The Liverpool Echo say that while there has been no confirmation that Peel Holdings would be prepared to sell the 15-hectare site, the club at least know what they would be looking at in terms of purchasing the land.
Keeping Everton In Our City (KEIOC) come to the same conclusion based on land values in the City estimated at £990,000 per hectare, with a £5m premium presumably for the waterside location at Trafalgar and Clarence Docks.
The North Docks area is one of two "brownfield" sites Everton are considering as alternatives to redeveloping Goodison Park as Farhad Moshiri and the Board seek to finally find a resolution to the club's long-standing stadium issue.
Peel, meanwhile, had planned to incorporate the site into their £5bn waterfront development project.
Reader Comments (147)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:38:16
2 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:45:41
3 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:51:36
However, a well lit stadium by the water would look stunning and the for the long term it would always remain attractive to possible investors and players for many years to come.
4 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:55:54
5 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:56:34
6 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:57:39
7 Posted 17/08/2016 at 15:58:37
8 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:00:33
I haven't had to drive away from around goodison for years, as I live in bootle so always walked, but surely regent Road, great Howard street, roads through town or up Leeds Street would dissipate the traffic easier than it is at goodison now?
9 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:02:01
The excuse Kenwright will come out with is that Everton have been promised any new stadium that will possibly be built in the possibility of Liverpool possibly being awarded the games in 2026. Bill will be long retired by then and when that falls flat he won't be taking the flak.
Let's see if our 'New owner' gets his wallet out and puts his money where his mouth is, which so far he hasn't.
10 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:04:27
11 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:08:52
13 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:13:57
14 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:16:29
15 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:17:44
16 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:24:00
17 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:26:14
18 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:29:11
This is an opportunity for the club to really make a statement of intent that would dwarf Anfield's renovation.
Time for the club to become Number 1 in the city again.
19 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:32:09
Moshiri or no Moshiri, I think we shall be well into 'the twenties' by the time any new stadium is delivered. In the meantime, here's a can of primer!
20 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:33:05
Donning that tin hat thingy...
Never been to the Mecca of football that is Liverpool, England, but from what I can gather this site would be the best we could get from reading many TW contributions.
This is a business and our performance on the ledger is important. A new site with a new stadium would put us in a prime financial position for half a century.
21 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:33:52
22 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:34:14
23 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:34:47
24 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:48:40
26 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:49:26
27 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:50:38
28 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:50:38
I wonder how much Arsenal paid for their piece of no mans land sandwiched between two railway tracks and has the east coast main line rattling it's foundations every 30 minutes?
29 Posted 17/08/2016 at 16:55:10
If EFC ever have any ambition to make the next step this has to happen.
30 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:00:20
My laugh out loud moment of the day! Cheers!!!
31 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:03:31
32 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:10:32
33 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:13:01
It's well worth reading the report (dated today) on their website. Apparently, Peel Holdings received planning permission for their 'Liverpool Waters' project over four years ago, and the 'project' has not moved forward one iota since then. So before we all start getting a little bit giddy, there are a number of obstacles to be overcome first.
A brand new sparkling stadium on the waterfront is all well and good, but we need the appropriate development to go alongside it.
I would presume the new regime at Everton will be well aware of this fact before issuing an official statement to the fans etc.
At least we now seem to have the level of commercial acumen within the boardroom to have a real fighting chance of bringing the project to fruition.
34 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:13:12
35 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:18:32
We cannot miss this opportunity & with the Commonwealth games being planned, the timing could be perfect.
The Peoples Club needs a a world class, iconic stadium, our future could be very bright indeed... Believe Blues!.
36 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:21:44
37 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:31:29
Also I think the dock wall has a listed building type of order on it so that could be a problem for access.
