Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

New Everton Stadium

The whole conversation is based on BMD and you've been complaining about the lack of overlapping tiers for ages on this thread.

I can't speak for its construction details but the North Bank certainly appears to have two pillars at either end which seem to support the front of the upper tier.

You know as well as I do that the Upper Balcony overhang is incomparable to your two examples. The overhand is a LOT more pronounced. It's higher up and much further forward. I'm sure you can see that with your own eyes, which make me think you are being disingenuous by using the comparsion to support your agenda/stick the boot into the club about the design. There is no (feasible/cost effective) way you could have that balcony floating over the tiers below in a bowl stadium.
 
Gardocki said:
The whole conversation is based on BMD and you've been complaining about the lack of overlapping tiers for ages on this thread.

I can't speak for its construction details but the North Bank certainly appears to have two pillars at either end which seem to support the front of the upper tier.

You know as well as I do that the Upper Balcony overhang is incomparable to your two examples. The overhand is a LOT more pronounced. It's higher up and much further forward. I'm sure you can see that with your own eyes, which make me think you are being disingenuous by using the comparsion to support your agenda/stick the boot into the club about the design. There is no (feasible/cost effective) way you could have that balcony floating over the tiers below in a bowl stadium.
Click to expand...

Hardly a complaint..... a simple reservation based on the fact that many have questioned the capacity, while overlapping tiers obviously offer greater capacity for footprint and secondly are inkeeping with the traditions of the club, which is famous for pioneering and benefiting from that format. Also, in the longitudinal axis, BMD is a bit tight for space and this method could've yielded some of that additional capacity at the north end.

The slender columns you talk about only support the North bank's roof. They are nowhere near heavy enough to support the upper tier too.... which they are not connected to. They run close to the upper tier's balcony wall.... but this is entirely supported by the cantilever behind it.... any goal post arrangement would require a partial or full crossbar truss. There isn't one! However, if that was the case it would have to be set back behind the line of the balcony wall to provide the vertical depth, and that could be equally applicable to the Top Balcony. You said that such an overlap wasn't possible..... it is, and there are many examples of similar! The North bank and Chelsea's North stand literally float in their entirety above the tier below.

I have surveyed all of GP... have the original drawings and have even met one of the original structural engineers at Littlewoods architectural dept over 20yrs ago. Yes, it is higher and propped forward as at many old US baseball stadia.... however, as shown, a different format could've been chosen whereby a similar overhang could've been achieved but in 1969 this wasn't seen as a priority. The uniform site also didn't help..... BMD has none of those problems and is 50yrs further on.
 
The old and the new.

FWWdevaXgAEzSUZ.webp
 



Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top