New Everton Stadium

The Olympic Stadium was meant to be downsized to leave us with a small permanent, but nevertheless world-class, athletics venue for our Olympians. Then Boris decided to try and sell it off, that failed because West Ham's bid was reliant on an illegal loan from Newham council. So it was refurbished as a multipurpose venue instead.

The reason Wembley wasn't used dates back to the early days of the Olympic bid (2002/3) and is nothing to do with corruption. Then London Mayor Ken Livingstone said he'd only support an Olympic bid if it could be used as a catalyst for major regeneration in the East End. On top of that, repeated failures to get London a world-class reusable athletics venue (new Wembley isn't that, even if a platform can be laboriously installed) meant there was no controversy in having a small athletics venue as a legacy of the Games. So an ambitious project was drawn up which got Mayoral support. The area around the Olympic Park is infinitely better than the contaminated land, polluted rivers, and fridge mountains that were there a decade ago, so they made the right decision as far as I'm concerned, but unfortunately the clusterfuck of trying to sort the stadium out has overshadowed all that a bit.
 
How many rows do we want our End Stand to be?

Lower Gwladys Street has 41, about 20 upper
Park End has 39.
They're around average for loads of clubs.

Bigger ones, Villa's Holte End Lower about 46 does,upper similar
Man United Stretford End Lower 50, upper 40
Fulham 55
Newcastle 58
Liverpool 60/68/76 (has less blocks in the back middle)
Sheffield Wed 68


Abroad I think Dortmund has 82 rows?

Edit:- @RobSpurs how many rows of seats does your new end stand have?
 
The binman chronicles said:
I think the FA paid for Wembley mate.
Click to expand...
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp..../15/football-association-wembley-stadium-debt

Wembley was built with the Olympics in mind as part of the design spec.

Why then, did the taxpayers have to shell out money for another stadium in London?

West Ham are effectively getting a free stadium now, and the taxpayer foot the bill for repairs, too.

Absolute waste of money when a venue fit to host the Olympics had already been built.
 
jonnyboy316 said:
This just gets worse. I was hoping for a bigger capacity for us and a more modest capacity for the games probably meaning a higher platform and less impact to the stadium design
Click to expand...

What capacity were you hoping for? Ignore the 50,000 because it won't be that which is why he said maybe more after first quoting 50-55,000.
 

BNJ1878 said:
I'd suggest everyone just takes a breather and waits for the initial designs to be revealed.

Absolutely no point stressing over it until they reveal the plans and how they plan to incorporate a track.

Pages and pages of scaremongering when nobody actually knows apart from those directly involved.

If however at the time of the reveal it's an awful proposal I'll be first over the top out the trenches.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. It just seems to me that what at first looked like a good deal is now starting to slowly unravel. The financing arrangement was contingent on a design that could incorporate a temporary track whether it be for this CWG or an event in the distant future. If this is true you have to question why would not be getting funding from the council. I would rather they just be transparent and confirm this with the caveat that they are doing everything possible to ensure the stadium will be as intimate and atmospheric as possible. Giving the impression that they will be designing the same stadium they would have designed if a running track was not a consideration is being dishonest.
 
Big Neville Southall said:
How many rows do we want our End Stand to be?

Lower Gwladys Street has 41, about 20 upper
Park End has 39.
They're around average for loads of clubs.

Bigger ones, Villa's Holte End Lower about 46 does,upper similar
Man United Stretford End Lower 50, upper 40
Fulham 55
Newcastle 58
Liverpool 60/68/76 (has less blocks in the back middle)
Sheffield Wed 68


Abroad I think Dortmund has 82 rows?

Edit:- @RobSpurs how many rows of seats does your new end stand have?
Click to expand...

Some talk about this in the SSC construction thread. Somewhere between 73 and 81. But we've since had a planning app granted that increases the capacity of that stand by 500, so not sure.

Some quotes:

----

I did a rough count on the drawings of 73. But remember our kop is a wavey design which means only the middle blocks will be this high. The number of rows decreases dramatically to the sides. The new anfield kop is rumoured to be as high as Kilimanjaro.

----

I counted around 69 on the section through the south terrace (planning drawing) but that had the vomitories interrupting the count so I cut-n-paste in Photoshop and filled in those areas. Counted about 12 extra after that so I estimate around 81 therefore to the highest row but might be wrong.

Kilimanjaro! I heard they were aiming higher than Everest!!!

----

I had heard that if you want to go to the back of the proposed new Anfield Kop you will need your passport as it overhangs the Irish republic.

-----

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=135526058&highlight=rows+kop+80#post135526058
 
KevMirallas said:
Yeah, and that's all completely fine. But again, every single person who knows anything about this project is telling us there is a solution to this problem. If the designs come out and the problem is not sufficiently solved, fume away. But until then, we're wasting energy fuming on assumption.

It's just like the transfer situation. People fuming on assumption, before discovering it was all for nothing.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but equally there are concerns, rightly in my opinion, about a track,albeit a temporary one.

There's two constants here; track area and the need for a decent amount of spectators to view the track action. This means we will have seats at each end greater than 177m away from each other. That's quite a distance.

The only way I can see that mitigated is through intelligent design which you won't get for the prices being quoted. It's right to have faith in Meis but equally it's right to be cautious.
 

Trueblue1878 said:
View attachment 37804

Look at the state of that lower tier!! Flat and miles from the pitch.
If we end up with something like the Etihad then we're really [Poor language removed]. It's got no atmosphere and the curving second tier (where the running track used to be up against) is also miles from the action.
This is exactly what we don't want to end up with.
Click to expand...
If you put a platform over the lower tier in the Etihad, it's still nowhere near long enough for a track - which is why they built only 3 sides at the time.

No matter which way they try to sell it to us, the upper tiers, particularly behind the goal, will be miles from the pitch.
 
GwladysBlue said:
So a billion pound stadium, paid for by the taxpayer, could have been used to host athletic events?

Why on Earth did the taxpayer AGAIN have to fork out for another stadium build in London to host athletics, then? To make matters worse, we subsequently let it out to West Ham on a peppercorn rent.

This country is corrupt as anything.
Click to expand...
The government and authorities will embrace any opportunity to divert our taxes towards their contractor mates who are overcharging the nation. I'm sure there's a quiet kickback afterwards. Masters of the hidden.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top