38 Posted 17/08/2016 at 17:43:53
39 Posted 17/08/2016 at 18:01:50
40 Posted 17/08/2016 at 18:10:40
41 Posted 17/08/2016 at 18:14:43
42 Posted 17/08/2016 at 18:15:39
No docks need filling in on the former Clarence Dock site, nor would further filling-in be allowed. The Dock Wall is an important listed structure and part of the World Heritage Site. Careful design needed but it would not be a deal-breaker. The main criteria should be:
 a state-of-the-art first phase to hold 48,000;
 plans to add an ultimate phase to ensure a venue fit and large enough for the European Cup Final [and, of course, a home for the European Champions], and
 no running-track at any stage, ever: nobody has been able to solve the football-athletics mix. It just kills the atmosphere for regular club football.
Just wait for the reaction from West Ham fans someway down the line, once they realise what they've been landed with. It'll be
Juventus all over again - ditching the multi-purpose Delle Alpi [built for Italia 90] and building themselves a proper ground instead.
Anything less and we should retain expanding Goodison as Plan A.
43 Posted 17/08/2016 at 18:17:58
45 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:06:00
"Nobody has been able to solve the football-athletics mix. "
I seem to recall that Man City did resolve this issue through forward planning. What I had been given to understand is that when the stadium was built the there were several layers of terracing beneath the running track. Once the Commonwealth Games were over, the surface was excavated down to its present football pitch level. Consequently the now exposed terracing brought the spectators in "Row A" considerably closer to the touchlines.
That doesn't sound like an unrealistic approach to have been taken.
46 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:28:48
47 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:32:42
The Manchester Commonwealth Games Stadium was always a half-built football stadium in disguise. Not only was the track permanently removed and the pitch lowered, but for athletics, it was a three-sided venue plus a temporary stand set way back the track stuck out at one end. Once the four-sided enclosure had been completed, athletics was off the agenda. How they pulled that trick off I don't know, but I'm sure nobody will get away with it again! In any case, surely Everton won't wait until after the Commonwealth Games come to Liverpool!
The Principality [Millennium] Stadium in Cardiff once had a running track for an earlier Commonwealth Games as well, but since rebuilding, re-introduction of athletics is now impossible.
Wembley was designed so that a running track could be inserted over the lowest level of seats this [daft] idea was abandoned and the Olympic Stadium built, but not before a big Olympic lottery grant had been given to Wembley [which I don't think was ever returned I might be wrong]. But Wembley still feels too 'open' to be a successful club stadium one-off special occasions are perhaps a different matter.
A big effort was made, from the start, to combine football and athletics at the Stade de France, but the final result is unconvincing, although it's more successful than West Ham's new home will ever be.
48 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:33:38
49 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:41:01
50 Posted 17/08/2016 at 19:46:26
51 Posted 17/08/2016 at 20:01:52
52 Posted 17/08/2016 at 20:10:59
53 Posted 17/08/2016 at 20:16:46
55 Posted 17/08/2016 at 20:52:41
a) not the 1,500m, but the 1,342.5 metres
b) not the 800m, but the 716.14 metres
c) not the 200m hurdles, but the 179.53m hurdles (just move the last 2 hurdles together!)
d) the 89.57681m sprint, where Usain Bolt doesn't smile for such a long time...
Maybe they could also propose to the Commonwealth Games Committee that the throwers secure a small parachute onto the javelin so that it opens mid-air and doesn't fly so far then?
56 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:18:33
57 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:23:41
It already has started mate, meetings with all involved are ongoing.
58 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:24:20
The Millennium Stadium has never had a track and neither did the modernised Arms Park. The Millennium Stadium, sorry the Principality Stadium, is however used for a whole range of activities: concerts, speedway, monster truck meetings etc.
59 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:40:29
This is what I have been told, and the person who told me knows what he is talking about.
60 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:43:56
As long as it's around the perimeter in Bill's office. And that goes for the sync swimming shot put and rifle shooting..
61 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:48:41
63 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:49:15
64 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:55:54
You're correct. But the rebuilding of the Arms Park, and then the Millennium Stadium on the same site, did not [and could not] accommodate the running track - that's the point I was trying to make. I'm old enough to remember all the different incarnations!
