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 binman chronicles said:
Oh what have you done! It's like the end of Bullseye...look at what you could have won.

Quick send them on to Farhad there might still be time to bin BM and choose one of these beauties.
Click to expand...

Think your assessment needs some perspective.

These were commissioned by KEIOC at the time of Destination Kirkby. They were hastily put together by a team of architects/engineers as alternatives to the real monstrosity in Kirkby. As concepts, they were entirely workable, though obviously not as refined as the BMD proposals given the time constraints.

The official concept for Bestway was different to this and was done by HOK (Populous), probably the largest and best known stadium design company in the world. Their initial commission was to demonstrate a 55k stadium on that site. Which they did. This would've had full access on one or 2 sides with partial bridged access on another to give good dispersal in all directions. A few mins walk from all major public transport hubs and multiple carriageways in all directions. The club said the stadium wasn't big enough at 55k, and HOK showed that this could be expanded before Bestway walked away after meeting Wyness, saying that they couldn't do business with EFC.
 
Tom Hughes said:
Think your assessment needs some perspective.

These were commissioned by KEIOC at the time of Destination Kirkby. They were hastily put together by a team of architects/engineers as alternatives to the real monstrosity in Kirkby. As concepts, they were entirely workable, though obviously not as refined as the BMD proposals given the time constraints.

The official concept for Bestway was different to this and was done by HOK (Populous), probably the largest and best known stadium design company in the world. Their initial commission was to demonstrate a 55k stadium on that site. Which they did. This would've had full access on one or 2 sides with partial bridged access on another to give good dispersal in all directions. A few mins walk from all major public transport hubs and multiple carriageways in all directions. The club said the stadium wasn't big enough at 55k, and HOK showed that this could be expanded before Bestway walked away after meeting Wyness, saying that they couldn't do business with EFC.
Click to expand...
Not that it matters now, that Bestway loop would have been decent.
 
Tom Hughes said:
Think your assessment needs some perspective.

These were commissioned by KEIOC at the time of Destination Kirkby. They were hastily put together by a team of architects/engineers as alternatives to the real monstrosity in Kirkby. As concepts, they were entirely workable, though obviously not as refined as the BMD proposals given the time constraints.

The official concept for Bestway was different to this and was done by HOK (Populous), probably the largest and best known stadium design company in the world. Their initial commission was to demonstrate a 55k stadium on that site. Which they did. This would've had full access on one or 2 sides with partial bridged access on another to give good dispersal in all directions. A few mins walk from all major public transport hubs and multiple carriageways in all directions. The club said the stadium wasn't big enough at 55k, and HOK showed that this could be expanded before Bestway walked away after meeting Wyness, saying that they couldn't do business with EFC.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest that you don't take these posts too seriously and it is easy to laugh at these now due to the dated and (as you say) rushed graphics and that is why we can and do make fun of them.

If I was to start picking holes in it in a deliberate and precise way I would have been pointing out the completely free floating 3rd tier on the main stand, the fact that we could build large hotels and schools as part of the project when we didn't have a pot to pee in. This is why we were prepared to move to Kirkby in the first place.

I like many others will thank you and the rest that tried to torpedo that move out of the city but at the same time I hold completely different views to you on the suitability of Goodison to be redeveloped to the point with what cash we had it would have only ever been one stand or a complete carbuncle. It's okay to disagree sometimes.
 
mahermi1 said:
...Just hope it's the right shape.. :oops:
Click to expand...

Looks fine to me...

Screenshot_20230704_160712_Chrome.webp
 

The binman chronicles said:
I'd suggest that you don't take these posts too seriously and it is easy to laugh at these now due to the dated and (as you say) rushed graphics and that is why we can and do make fun of them.

If I was to start picking holes in it in a deliberate and precise way I would have been pointing out the completely free floating 3rd tier on the main stand, the fact that we could build large hotels and schools as part of the project when we didn't have a pot to pee in. This is why we were prepared to move to Kirkby in the first place.

