New Everton Stadium

[onlyme]

He's been a member since 2010..

Some of you conspiracy theorists like to believe anything that suits your agendas

Haha OK, the irony in your response is either deliberately funny or at best naive considering your posts..

 

[blulouie]

I think the final design will look like a ship...

I think you might be on to summit there Frank.
Whatever gave you that idea ?

 

[Frang]

I think you might be on to summit there Frank.
Whatever gave you that idea ?

Cos like the team it will sink...

 

[blulouie]

Cos like the team it will sink...

Titanic FC

 

[Deleted member 41045]

So how do the proposed Cruise Liner & IOM Ferry Terminals fit in with the surrounding area. Or is it just Everton UNESCO have it in for?

I'd guess just Everton looking at all the identikit crap that's gone up around the Pier Head.

 

[GwladysBlue]

Wolves announcing work on their ground is to start in Summer 2020 to take their capacity to 46,000.

 

[Azza]

The scale of the stadium would have been clipped during the club's negotiations with UNESCO last summer in New York. The city's WHS was on the line and UNESCO wouldn't wear a stadium that has huge height or deviates too greatly from what's around it. The capacity and aesthetic takes a huge hit through that alone. The club are working within all this.

The Liverpool Waters Project as a whole is the reason for UNESCO's concerns and has been since Peel completed the purchase. I doubt the removal of the status would have any economic impact to Liverpool due to a stadium or a new office block or hotel going up.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Wolves announcing work on their ground is to start in Summer 2020 to take their capacity to 46,000.

Come 2023/24 they'll probably be looking at 55k!

 

[Frang]

Come 2023/24 they'll probably be looking at 55k!

That's what it will end up at. Couple of phases in construction

 

[RobSpurs]

I'm sure it will be a good building, in terms of design, but I'm disappointed with a pretty ordinary looking aesthetic. Was expecting a bit more wow factor, something unique like the aborted Chelski stadium.

Aborted for a reason.

When they got the architects who designed Beijing's Bird Nest involved and announced that stadium design, they were surely thinking they'd be getting a fair wedge from their owner to pay for it. And I'm sure it's not coincidence the announcement it'd been put on hold came the same week Roman's visa problems emerged.

That thing would've cost a bomb, easily into the realms of some of the crazy NFL stadiums in terms of costs. There was talk of them buying a brick factory to produce the 6 million bricks needed, every element looks a different size and shape. It's effectively the cost of a normal 60k stadium, plus the cost of a giant columned steel/brick frame encasing it....absolutely nuts...

The upshot being, that kind of design isn't possible without a very, very generous owner or NFL-level revenue. Chelsea are rich, but left to their own devices, not that rich. In future I reckon they could pull off a more conventional steel/glass stadium build with some unique features (i.e. like we've done), but the brick egg-slice was always Roman's vanity project.

So yeah, if you're looking at half a billion for your stadium, probably best not to expect something that would cost at least double that.

 

[davek]

The Liverpool Waters Project as a whole is the reason for UNESCO's concerns and has been since Peel completed the purchase. I doubt the removal of the status would have any economic impact to Liverpool due to a stadium or a new office block or hotel going up.

Then why were Everton involved in discussions with UNESCO, and Anderson too as a proxy for the club, last summer?

They were pacified at that stage and that's how you have a proposed stadium capacity of 52,000.

 

[BunnerJnr]

The dock wall is about 15ft high. It'll be a nod to it or a wall using the bricks from the parts of wall they have to cut open for access.

I imagine there will be about 2/3 of these sort of designs that we have seen. All with different specs depending on what we eventually go for.

Are you talking about the Dock road wall on the docks boundary at Regent road ?
As I'm sure @BunnerJnr means the actual Bramley Moor dock that is full of water atm.
Fits in with @roydo saying the pitch looks like it is below ground level.

Yes I meant the actual wall that retains the water in the dock basin is listed.

 

[chrismpw]

Aborted for a reason.

When they got the architects who designed Beijing's Bird Nest involved and announced that stadium design, they were surely thinking they'd be getting a fair wedge from their owner to pay for it. And I'm sure it's not coincidence the announcement it'd been put on hold came the same week Roman's visa problems emerged.

That thing would've cost a bomb, easily into the realms of some of the crazy NFL stadiums in terms of costs. There was talk of them buying a brick factory to produce the 6 million bricks needed, every element looks a different size and shape. It's effectively the cost of a normal 60k stadium, plus the cost of a giant columned steel/brick frame encasing it....absolutely nuts...

The upshot being, that kind of design isn't possible without a very, very generous owner or NFL-level revenue. Chelsea are rich, but left to their own devices, not that rich. In future I reckon they could pull off a more conventional steel/glass stadium build with some unique features (i.e. like we've done), but the brick egg-slice was always Roman's vanity project.

So yeah, if you're looking at half a billion for your stadium, probably best not to expect something that would cost at least double that.

Cost is irrelevant to me as I ain't paying!

Still the aborted stadium looked a thing of beauty to me. Horrible club though. The phrase 'pearl to swine' comes to mind.

 

[nsno-chris]

Then why were Everton involved in discussions with UNESCO, and Anderson too as a proxy for the club, last summer?

They were pacified at that stage and that's how you have a proposed stadium capacity of 52,000.

It was nothing to do with the size it was the fact UNESCO weren’t consulted whilst discussions over the Liverpool Waters project were ongoing, they felt blindsided. Plus they wanted to ensure the heritage of the dock and wall in the line with their guidelines. The argument from fat joe was to do with UNESCO recommending the 2 year hold on new developments which would have hindered the project (if it had been on time) for the commonwealth

 

[davek]

It was nothing to do with the size it was the fact UNESCO weren’t consulted whilst discussions over the Liverpool Waters project were ongoing, they felt blindsided. Plus they wanted to ensure the heritage of the dock and wall in the line with their guidelines. The argument from fat joe was to do with UNESCO recommending the 2 year hold on new developments which would have hindered the project (if it had been on time) for the commonwealth

And that was to do primarily with the scale of the proposals. They (UNESCO) were already raging about the high rise already in place, which were given planning permission from the council. Last year, after UNESCO lobbying, the city council restored its tall buildings policy to control high rise development. It's in that context that the Everton stadium plans have been forged in. In short: a massive series of stands down there as big as the ones currently being built by other major UK clubs was no go.