New Main Stand

[Big Neville Southall]

Is right. The most recognisable and distinguishing part of the whole stadium. GP is famous for its appearance. Going forward I think the most distinguishing elements of it should be retained and that includes what's left of the Leitch designs. If we've got any money to invest on the ground then lets prioritise the Park End and the Main Stand.

I don't know how to quote both your posts, but a big yes to both.

I'd happily sell players to fund land and one stand and finish 17th in the league and rebuild on the pitch. If we got one new stand with all the corportes stuff needed in the one stand while increasing the capacity to 45-50000 then I'd happily forget all the off field troubles and get back to the football. It's becoming a millstone round our neck. Just focus on one stand and forget about everything else.

 

[Carlito]

I'd be happy with a piecemeal rebuilding job, but I'd prefer to wait until the present board is gone. Everything they touch turns to warm Chang.

 

[toffeeben15]

I would be happy if they got rid of the lower bullens and posts and put boxes there to hold the stand between the paddock and upper bullens . The get rid of the boxes in the main stand and get rid of the posts and put more seats . They should fill in the corner of the bullens and park end stand . House the away fans in the corner and shove the home fans in the park end and bullens so they are surrounded

 

[peteblue]

££££££££££££'s

 

[Inner-city]

If Everton announced that they were to demolish the Main Stand and rebuild it with however much room you wanted for a single stand. If you had to pick another clubs stand to base it on which one would you go for? Plus what size would you go for?

A silly post as Everton HAVE to move home. GP is a shambles to the norm of modern day stadia. EFC need the revenue of modern stadia with mass-transit access to even consider being a top club. Look at:http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/Rapid-Transit-Football.html Opening a mothballed mass-transit Merseyrail line to accommodate stadia using Arsenal as the role model. Tarting up GP means EFC stay a lower table club. The club has to think and do things BIG!

 

[thecadet]

Rebuild

Would this involve total rebuild and a new ground on the same site, but with a rotated pitch?

I'll go along later with my tape measure to see!

Financially we couldn't sustain this option under the current regime. It would mean operating Goodison on 75% or less capacity. Our revenue streams aren't strong enough to support us through this option IMHO

 

[royalblue66]

Kenwrongs preferred option

Is that Steve Round behind them hoardings

 

[Inner-city]

almost like dortmunds ground! They got the colour right

Not much different to what we have now.

 

[Inner-city]

Would this involve total rebuild and a new ground on the same site, but with a rotated pitch?

I'll go along later with my tape measure to see!

This has been studied in the past using the mains stand with new roof as the goal stand - and rejected. The infrastructure at the current site cannot accommodate a large volume of fans, 40,000 is max by modern standards. Only a new spacious site with mass-transit access can propel EFC forwards. New purpose built stadia are cheaper to build than tart ups.

 

[Big Neville Southall]

A silly post as Everton HAVE to move home. GP is a shambles to the norm of modern day stadia. EFC need the revenue modern stadia with mass-transit access to even consider being a top club. Look at:http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/Rapid-Transit-Football.html Opening a mothballed mass-transit Merseyrail line to accommodate stadia using Arsenal as the role model. Tarting up GP mean EFC stay a lower table club. The club has to think and do things NIG!

If Everton said thy were staying at GP and asked you about to sort the the mass transit out to the best you could, opening up lines like the one Liverpool suggested, what would you recommend?

 

[Inner-city]

Financially we couldn't sustain this option under the current regime. It would mean operating Goodison on 75% or less capacity. Our revenue streams aren't strong enough to support us through this option IMHO

That was juts one of the reasons the idea was rejected in the past.

 

[Inner-city]

If Everton said thy were staying at GP and asked you about to sort the the mass transit out to the best you could, opening up lines like the one Liverpool suggested, what would you recommend?

Their only hope is getting the Canada Dock branch line, which runs close, electrified and onto Merseyrail and a station at Walton Lane. But a station needs about 4 to six platforms to be effective and cope with the increased stadium capacity. There is not room on the line with too many houses built backing onto the track and it is either on embankments or in deep rock cuttings giving no width.

HMG are not going to cover the cost of electrification from Edge Hill to Seaforth, and EFC would not as the cost would be beyond them. They could contribute to the cost of 4 to 6 platform station. What let Kirkby down was that the transport was naff. The stadium should have been nearer the station and the station expanded - there again the Kirkby station is in a rock cutting so expensive engineering works are needed.

Have two stadia on the Canada Dock line and HMG might pay as the line would be cost effective, and it also enables electric trains to operate from the container terminal, which is being enlarged to accommodate the largest container ships in the world. Also the districts the line runs through gains, EFC & LFC gain and the port trade gains. The big problem is getting space for two large stations near the existing stadia.

 

[magicjuan]

This has been studied in the past using the mains stand with new roof as the goal stand - and rejected. The infrastructure at the current site cannot accommodate a large volume of fans, 40,000 is max by modern standards. Only a new spacious site with mass-transit access can propel EFC forwards. New purpose built stadia are cheaper to build than tart ups.

Other than a small rise capacity isn't the argument the club have put forward, it's corporate everyone whines about. If, 'ucking big if with this board, it was done correctly and with a strategy, additional expansion in capacity could be factored in. There are numerous occassions where external agencies have bent over backwards to help and accomodate Everton FC, but the one thing that has always been missing is the willing of the board to engage. Key word in all this is 'plan', the board don't have one other than wishful thinking and the occassional lucky dip.

 

[edge]

That was juts one of the reasons the idea was rejected in the past.

it was rejected because the ground was to be extend beyond the main body or line ,why was that ?loads of buildings jut out above street level or are you saying it must be uniform all the way around.

 

[Inner-city]

it was rejected because the ground was to be extend beyond the main body or line ,why was that ?loads of buildings jut out above street level or are you saying it must be uniform all the way around.

Reduced income over many years was a prime consideration in a club hanging onto big club status. Transport and parking is poor and unable to cope with a large capacity stadium. Land would need to be bought. Also the closeness of the Main stand to the terraced houses with only a narrow street providing access is now a modern consideration in planning. There are many expensive points to get around that are not there in a new spacious site rebuild. Believe me over the past 15 years all options have been looked at by EFC, hiring experts to analyse and bottom line. All points to a new stadium elsewhere, which the club did and was refused on planning. The club has spent a lot of money on these various surveys, designs and analysis in the past. They have all the info they need. A pity none emphasised mass-transit transport as essential as if they did the Kirkby stadium would not have been rejected.