Stadium Thread - ALL Kirkby/Stadium Discussion Here

[stanleypark]

Sadly, engineering a Stadium to be 'future proof' (i.e. over engineering the foundations, supporting and superstructures to be able to accommodate the load of extra tiers for example) costs extra.

Bearing in mind how marginal the finances for the Stadium already are, prior to call-in, spiralling costs and shrinking retail enabler, do you think we are:
a- likely to spend the extra, just in case we possibly need it sometime in the future.
or
b- just going to get the bloody thing built, and worry about that later.

... oh, and it's Big Keith making the call .... that'll be a b then will it?

I'm sure it will be b, cos they don't care about the long term. It's like the Park End all over again.

 

[davek]

I agree that Kirkby is far from a fantastic stadium and totally agree with your point that its designed for the short term. The way I see it, is as a damage limitations exercise if this thing does go ahead. Push for improvements rather than us all just saying everythings rubbish, push for a better design for atmosphere like a kop-like design, push for more options for expansion, and push for more character in the design, but be realistic, we can't afford extravagant changes. So we need to push for the essentials. At the end of the day, its us that are going to be in it for the rest of our days. Once its built,its too late to moan about things like the atmosphere then.

I understand where you're coming from mate, but that type of 'dented shield' approach to the stadium doesn't appeal to me. I think we still have the chance of avoiding this, and whilst I do I wont be going cap in hand to the people who want to shove us into this cowshed asking if they can upgrade it to a stable.

 

[davek]

Goodison isnt a fantastic stadium from a aesthetic POV. What makes it good is the atmosphere due to its basic design and its history.

I've had friends who've been to Wembley and they all say the same thing - its a sight to behold but the sound doesnt travel, everything is hollow and feels flat. I've heard the same with the Emirates.

Are they [Poor language removed] stadiums? No. Have we got money to build a £500+ stadium like that? No. Can we build a stadium that can accomadate and create a great atmosphere, without obstructed views, and with new, modern facilites well above Goodison and Anfield? Yes.

If stadiums that cost way more than what we're building cannot unite great atmosphere and nu-age design somethings got to give way. A tarty, flashy, park-end shapped like a giant 70ft bronze Dixie Dean might look good for example, but would it be any good? No.

Here's something from the report -

"However, within those constraints, it is your officers’ view that considerable efforts have been made to create an attractive design of building. In particular, each elevation is marked by capped tower structures (four on each of the longer side elevations and three on the shorter end elevations) that extend along the majority of the underside of each stand. These features help to break up the overall mass of the building, create visual interest and provide an effective means of masking the main entrance stairways, lifts and upper level circulation. They are further aided in this task by steel columns that project from above the towers and through the stadium roof, the overhanging roof and supporting cables. The corners of the stadium have been infilled, with a combination of high level glazing and a curved fascia, to resolve and add visual interest to the junction between each stand. Overall, the design of the stadium is considered to be an appropriate response to the brief."

Isnt the report more of a evaluation of the proposals, offering areas of imporvement anyway?

I think you're hinting at history as being the key ingredient to a good atmosphere and therefore making a great stadium. But Goodison was until recently - historically speaking - a state of the art stadium. Other fans notice the craftsmenship and charm of another era when they look at the Gwladys Street end and Bullens (in my opinion one of the finest sights in football is looking over from the Main Stand at those two stands and marvelling at how those age-old structures look and how much of a 'real' environment it provides compared to some of the anodyne [Poor language removed] that passes for a ground today...not simply because they're old, but because they look so good...which isn't to say that can't be improved). But like it or not, a stadium like that had been costly to assemble over the twentieth century. It wasn't achieved simply by building a bog standard ground and then waiting for time to pass to give it something 'special'...if it was we'd all look at the likes of Bloomfield Road and think Blackpool are mad for shifting from there.

 

[stanleypark]

I understand where you're coming from mate, but that type of 'dented shield' approach to the stadium doesn't appeal to me. I think we still have the chance of avoiding this, and whilst I do I wont be going cap in hand to the people who want to shove us into this cowshed asking if they can upgrade it to a stable.

Good analogy! I think we have to do both though. Yes, fight for a prefered location, but at some point we have to have a plan b in case this does go ahead. Plan b has to be to improve the design. At the end of a day, I'd rather play in a stable in Kirkby than a Cowshed in Kirkby!

