New Everton Stadium

deipnosophist said:
Do Liverpool FC/Everton FC 'divisions' spill over into council politics?
Click to expand...

Officially no but probably a little. EFC didn't really do much to stop LFC when they were planning to build on Stanley Park when they could have done. LFC could make things difficult for Everton if we tried to move to the Waterfront.

In all honesty though I am not sure they would bother too much. They are happy putting lipstick on a pig with their ground development and I think that will continue.
 

“If it were a dockland site that’s not owned by us, so they would have to purchase that. If they do something with us then what they put in, in terms of a stadium, will help create leisure and jobs around the area so we are prepared to do a deal with them that brings the scheme to fruition.

“I am restrained in talking openly about this while they are still talking to (other) landowners. But if they go for a council-owned site we can put in leisure to create jobs.
Click to expand...

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/everton-have-money-new-stadium-11347078

That makes it sound like the council want SCB whereas we maybe are talking to Peel.

Edit: unless there's a council owned dock site we take that he's on about.
 
Last edited:
Duncan Disordely said:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/everton-have-money-new-stadium-11347078

That makes it sound like the council want SCB whereas we maybe are talking to Peel
Click to expand...
Tw
Duncan Disordely said:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/everton-have-money-new-stadium-11347078

That makes it sound like the council want SCB whereas we maybe are talking to Peel
Click to expand...

Yep that's the info I've heard all along. SC solves a council problem. Docks will be good for everyone but much harder and more expensive to pull off
 
Whistlin' Dixie said:
Do you have any evidence world heritage status isn't? Turning your nose up at it doesn't make you some sort of authority.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that we'd have to be careful about preserving the waterfront's heritage, but the truth is the UNESCO status isn't a prerequisite for that- they have no legal power in decision making- that's more dependent on the council. UNESCO are there to advise, warn and set regulations- but they can (and have been in Dresden) ignored if the city decides that they are being held back- which is becoming the overwhelming sentiment.

And yes, there was a report (I think it was one of the update reports from Impacts '08) which found that WH status is contributing significantly less to tourist statistics than it was 10 years ago or so. Not to put any real significance in this, but just as a picture, I interviewed tourists down at the docks last year for my university research, and precisely 0 out of 50 respondants said that the reason they visited was because of the WH status. In fact, I reckon half of the city doesn't realise that we've been awarded the UNESCO City of Music status last December.

If the city wants to go ahead with Liverpool Waters, a new stadium or anything else within the UNESCO WH area or buffer zone, it will have to shed the WH status. I don't think we'll do that and start developments within 3 years.
 

Duncan Disordely said:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/everton-have-money-new-stadium-11347078

That makes it sound like the council want SCB whereas we maybe are talking to Peel.

Edit: unless there's a council owned dock site we take that he's on about.
Click to expand...

Its quite interesting reading that piece. I think he has given a massive indication of where and who....

Doesn't really sound like he is railroading us to SC but giving us that option if we cant get Waterside
 
So the council are effectively washing their hands of us by only offering an unacceptable site. (Stonebridge Cross)

That's why good sites such as Stanley Park, Walton Hall, William Collins etc are all off the table.

And why this info has been leaked to the press.

They want to force us to buy private land now that we have finances.
 
ToffeeDoug said:
It shouldn't be falling to the Mayor of any city telling any football club anywhere when its new stadium is going to be ready, especially as there must be 526 variables at play here to be resolved comprising a good many unknown unknowns, to use Donald Rumsfeld speak.

We're being seen by LCC as an easy option to regenerate the area around Croxteth when no one else, including themselves, can be found to do so. In comparison, it's never going to be that hard to fill the old dock areas with student accommodation blocks and hotels.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be student accomodation on the docks, but I get your point. I think Liverpool gets a lot of stick over their student accommodation strategy, but there's not really that much wrong with it. Liverpool is a University City, and a huge part of its income is from students. Liverpool does in fact have one of the largest retaining percentages of many other Cities in Europe. People who come here, tend to stay here and contribute to the local economy for years and years after their studies.

Sorry to go off topic a bit....

The Stadium. the other things I've seen mentioned, like the Canada Docks....... no way, I'm pretty sure that wont happen.
 
beachy said:
So the council are effectively washing their hands of us by only offering an unacceptable site. (Stonebridge Cross)

That's why good sites such as Stanley Park, Walton Hall, William Collins etc are all off the table.

And why this info has been leaked to the press.

They want to force us to buy private land now that we have finances.
Click to expand...

I think although it will cost more Everton are probably better off going it without the Council involvement
 

Duncan Disordely said:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/everton-have-money-new-stadium-11347078

That makes it sound like the council want SCB whereas we maybe are talking to Peel.

Edit: unless there's a council owned dock site we take that he's on about.
Click to expand...
very interesting article. A must read.

Anderson must know something to make him so sure 'something' will happen. He is offering the positives, wheras before he was quite negative in past schemes.
He seems to think we can deliver on a stand alone stadium , no retail income from site plus able to fund a team

Positive signs
 
bullensboy said:
very interesting article. A must read.

Anderson must know something to make him so sure 'something' will happen. He is offering the positives, wheras before he was quite negative in past schemes.
He seems to think we can deliver on a stand alone stadium , no retail income from site plus able to fund a team

Positive signs
Click to expand...
Anderson is only interested in lining his own pockets.
 
beachy said:
So the council are effectively washing their hands of us by only offering an unacceptable site. (Stonebridge Cross)

That's why good sites such as Stanley Park, Walton Hall, William Collins etc are all off the table.

And why this info has been leaked to the press.

They want to force us to buy private land now that we have finances.
Click to expand...

No, not how I see it, the Council want to see something of what we can now offer. The land he says they are letting go cheap, is currently giving them nothing at all. He no doubt has plans for many other parts of the Mayoral development but is struggling with Stonecross. His comment that Stadium designs are pretty easy to pick up is ridiculous. Anybody can design a stadium on Google Sketchup, but its a different matter altogether to build a suitable stadium for the occupants and the space. We don't want generic, we want bespoke.
 
Thinking about it too, we'd probably be able to do a stadium with Peel without having to think about Joe's Commonwealth games plan, whereas he'd probably want that as part of SBC.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top