I like many others will thank you and the rest that tried to torpedo that move out of the city but at the same time I hold completely different views to you on the suitability of Goodison to be redeveloped to the point with what cash we had it would have only ever been one stand or a complete carbuncle. It's okay to disagree sometimes.
Click to expand...

I think people were doing a bit more than joking about the graphics.

The school development was part of a joint venture vehicle that was subsequently used for multiple school developments around the city and the city planning department were involved throughout. The hotel/residential enablers were obviously indicative only, but again were backed in principle by the planning office. These were especially applicable with the Bestway site because it was seen as a bridging development with Project Jennifer and other stalled North Liverpool schemes for redevelopment continuity in that area. The Wallasey Tunnel had always been a barrier to continuous development and city centre expansion along that corridor and this was seen as a potential solution.

The Kirkby project was going to cost the club at least £88m of the £100m total. At that time, that would've comfortably done far more than add just one stand at GP.

Any apparent floating tiers were a result of hastened graphics only, which were funded and created by a third party. The architects/engineers involved all had several stands/stadiums in their portfolios..... and of course HOK have designed more stadia than anyone and were more than happy with the site's viability.
 
Last edited:
Tom Hughes said:
I think people were doing a bit more than joking about the graphics.

The school development was part of a joint venture vehicle that was subsequently used for multiple school developments around the city and the city planning department were involved throughout. The hotel/residential enablers were obviously indicative only, but again were backed in principle by the planning office. These were especially applicable with the Bestway site because it was seen as a bridging development with Project Jennifer and other stalled North Liverpool schemes for redevelopment continuity in that area. The Wallasey Tunnel had always been a barrier to continuous development and city centre expansion along that corridor and this was seen as a potential solution.

The Kirkby project was going to cost the club at least £88m of the £100m total. At that time, that would've comfortably done far more than add just one stand at GP.

Any apparent floating tiers were a result of hastened graphics only, which were funded and created by a third party. The architects/engineers involved all had several stands/stadiums in their portfolios..... and of course HOK have designed more stadia than anyone and were more than happy with the site's viability.
Click to expand...

The only stand we could have done something with at GP is the park end.
The rest would have needed the footprint expanded in order to alleviate the issues those stands have today and that would have possibly meant acquiring land to accommodate that.

GP is hemmed in on three sides so adding one stand only leaves three sides of the ground still in an abject state.

GP could be redeveloped but the time, money and obstacles for that to happen were and still are huge but let’s not go down that road.

The future is BMD so let’s just embrace it
 

Toffeeslam said:
The only stand we could have done something with at GP is the park end.
The rest would have needed the footprint expanded in order to alleviate the issues those stands have today and that would have possibly meant acquiring land to accommodate that.

GP is hemmed in on three sides so adding one stand only leaves three sides of the ground still in an abject state.

GP could be redeveloped but the time, money and obstacles for that to happen were and still are huge but let’s not go down that road.

The future is BMD so let’s just embrace it
Click to expand...

Only needed a footprint expansion on the Bullens side to achieve 55k-60k.

BMD is well embraced.... and there is no need to continue to embrace myths perpetuated before, during and after Desination Kirkby to sweeten that deal.
 
Gardocki said:
Looking back, that Goodison Proposal looks like a bit of a dog’s dinner.

I’m much happier with a beautiful stadium on the river than what was proposed there, even if the graphics may have been a bit dodgy.
Click to expand...

It's hardly a valid comparison. Any proposals for Goodison redevelopment at that time were very much restricted by an extremely tight design budget.

However, suffice to say that GP with £300-500m spent could've had: 65k capacity with at least the same corporate provision, no restricted views and perhaps even closing roof etc.... with all site history/tradition preserved. I've no idea what value that represents.

Before anyone says it..... you can say all that and still fully "embrace BMD". They are not and never have been mutually exclusive paradigms.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top