New Everton Stadium

[Tom Hughes]

From a physical perspective, BMD will be easier to expand than Anfield, St James or in fact most stadia in England.

Yes, it would compromise the external design but another tier could easily be added to the east and west stands.

Anfield and St. James both have huge practical issues in expanding further. Their fans on SSC have huge ambitions, but much of that is pipe dreams.

St James's is pretty straight forward to get to approx 60k. They've recently re-acquired the land at the Gallowgate end, so it looks like that's on the cards. The east stand is more problematic, but with their wealth, who knows?

For Anfield it's mainly the transport/planning issues that scupper expansion at present. If the safestanding experiment ever results in a ratio increase, they could rebuild the Kop as an entire new terrace and/or re-acquire Skerries Rd for expansion there too. FSG prefer tight ROI development and to really sweat the asset.... so if not them, it may well end up being the next owners.

At BMD, there are historic planning height constraints in place, which had to be complied with for the current design.... although these may be alleviated for an existing structure. It would also compromise the signature roof design but maybe offer the opportunity for a closing roof in the future. A cheaper option might be a negotiated overhang at the North end to complete the upper bowl, with whatever gains safe-standing might supply at both ends. That's before we see how site access/egress and transport works out regarding capacity.

 

[Gardocki]

It’s no wonder people say you are negative about BMD Tom. It’s far easier to expand BMD. There’s no doubt about that, yet you defaulted to saying how St. James and Anfield could be done, but the difficulties in doing BMD.

There is a big issue with the Gallowgate in terms of the local underground line etc. They have decided to build a fanzone there rather than expand it. They are looking at the possibility of expanding the east stand but that looks fairly futile. Very expensive for limited gain.

Liverpool would need to buy a few rows of housing for the SKD or move a pretty major road for the Kop. Both of these are massively complex and the club has shown no desire to tackle these issues.

 

[fitzyefc]

Didnt Meis say we cant extend BMD

 

[Connor]

Didnt Meis say we cant extend BMD

It can be expanded to 62k with safe standing

 

[sbbefc]

It can be expanded to 62k with safe standing

Not that I'm bothered. I think 50ish k is more than enough. But if we're doing that won't all the other clubs be doing it too?

 

[The binman chronicles]

Didnt Meis say we cant extend BMD

No he never ruled it out. The overall design would be lost though.

I don't know why we are talking about expanding BMD when it hasn't even been built yet. We will be saddled with a large debt for the next 20+ years and for an increase of 6 to 10k seats and the huge amount that would cost I can't see there being a business case until the stadium has been fully paid off. Even then I can't see them doing anything but Tom is right they may bring the North stand to full height overhanging the boundary (if the concourse space allows) as in the grand scheme of things it isn't a lot to do, but is that hassle worth 3k extra?

 

[Jacko93]

Not that I'm bothered. I think 50ish k is more than enough. But if we're doing that won't all the other clubs be doing it too?

Its not a simple as putting in loads of safe standing rows where seats currently are. The capacity of a ground is not solely based upon number of seats, but provision of facilities. There is also the fact that a person standing takes up more lateral space than some body sitting. This is why people spill onto the steps during half time. Standing as a direct replacement for sitting will lead to an approx. ratio of 0.9:1, ie, less capacity than a full seated stand.

Using the example of Goodison park and the Gwladys Street. If we were to swap it all out for safestanding, the allowed capacity would only be 9549, rather than its current 10,611. then there is the issue of facilities. If the Gwladys was built to todays standards, the facility provision likely wouldn't be enough to satisfy the guidelines and wouldn't be able to have its currently capacity anyway.

 

[Connor]

Not that I'm bothered. I think 50ish k is more than enough. But if we're doing that won't all the other clubs be doing it too?

Yes but its unlikely that change is passed anytime soon

 

[Davideeyore]

It can be expanded to 62k with safe standing

No not really. Not unless there's a dramatic change in the law. It's a myth that we an increase it with safe standing.

But Colin Chong said it can be expanded on the east and west stands.

 

[Connor]

No not really. Not unless there's a dramatic change in the law. It's a myth that we an increase it with safe standing.

But Colin Chong said it can be expanded on the east and west stands.

Yeah:

Yes but its unlikely that change is passed anytime soon

 

[The binman chronicles]

Gives a great impression of size this...

 

[Davideeyore]

Yes but its unlikely that change is passed anytime soon

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. I thought that as well at the beginning but we're not going to take 10,000 seats and turn them in to 20,000 standing to hit 62k. Besides other clubs can introduce SS too.

 

[Connor]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. I thought that as well at the beginning but we're not going to take 10,000 seats and turn them in to 20,000 standing to hit 62k. Besides other clubs can introduce SS too.

Yeah I know, I didn’t say anything otherwise

 

[GlosBlue]

Who to believe?!

 

[trueblue84]

Didnt Meis say we cant extend BMD