New Everton Stadium

[H.H.]

I’m always tried to be as helpful as possible on this thread (see the amount of time I spent a couple of pages back) but because I sometimes give a non blue tinted glasses point of view about it I do realise it’s a view that nobody really wants to read so you can to give as many negative Reps as you want, it makes no difference to me.

 

[Bluestar]

Once you fold up the seat you are left with a blank row that you can put however many humans* that will fit in that space (*obviously up to regulations at that point).

It's whether these regulations change over time will be the key. There really shouldn't be an issue with a higher ratio in a stadium that was designed from the outset to cope with it but perhaps older stadia might cause issues for us as they try and jump on the bandwagon to increase capacity, unless each stadium has its own unique ratio allowed.

They are ticketed spaces as far as I can see. Seating or standing the numbers are the same. The reason it is safe is because it is Ticketed allocated spaces.
One seat -one rail.

Every example I have seen works like that.
Unless there is a way of compressing the space between the rails and doing away with the seats all together, it won’t alter the capacity.

The point of rail seating is that it can be used either way.

 

[andy4efc]

I’m never my sometimes “cheeky” self on this stadium thread and you’re correct, I was making my judgement on the assumption that because for at least 20 years both Labour and Conservative governments have known that safe standing is safe, they still haven’t yet allowed it and that’s why I don’t think they will ever allow 1.5-1 standing at stadiums.
Good post by the way .

Thinking about it again, if Everton are already “squeezing” in as many seats into the bowl as possible, I wonder if they are willing to not have as many rows as possible now (maximum capacity) in the hope allow for a possible government Change in X years amount of time?

I think with any stadium being built now it has to have some level of future proofing doesnt it? Clearly the the stands behind the goal are being designed so that the capacity can increase a long with government regulations. This future proofing isn't covering the next 2/3 years, its the next 15, 25, 50.. Doing this future proofing, at a possible cost of more seats NOW (asin, a couple of thousand more), is probably wise considering what is 2k extra season ticket money to club? Nothing pretty much. But in the future, an extra 5-10k, makes up the short-term and more with merchandising etc.

I think everything about this is wise, 52k, will be full every week, we have the fanbase for it. 60k upfront? Risk empty seats every week and no fan wants that, no club wants that as when things are 'exclusive' it sells better. Relating this to my job, we work in providing pe and clubs to school kids, whenever we limit a club to say 20 kids, it sells out, if we dont limit it we sometimes get 10-15. That natural demand works the same way for this I think.

All ties together in me eyes, with how it is worded, if they know that no safe standing will ever come, they can always expand without it (reading from the text it sounds like they can expand without safe standing, but ultimately the goal is to it FOR safe standing).

 

[The binman chronicles]

They are ticketed spaces as far as I can see. Seating or standing the numbers are the same. The reason it is safe is because it is Ticketed allocated spaces.
One seat -one rail.

Every example I have seen works like that.
Unless there is a way of compressing the space between the rails and doing away with the seats all together, it won’t alter the capacity.

The point of rail seating is that it can be used either way.

Just to give one example Dortmund's capacity is 81,365 for domestic matches (standing and seating) and 65,829 for internationals (seated only). That's because the ratio for standing is 1:1.7.

Now at the moment it will be 1:1 here but after a few years like that and it's proven safe it's not inconceivable that they will start to experiment with that number.

 

[H.H.]

Just to give one example Dortmund's capacity is 81,365 for domestic matches (standing and seating) and 65,829 for internationals (seated only). That's because the ratio for standing is 1:1.7.

Now at the moment it will be 1:1 here but after a few years like that and it's proven safe it's not inconceivable that they will start to experiment with that number.

And Dortmund home games in European games are also the lower capacity (seated only allowed.)

 

[Bluestar]

Just to give one example Dortmund's capacity is 81,365 for domestic matches (standing and seating) and 65,829 for internationals (seated only). That's because the ratio for standing is 1:1.7.

Now at the moment it will be 1:1 here but after a few years like that and it's proven safe it's not inconceivable that they will start to experiment with that number.

we have really squeezed the seat spacing to make the stadium intense. It’s a gazelle or cheetah if you like, hyper designed for a specific purpose. The idea was to create atmosphere, so there isn’t acres of space to compress between seats. We have already pushed the rules the limit.

 

[The binman chronicles]

we have really squeezed the seat spacing to make the stadium intense. It’s a gazelle or cheetah if you like, hyper designed for a specific purpose. The idea was to create atmosphere, so there isn’t acres of space to compress between seats. We have already pushed the rules the limit.

I'm not sure I follow. Of course the wider the seats and the bigger the row depth, the more comfortable it would be but the principle is still the same. If you have 30 seats on a particular row within a block and you have 1:1.2 ratio you'll have 36 people standing in that space, bring that to 1.5, you have 45. If you go to German levels you could have 51. For the lower ratios you aren't having to create any extra space, the human anatomy does it for you where naturally you take up less space standing rather than sitting.