 

[Gazdalf]

The offer of my back garden is still open. Bring beer and Meccano and we are sorted.

 

[gordonjblair]

am surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet today:

Minutes of the Knowsley Planning Committee meeting on Monday are now available on their website, along with a few other gems. You are going to be truly astonished at some of these:

"Within six months of commencement of development the Club shall provide to the Council, for its approval, a programme that shall provide for the Council’s use of the Stadium. As a minimum, the programme shall allow for a maximum of 100 free uses by the Council of the Stadium facilities annually; use of the Stadium facilities at a discounted rate for all additional events above the free quota; and, a discounted rate on catering facilities.

"If an agreed programme for stadium use is not provided then the Club will be required to reimburse the Council its costs incurred in securing alternative accommodation."​

Yes - we remiburse Knowsley if we can't fit them in for one of their 100 free uses.

"The Developer and/or the Club are required to pay the following contributions prior to commencement of Development:

3.1.1 Local Highway Improvement Contribution: the amount of £250,000.00 towards the cost to the Council of monitoring the impacts of the Development on local roads and the pedestrian network and the implementation of measures designed to mitigate any adverse impacts;

3.1.2 Railway Station Study Contribution: the amount of £50,000.00 which shall be used by the Council to review the means by which Kirkby Railway Station could be further improved to accommodate match-day demand beyond that currently predicted. The study shall report on the practical and commercial feasibility of any options for improvement.

3.1.3 Controlled Parking Zone Establishment Contribution: the amount of £1,000,000.00 which shall be used by the Council to establish a controlled parking zone scheme within the vicinity of the site. Members should note that in the event that the actual cost incurred by the Council exceeds £1,000,000.00 the Developer will be required to pay the difference to the Council;

3.1.4 Traffic Regulation Order Contribution: the amount of £25,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the promotion and establishment of any Traffic Regulation Orders and other traffic management measures necessary as a consequence of the Development;

3.1.5 Intelligent Transport Contribution: the amount of £150,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards establishing an intelligent transport system in the vicinity of the Site;

3.1.6 Market Contribution: the amount of £250,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards improvements to Kirkby Market;

3.1.7 Playing Fields Contribution: the amount of £100,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the provision of the playing fields to replace those lost as a result of the Development;

3.1.8 Developer’s Council Officers Contribution: the as yet uncalculated amount which shall be applied by the Council to fund the appointment of temporary staff.

3.1.9 Club’s Council Officers Contribution: the as yet uncalculated amount which shall be applied by the Council to fund the appointment of: one building control officer and one stadium management officer; and

3.1.10 Air Quality Contribution: the amount of £23,000.00 which shall be used by the Council towards the cost of monitoring nitrogen dioxide contributions on Bewley Drive for three years following the occupation of the Development.

3.2 The Developer is required to pay the following contributions prior to occupation of the Development and/or Stadium:

3.2.1 Travel Plan Contribution: the amount of £150,000.00 towards the cost to the Council of monitoring transport choices of those visiting the development and encouraging sustainable means of transport;

3.2.2 Controlled Parking Zone Annual Contribution: the amount of £200,000.00, to be paid annually, to the Council as a contribution towards the ongoing management and enforcement of the controlled parking zone scheme. Members should note that in the event that the actual cost incurred by the Council in anyone year exceeds £200,000.00 the Developer will be required to pay the difference to the Council;"

"The Stadium Travel Plan is required to include measures aimed at:

• promoting the use public transport and non-car modes of transport to/from the Stadium;

• the provision of off-street park & walk and off-street park and ride sites together with requisite shuttle buses to accommodate 16,500 visitors to the stadium;

• the provision of special event day buses to accommodate 6,800 visitors to the stadium;

• the provision of coaches and coach park to accommodate 5,100 visitors to the stadium;

• the provision of public transport arrangements to include sufficient train capacity to accommodate 3,800 visitors travelling by train;

• ensuring sufficient publicity for parking restrictions in the vicinity of the site;

• the assessment of additional traffic impacts;

• providing incentives for those travelling to the stadium by car to arrive early and leave late; and • ensuring monitoring measures are in place.

4.4 The Stadium Travel Plan is to be amended, and submitted to the Council for approval, on an annual basis to take into account the projected average attendance at the Stadium and the projected modal share for the following season.

