. The deal that was put forward last year basically secured the land for Everton to design for without the risk of Peel selling it from under them
Click to expand...
It's hard to understand what couldn't be anticipated on use of land. It's a stadium plus retail I would imagine.
 
davek said:
I couldn't agree more mate. They are my sentiments entirely.

It IS all a bit too much razzmatazz for such a provisional understanding.

On planning obstructions: yes, we'll have less red tape given that we wont have to worry about regional local plans being transgressed etc etc. But I think we will see some opposition and it will slow this down a hell of a lot.

If we have a fair wind behind us I'd go with the earliest of your timeframe - 5 years.
Click to expand...

What excites me is finally fulfilling that ambition we had and was raised during King Dock, for me that just feels full circle in BM goes ahead and will heal the lament we all feel driving by the Echo arena and looking at plans from 20 years ago.

But taking the emotion out of it. I agree i wholly expect objections, hitches and delays, i dont see that as particularly as an Everton thing i think that evident of any project of this scale and football stadiums in general. Spurs are 8 years into sorting their ground on their existing site, Chelsea are a good 5 years into theirs and have only released plans a couple of weeks ago.

My other concern is that much of the existing board were involved in the projects of Kirkby and Kings dock, that has created a nervousness in me whether the required skill set is there to project manage this plan to completion, i hope there is a "war time" board that emerges to manage this facet of our development.
 

davek said:
I couldn't agree more mate. They are my sentiments entirely.

It IS all a bit too much razzmatazz for such a provisional understanding.

On planning obstructions: yes, we'll have less red tape given that we wont have to worry about regional local plans being transgressed etc etc. But I think we will see some opposition and it will slow this down a hell of a lot.

If we have a fair wind behind us I'd go with the earliest of your timeframe - 5 years.
Click to expand...

You have no real basis/argument to suggest minimum 5 years or 5-7 years. It's just your pessimistic opinion based on previous failed stadium bids. Pure guesswork.

It's very boring.

I don't like the man but Joe Anderson who's sat in recent meetings with Moshiri and Kenwright suggests 3 years. His opinion is held in much higher regard.
 
Anyway on the possible commonwealth game aspect of the deal
Durban pulled out/were sacked due to lack of funding.
2018 hosts The Gold Coast have stated that they would have no trouble in doing a 'Double Header' in 2022 - The estimated cost so far is GBP 1.3B and that will no doubt go up - it always does.
Does/could LCC get similar funds.
Montreal have just finished paying off the debt from 1976...just sayin like.
 
Neiler said:
What excites me is finally fulfilling that ambition we had and was raised during King Dock, for me that just feels full circle in BM goes ahead and will heal the lament we all feel driving by the Echo arena and looking at plans from 20 years ago.

But taking the emotion out of it. I agree i wholly expect objections, hitches and delays, i dont see that as particularly as an Everton thing i think that evident of any project of this scale and football stadiums in general. Spurs are 8 years into sorting their ground on their existing site, Chelsea are a good 5 years into theirs and have only released plans a couple of weeks ago.

My other concern is that much of the existing board were involved in the projects of Kirkby and Kings dock, that has created a nervousness in me whether the required skill set is there to project manage this plan to completion, i hope there is a "war time" board that emerges to manage this facet of our development.
Click to expand...
Again I agree with that. And I dont think you can stress too much the final point you made about overhang in terms of club personnel involved in failed projects: they have previous with local authorities and various local quangos and they are not well thought of - to put it mildly.

If this is to go swimmingly we need a clear out of the old guard at the club. All the officers and certainly the CEO. No other party can have confidence in us if we retain those chuckle heads.
 

jimmythenut said:
You have no real basis/argument to suggest minimum 5 years or 5-7 years. It's just your pessimistic opinion based on previous failed stadium bids. Pure guesswork.

It's very boring.

I don't like the man but Joe Anderson who's sat in recent meetings with Moshiri and Kenwright suggests 3 years. His opinion is held in much higher regard.
Click to expand...
Nah, they all say "three years". It's like that old stock quote about wars: "it'll all be over by Christmas".

It'll be 5 years minimum.
 
davek said:
Again I agree with that. And I dont think you can stress too much the final point you made about overhang in terms of club personnel involved in failed projects: they have previous with local authorities and various local quangos and they are not well thought of - to put it mildly.

If this is to go swimmingly we need a clear out of the old guard at the club. All the officers and certainly the CEO. No other party can have confidence in us if we retain those chuckle heads.
Click to expand...

People who likely know more then me think that the stadium is one of the conditions for Moshiri to buy out other shares. My own personal opinion Bill and Woods will keep a small shareholding. How that will likely play out in terms of their role within the club im not so sure, im suprised at how active Bill in particular appears to be as chairman since Moshiri came in, you know i dont feel he is the root of all evil like some do, but when it comes to a project like this he doesn't have a great track record. Equally i would like to think Elstone isnt going to be our CEO heading toward this new dawn, we had different opinions on Kirkby but i think we could both agree the process was disaster and poorly managed. A new CEO with a track record of delivering a project of this scale would be welcome.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top