And Eric [42 and 59]:
There will undoubtedly be World Heritage issues, but I don't think they are insurmountable.
My preference has always been to expand Goodison in affordable increments, keeping a tight hold of its history. But I admit I'm as excited as anyone else by the potential of a brand-new waterfront site, providing the design is world-class and everything possible is done to create the 'optimum' football atmosphere.
65 Posted 17/08/2016 at 21:59:22
Bob Wake up! Wake up! What were you dreaming about????
66 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:05:33
My old local booza went for £32m
Snap their bleedin hands off!!!!!!
67 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:08:34
68 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:09:37
69 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:10:31
70 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:12:36
71 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:34:08
A bit of cloak and dagger perhaps... These little snippets of positivity could help get a player or two over the line.
72 Posted 17/08/2016 at 22:43:04
73 Posted 17/08/2016 at 23:02:23
74 Posted 17/08/2016 at 23:35:39
75 Posted 17/08/2016 at 23:42:44
Interesting link this one. Straight from an Arsenal webpage.
Things may never be the same again...
76 Posted 17/08/2016 at 23:50:10
77 Posted 17/08/2016 at 23:56:14
As new grounds go this is a good plan. We are regenerating an area, we are not building on a park or forest, and even for me one of the most gloom ridden, suspicious and distrustful fans left out there I may just start believing again. I may... just may be able to forget about the Fortress Sports Fund, NTL and the Kings Dock.
This is it; we don't need Messi, Rodriguez or even Austin. Get us this and that's me made up. Moshiri is real and not another load of Billy Liar BS.
Although thinking about it.. what part of the Docks? It's a big place... Please close to town and not the stinky bit by United Utilities!
78 Posted 17/08/2016 at 00:11:13
They do of course want to leave a couple of fingers in the pie, and will look at deals that give them a long term return, like retaining the freehold on the land that gets developed and occupied by the "partner".
The mooted £20M price tag for the land is usually not an upfront cost (even though that money really is a drop in the ocean for Everton these days) it will be mortgaged (and Everton will reclaim all the interest paid on the mortgage from the taxman).
I'm guessing Everton would have to come up with a plan and commit to developing the whole site rather than just the stadium.
The blurb on Peels website would have you believe there is lots of interest in this and other sites in their portfolio, I think if that was the case, (barring serious contamination issues) this site would have gone a long time ago.
It looks like their projects for Liverpool waterfront and Wirral waters have stalled. I think Peel may need Everton just as much as Everton need Peel
79 Posted 17/08/2016 at 00:20:05
I love Everton but my home team is Rapid Wien. They have a new stadium but with safe standing behind goal has not lost the amazing atmosphere. Have a look on YouTube (opening vs Chelsea) and see if you like it.
80 Posted 18/08/2016 at 02:40:43
What is the impact of losing the space that would be sacrificed for a football stadium with all of its support infrastructure? and then, what positive impact could the stadium have on pump priming an albeit reduced Liverpool Waters 2 project? Finally, £20m in the bank is £20m in the bank!"
81 Posted 18/08/2016 at 03:46:37
The key is not about seats or standing, it's about limiting access to a particular space. If the same overcrowding occurred in a seated area, whilst the loss of life would be offset by the lack of barriers blocking egress to the pitch, there would be far more injuries to limbs etc. with people being bundled over seats. Semantics, will never happen.
82 Posted 18/08/2016 at 05:51:08
83 Posted 18/08/2016 at 06:03:17
I realize we'd all be worried about a lot more than footy of the seas rise significantly, but are developers and tenants taking potential rising seas into account in places like Liverpool?
At least if we get Usmanov we'd have a huge yacht as an Ark ...
84 Posted 18/08/2016 at 06:52:02
85 Posted 18/08/2016 at 07:29:05
86 Posted 18/08/2016 at 09:25:46
Business people like Usmanov are always looking for "opportunities". The development of the Liverpool waterfront represents a huge opportunity for anyone who gets the concept right.