Safe standing has already been baked into the plans that have been submitted, the lower half of the home end uses slightly less rake to allow it to be used in this way. They even show how it could be converted if a step divides each row and therefore you'll have two standing rows within a single 'seated' one allowing for the larger ratios if ever approved. To save a total redevelopment of the stand if legislation changes it will be designed to handle more people than it will actually open for. This means the vomitorys will be larger and perhaps the exit rows will be wider, but tbh the latter can easily be changed at a later date. The stand will also require the extra room to handle the bigger capacity internally (more toilets and exit stairs etc.). Again these can be added later so I guess it will just feel a fair bit more spacious to start with while it is in all seater mode or standing at a 1:1 ratio.

 

[Bluestar]

I'm not sure I follow. Of course the wider the seats and the bigger the row depth, the more comfortable it would be but the principle is still the same. If you have 30 seats on a particular row within a block and you have 1:1.2 ratio you'll have 36 people standing in that space, bring that to 1.5, you have 45. If you go to German levels you could have 51. For the lower ratios you aren't having to create any extra space, the human anatomy does it for you where naturally you take up less space standing rather than sitting.

Safe standing has already been baked into the plans that have been submitted, the lower half of the home end uses slightly less rake to allow it to be used in this way. They even show how it could be converted if a step divides each row and therefore you'll have two standing rows within a single 'seated' one allowing for the larger ratios if ever approved. To save a total redevelopment of the stand if legislation changes it will be designed to handle more people than it will actually open for. This means the vomitorys will be larger and perhaps the exit rows will be wider, but tbh the latter can easily be changed at a later date. The stand will also require the extra room to handle the bigger capacity internally (more toilets and exit stairs etc.). Again these can be added later so I guess it will just feel a fair bit more spacious to start with while it is in all seater mode or standing at a 1:1 ratio.

Thanks, so essentially it can be more dense than seating, but licensing would have to permit it.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

When the location was revealed and ever since artists impression always been struck by the the close proximity to the sea. Wonder how much thought has really gone into the much predicted rising sea levels

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

When the location was revealed and ever since artists impression always been struck by the the close proximity to the sea. Wonder how much thought has really gone into the much predicted rising sea levels

This is covered in the planning application.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

This is covered in the planning application.

Ha planning won't be holding my breath then. It's not burning issue for me. Just I would not be looking purchase or build seaside property anywhere. Most likely I'll be dead when it becomes an issue, however, my own little blues noses maybe not!

 

[The binman chronicles]

Ha planning won't be holding my breath then. It's not burning issue for me. Just I would not be looking purchase or build seaside property anywhere. Most likely I'll be dead when it becomes an issue, however, my own little blues noses maybe not!

As much of Liverpool is quite flat wouldn't most of the area be at risk? For instance if BM floods wouldn't the 3 graces, Liverpool one etc. So if it gets that far there will be bigger issues than just football to deal with.

 

[Toffeelover]

As much of Liverpool is quite flat wouldn't most of the area be at risk? For instance if BM floods wouldn't the 3 graces, Liverpool one etc. So if it gets that far there will be bigger issues than just football to deal with.

This is unlikely to happen this side of a 100 years, so why worry?

Anyway consent expected in October, great get it built and upset that lot over the other side of Stanley Park.

Bit like Brexit most of us want to be on side of the Mersey and that lot in Red are like remainers and want us to stay in GP.

 

[The binman chronicles]

This is unlikely to happen this side of a 100 years, so why worry?

Anyway consent expected in October, great get it built and upset that lot over the other side of Stanley Park.

Bit like Brexit most of us want to be on side of the Mersey and that lot in Red are like remainers and want us to stay in GP.

Indeed, my point was that they're not exactly going to let the rest of Liverpool flood so us being that close to the water has little bearing. They will just build higher sea defences up to the point we are all buggered, be that in 75/100/150 or 200 years in the future.

 

[Tim UpperBullen]

I seem t

When implemented, it'll look something like

View attachment 95457

If a change in the law allows the seats to be retracted for domestic games, it will almost certainly start with a 1:1 ratio. But, in theory at least, you can get two people in each space behing each rail. It'd be very cosy, and I can't say I'd fancy it, but it's possible.

In Germany, rail seating areas, when used for standing, tend to operate on ratios of 1.2:1 to 1.8:1

Realistically, if we did something similar at Bramley Moore, we'd be looking at a ratio of something like 1.5. I forget the capacity for the opposite stand, but the main stand behind the goal will have a standard capacity of 13,000, so a 1.5 ratio would add 6,500 to that. Taking it up to 62,000 only needs an extra 3 or 4k at the other end.

My understanding is that both stands will be, in terms of things like concourses, toilets and general egress issues, designed to cope with the extra capacity.

Obviously, if money gets tight, they might not put everything in place to support the extra capacity from day one, but there should be the square metres required to do so at a later date.

Whether or not it'll ever get expanded by 10k by using extra capacity provided by rail seating is another thing entirely.

My personal view is that, some time in the next five to ten years after we open, is that we'll see an increase in capacity down to squeezing more people into rail seated areas, but it won't involve all the areas in the South and North stands.

So I reckon we'll open at just under 53k, and see that, in the fullness of time, increase to something like 58k as the lower or middle areas get converted to expanded standing.

I seem to remember the home end being split so that only the bottom "half" had rail seats, so this would lower the potential increase if rail seating and an increased ratio was allowed