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

I've also seen questions asked about boundary fences, particularly in relation to what will separate the site from UU.

According to the design and access addendum, it looks like it will be a 2.4m high security fence. So pretty drab but it does state that there is "The option to incorporate signage or artwork onto the S11 fence at specific locations".

20240702_125630.webp


20240702_125935.webp
 
Tom Hughes said:
750mm tread depth is the absolute minimum for a 2 step safe-standing arrangement, ie 2 × 350mm steps + 50mm allowance for fold-away rail-seat = 750mm. Even then, at best that would only yield 1.3 - 1.5:1 ratio capacity uplift according to the safe-standing people themselves. The German stadia we often look to for comparison, usually have treads of 800-900mm+ in these areas. A future return to terraces (as still seen at Rugby league stadia) can free up more space, but I think the South stand exceeds the maximum rake for traditional terraces.

Unfortunately, we haven't adopted those narrow straight-backed rail seats. The seat and rail are separate and much deeper units, taking up signficantly more depth, reducing clearway and essentially stopping a second step. Without that, there is no potential for increased ratios. Someone posted a good photo of a worker standing in a row in the lower south stand. It was clear that the chosen seat/rail arrangement leaves little room for circulation and/or capacity uplift.

Colin Chong said a while ago that he felt the only route to capacity-expansion was via adding or extending tiers to the east and west stands. He was submissive of increased ratios. I've no idea if that was his guesswork or based on the latest studies of the on-going safe-standing experiment that he may be privy to.
Click to expand...

I believe if ratios were to increase then they would address the type of seats to go for the slimline ones. They obviously don't expect it to be anytime soon else it would be a complete waste of money installing what they have now.
 
Tom Hughes said:
750mm tread depth is the absolute minimum for a 2 step safe-standing arrangement, ie 2 × 350mm steps + 50mm allowance for fold-away rail-seat = 750mm. Even then, at best that would only yield 1.3 - 1.5:1 ratio capacity uplift according to the safe-standing people themselves. The German stadia we often look to for comparison, usually have treads of 800-900mm+ in these areas. A future return to terraces (as still seen at Rugby league stadia) can free up more space, but I think the South stand exceeds the maximum rake for traditional terraces.

Unfortunately, we haven't adopted those narrow straight-backed rail seats. The seat and rail are separate and much deeper units, taking up signficantly more depth, reducing clearway and essentially stopping a second step. Without that, there is no potential for increased ratios. Someone posted a good photo of a worker standing in a row in the lower south stand. It was clear that the chosen seat/rail arrangement leaves little room for circulation and/or capacity uplift.

Colin Chong said a while ago that he felt the only route to capacity-expansion was via adding or extending tiers to the east and west stands. He was submissive of increased ratios. I've no idea if that was his guesswork or based on the latest studies of the on-going safe-standing experiment that he may be privy to.
Click to expand...
It wouldn’t be a problem to retrofit the narrow backed rail seats at a later date though.

It is possible to have the 1.5:1 ratio with 750mm tread which is all I was getting at.
 

Gardocki said:
I have the opposite view. I think its only a matter of time. These changes are incremental. Once its demonstrated that safe standing is safe there's no reason to stop it happening. It wasn't long ago that people were saying safe standing/rail seating wouldn't be allowed in England due to the legacy of Hillsborough.

I also don't think there are many people who are actually opposed to it. I think that's more of a general narrative.
Click to expand...
They've been talking about it for atleast a decade. It's been proven safe in Germany and other European countries (Scotland?) for years now.

It will only happen here when United, RS and Arsenal want it to happen. Their stadiums can't accommodate it without major changes. They're not just going to allow a change that gives their rivals an uplift in match day revenue and not get any benefits themselves.
 

matty1878 said:
so we can have 10,000 more?

it it’s costly i mean it’s not like we wouldn’t regenerate it?

in my opinion they’ve not done it big enough
Click to expand...
Yes we can add 10,000 more seats, Colin chong confirmed it last year that the east and west stands can be extended to add those additional seats. And the east and west side stand concourse is already built to accommodate the additional numbers.
It is costly but no figures were mentioned, but when you start having to change all the roof dimensions and potentially the steel cladding it starts to mount up.
I agree it should have been at least 55,000.
 
Dougie said:
Yes we can add 10,000 more seats, Colin chong confirmed it last year that the east and west stands can be extended to add those additional seats. And the east and west side stand concourse is already built to accommodate the additional numbers.
It is costly but no figures were mentioned, but when you start having to change all the roof dimensions and potentially the steel cladding it starts to mount up.
I agree it should have been at least 55,000.
Click to expand...

i don’t know why haven’t made it bigger it’s baffling mate

or atleast so “we can when we want”

60/odd i would of done
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top