I have posted previously that I am prone to a vivid imagination but this whole thing could turn out "bigger than Ben Hur".
87 Posted 18/08/2016 at 09:27:46
88 Posted 18/08/2016 at 09:53:18
Matt, it's well known that the Kop stand for the entire game at every match without any added safety measures. Reading RS forums on the subject this morning after seeing your post it would appear that there are many advocates for an area where there are measures in place to allow fans to stand and cheer the team on in complete safety.
In the Street End with every attack we're up and down like it's a pilates session, how difficult would it be to bring in a safe area? It's a bit rich the RS as a club allowing the Kop to stand every game yet still opposing standing areas at other stadiums. And that's not in any way a slight on the families of the 96, believe me. Safe standing is a possibility and should be considered.
89 Posted 18/08/2016 at 11:32:48
If you've never seen it, a quick Google will give you an idea. Old school from the outside, tight and noisy in the inside with supporters close to the pitch and high end terraces.
It's pretty epic.
90 Posted 18/08/2016 at 11:55:58
91 Posted 18/08/2016 at 12:09:27
"Expect to see significant investment on the pitch and more involvement from Usmanov" were the comments made.
Seems it's just wishful thinking. It will be down to Moshiri which is a step forward from Kenwright. Not that we've seen anything yet off the pitch that is. Still as poor and 2nd rate as ever in that regard.
92 Posted 18/08/2016 at 12:24:52
Being from the continent I am surprised that in England standing is still prohibited but I notice that the arguments can get emotional rather soon and don't think that's worth the hassle so I try to stay away from the discussion. But here are my two cents:
In countries like Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands most stadiums have standing areas. Those that don't have standing areas, have designated "fan areas" where you get told that although you purchase a seat, everybody in the area will stand up the entire game. These are all developed countries with almost all new/redeveloped stadiums, those standing areas are as safe as any seated area. I dare even say that a proper standing area is safer than everybody standing in a seated area...
For the atmosphere inside the stadium, standing area seem to have a great effect. Even huge stadiums like Dortmund's (85,000) and München's (75,000) have a great atmosphere, where all-seater stadiums of comparable size in England, Spain and Italy more often than not fall behind on this point.
To me, it's really a no-brainer actually.
93 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:08:24
OK, there can be some adjustment to relatively small architectural details but the overall impression is one of "sameness". If we DO end up with a new stadium let's have one which stands out from the rest.
94 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:16:49
Hopefully it will be announced officially the day the RS open their new stand.
95 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:19:06
96 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:28:10
How about one in which the away section is 3 metres below pitch level? For the "bigger" clubs.
97 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:31:23
98 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:39:18
99 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:49:47
The Royal Blue Mersey Stadium.
100 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:50:27
I didn't know about the RS standing on the Kop. Then again, I shouldn't be surprised either. Personally I'd be in favour of the safe standing areas a la Germany (and I'm sure Celtic did the same) with the rails that can have seats re-installed easily for Champions League games where it's a competition requirement.
101 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:55:48
With hooliganism being virtually non-existent in stadiums these days side note: how quickly did that disappear from inside the stadiums? Still surprises me to this day, for me it felt like it just vanished overnight crowds being monitored and controlled far better by new technologies and stadiums being designed far better to manage with big crowds, especially the new stadiums, there is really no reason to ban standing.
But I realise I'm preaching to the choir. I would love it if Everton was allowed to do a pilot on a big standing area behind one of the goals in a new stadium. Think it would do wonders for the atmosphere.
102 Posted 18/08/2016 at 13:58:05
103 Posted 18/08/2016 at 14:38:18
Excellent idea! "3 metres below pitch level"? How about 3 m below Mersey high tide level with culverts to and from the river to feed their under ground stand. See how big they are then. Or we could have a sprinkler system so that it pisses down on them for the entire match.
104 Posted 18/08/2016 at 14:43:25
Hearing Bramley Moor Dock
105 Posted 18/08/2016 at 14:47:16
Now is the time when Everton fc come out of the dark age and reach for the stars. A long time coming but the club have men of ambition and cash and that is a good combination. Particularly when you have the reins of such a historic entity in the beautiful game.