4..5 Members should note that in the event that the transport arrangements set out in the Stadium Travel Plan are not achieved, the Stadium capacity for a Major Event (ie. one that attracts 7,500 or more visitors) shall be reduced on a pro-rata basis. The Stadium is not to be occupied until a Railway Station Improvement Scheme has been completed to the satisfaction of Merseytravel and the Council. This scheme is to be agreed between the Developer and Merseytravel, the cost of which is to be borne by the Developer and shall not exceed £3,700,000.00."​

And saving the best for last....from another report dated 4/6/08

6.1.3

The Council is in discussions with Everton about sharing non-football related revenues above those which are forecast in the Club's business plan. These discussions are also yet to be finalised."

​

So in summary:

We give the council use of the stadium 100 days / year. For free, with discounted catering.

We're allowed 6 large events of our own, but attendance at these can be capped depending on the transport plan. But certainly no concerts.

What we do make, if much at all given the restrictions, we may well have to share with KMBC.

We are committed to ongoing subsidies for the parking policy that bans us from parking near the stadium.

and so on, ad nauseum..

I'm sorry, but this is starting to get [Poor language removed] silly
​

 

[inertia3112]

it started to get [Poor language removed] silly at 'no plan b', then we sped past 'a mockery of a sham of a mockery' when we found out we need to put up £78m when pre-vote it was much less, i think now its reaching the point where even Rafael's advice on what to do would be better than what were hearing from the blue corridors of power.

And whats coming out of the knowsley minutes above, should shock people, but surely not anymore.

 

[Basil Fawlty]

At one stage i admit i was for the move but this is nuts, we pay 78m of our own money for a stadium (didn't the Mackems pay like 40 odd for the Stadium of [Poor language removed]) we can't use it for non-football reasons more than 6 times, we can't park our cars anywhere near it, we are obliged to give KMBC free usage of it

It's not our stadium by the sounds of it , we are going to regret this i think. Liverpool is a big place, there must be a greenfield site somewhere or somewhere we could redevelop ourselves because we'll lose more commercially after we move than we would save in the initial building work

How much will it cost us giving our facilities away for years and years to KMBC just to save a few million, if you think about it a stadium that size could lease for millions, so we are not really saving any money at all

 

[Nebbiolo]

Not the best deal we could imagine, and not the deal of the century!

I think one of the problems of allowing the public vote in the first place, is that now those that voted yes because of the spin they heard from Bully and company, now feel as though they were sold a line.

The club, for better or worse, should have just gone it alone. Then we could hardly complain that we feel cheated by any unfolding events.

Plus, it was always an unfair vote when you think about it. It's not like we had a camp that was able to put the negatives to the fans in any way as forcefully as the club could put the positives. KEIOC is hardly a slick, polished outfit able to grab the limelight, like the club is able to.

 

[SweetHomeGoodison]

And just to reiterate the point.........Everton wont own the stadium, they will pay rent to Tesco. KW describes it as peppercorn, but as he spouted so much other [Poor language removed], this comment probably is too and it will sure as shi* cost the club dearly. I wonder how many days Tesco bods will be given the golden keys for ?

They own Goodison, even though it is mortgaged and apparently without equity. But at least these loans can be repaid.

Im astonished that BK is still going along with this catalogue of horrors. His CEO is a complete arrogant incompetent *wat ! It may seem like LCC have it in for EFC, but did KW consider for a second that something like the Bellefield knockback would never happen ? That green space ( all be it private land ) has been the outlook for those surrounding houses for decades. If I lived there I would complain too.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Dont like the latest developments at all.

 

[coyney]

To be honest Im fed up being the laughing stock of the city this is a bad move turned into a nightmare.even our postmans a r/s has to put on my letters if no longer at this address try Kirkby.I admit it was funny LAST YEAR.

 

[Nebbiolo]

To be honest Im fed up being the laughing stock of the city this is a bad move turned into a nightmare.even our postmans a r/s has to put on my letters if no longer at this address try Kirkby.I admit it was funny LAST YEAR.

It's the banter that will be the first to go if the club leaves the city!

 

[SweetHomeGoodison]

Im just wondering how KWs calculator is holding out, those buttons must be worn out by now. I wonder just how he is still convincing the other bods that the figures are still stacking up.

 

[MaccaBill]

A mass email of Bill Kenwright? Clog up his inbox? Anyone got his address?
And if we haven't got his personal email address, perhaps we could look up his business one?