So let's get that land for the price of a couple of premier league players yearly salaries and get building. The cornerstone is on me.
106 Posted 18/08/2016 at 14:51:03
107 Posted 18/08/2016 at 14:57:56
Looking at Google Earth there doesn't seem to be enough room at Bramley Moor to build a stadium and there appears to be a new development under construction when the photos were taken. Trafalgar Dock appears to have a lot of room..
108 Posted 18/08/2016 at 15:10:01
109 Posted 18/08/2016 at 15:11:05
110 Posted 18/08/2016 at 15:13:04
111 Posted 18/08/2016 at 15:20:37
112 Posted 18/08/2016 at 15:24:17
As for the stadium itself we must aim high with a 60,000 capacity. It must be state of the art but there is no reason why it should not include a safe standing area in line with the current German model. A retractable roof would address the concerns about prevailing north west winds which frequently reach gale force along the river front.
Transport considerations are mistakenly often secondary when new stadiums are being planned. The huge advantage of this site is its proximity to the city but thought would need to be given to car parking provision including a park and ride facility capable of supporting a 60,000 capacity.
As for the current facelift at Goodison, I heard it had run into some issues concerning the external cladding. That is not entirely surprising given the age of some of the material.
113 Posted 18/08/2016 at 16:54:19
114 Posted 18/08/2016 at 17:15:23
115 Posted 18/08/2016 at 17:46:22
116 Posted 18/08/2016 at 18:01:01
117 Posted 18/08/2016 at 18:08:31
118 Posted 18/08/2016 at 19:15:01
119 Posted 18/08/2016 at 19:25:45
Here's a Link where the rumour originated in regard to the Lucas Oil Stadium whisper
120 Posted 18/08/2016 at 22:28:34
I think if the rail seating at Celtic is a success other SPL will follow and surely then is only a matter of time before EPL does; I hope so... I would love Everton to have noise like at Rapid.
122 Posted 19/08/2016 at 03:11:16
123 Posted 19/08/2016 at 05:17:53
124 Posted 19/08/2016 at 09:15:09
That said my second point is superfluous. A dockside site would be a nightmare, especially for night games. Anyone trying to get near the city when there is an event at the Arena will know what I mean. Car traffic, instead of being close to the ring road and fast routes out along the East Lancs and the other radial routes, would have to trundle through Walton or Anfield or the city itself to escape. Anyone crossing the river would be no worse off though. Could be a lifeline for the ferries if they build a landing stage outside the stadium and buy a redundant aircraft carrier.
125 Posted 19/08/2016 at 10:02:34
126 Posted 19/08/2016 at 11:20:03
But according to that logic, Kirkby would have been ideally sited, close to East Lancs, M67 and M62, and we all know our views on that one.
The key is ensuring there are, by virtue of the city location, plenty of public transport options, and late evening rail services out to suitably scoped park and ride facilities, say, at Liverpool South Parkway or Aintree
127 Posted 19/08/2016 at 11:43:50
128 Posted 19/08/2016 at 11:54:22
129 Posted 19/08/2016 at 12:03:21
As noted the river is going to be right there. Park and Rides could be buses on the Liverpool side or ferries from two sites on the Wirral side. Easy to see how ferries could even drop off/collect on the stadium site directly.
Sandhills station is a 20 minute walk. Lime Street is only a 35-40 minute walk.
Hard to imagine a site with more diverse transport options to get into.
130 Posted 19/08/2016 at 12:15:14
The problem with waterside development as proposed is that you only have access from one side. Arsenal is a bit like that and, despite having tube lines and rail connections it's a nightmare to access, and yes, I know that it's isolated on one side by a rail line.
Middlesbrough is another example of waterside development that is difficult to access and leave, and it has the benefit of loads of car-parking and an expressway within half a mile. It's also in the middle of a drinking desert, as would be the case with the docks here, meaning that there would be likely to be a concentration of punters arriving around 30 minutes prior to k.o. The club would hope that people might arrive earlier and drink in the ground but, other than Newcastle, where I had a passable pint of Guinness once, most of the beer in football grounds is poor and over-priced.
Posters talk of the authorities working with the club. Well their record so far is grim. Anyone from the Wirral will know that night-time tunnel closures cause chaos and I dread to think how the closure of the Wirral Line access to the city will work out after Christmas.
The old soccer specials were great but that was when most people used public transport and other means to get to the match. The soccerbus works well currently because the journey time is short and a few buses making rapid runs can shift lots of fans at an economic cost. Longer distances to travel in traffic are not likely to do so. What do people pay for the bus service to the game from places like Ellesmere Port? Anyone know?
Finally, anyone remember the people who would mind your bike in their backyard during the game for 3d?
131 Posted 19/08/2016 at 12:32:52
132 Posted 19/08/2016 at 13:02:43
Would he take up a lease from Peel for a new stadium? Yes/no/
Would he see the bigger picture? Yes/no?
Would the bigger picture include the whole development of the dockland including the stadium? Yes/no?
Would this scenario be positive for our Everton? Yes/no?
Any takers on the thought process?
133 Posted 19/08/2016 at 13:21:00
"Moshiri is fundamentally a businessman, not an Everton fan! Yes/no?"
Fundamentally a businessman. Not an Everton fan on buying shares. Possibly converts to a real Everton fan.
"He likes Everton for a few reasons that include the chance to make money. Yes/no?"
Probably wants to make money. Possibly wants at least not to lose money. This might be (also) a vanity project.
"Would he take up a lease from Peel for a new stadium? Yes/no?"
"Would he see the bigger picture? Yes/no?"
Probably. Whatever the bigger picture is (assume strategic vision).
"Would the bigger picture include the whole development of the dockland including the stadium? Yes/no?"
Probably, if that's important to his own objectives.
"Would this scenario be positive for our Everton? Yes/no?"
Potentially yes. Potentially no.
134 Posted 19/08/2016 at 14:08:47
Ellesmere Port question why would you get a bus?. Train straight through to Lime St or Sandhills and its a short walk or get off at Woodside and get on a ferry.
If you absolutely couldnt handle not driving then you head down the M53 to Seacombe and park up at the ferry terminal there. Either way theres only a problem if you try and contrive one.
Sure the Riverside Stadium in Middlesborough is close to a river, but, that is where the similarity ends to what is possible in the north docks. The Tees doesnt have a pre-existing ferry infrastructure with a motorway network right behind it like exists on the Wirral side of the Mersey.
Likewise, the mersey stadium is going to be incorporated into a wider leisure, tourism, business and residential development in the surrounding area. It will be a far removed experience from the traditional matchday bevvies down the Winslow etc, but, to get a true iconic stadium on the waterfront skyline I think most Evertonians would take the trade off.
There are no insurmountable problems with any of the factors you mention. Its not a one-sided stadium because we use our river. Our docklands are being revitalised not stuck out at arms length and, if the stories are to be believed, part of Moshiri's deal in coming in was to enable the stadium project.
135 Posted 19/08/2016 at 14:20:29
136 Posted 19/08/2016 at 14:45:01
Maximise event days. This may involve investment in durable pitch surfaces
Generate premium income through club seats and boxes
Optimise non-gate sports income related to hospitality, concessions, ground sponsorship, advertising and parking
Diversify operations to provide a 365 days a year income - such as hotels, conferences etc.
Money back swiftly and ongoing revenue streams for the long term.
137 Posted 19/08/2016 at 15:27:27
When you think we spent £13 mllion on Niasse, a complete disaster, then £20 million to guarantee our new ground is nothing.
138 Posted 19/08/2016 at 15:53:11
139 Posted 19/08/2016 at 16:39:43
This would be an iconical standout stadium I would love to see, should the pipe dream ever be fulfilled. Play the short 30 second video to get a clear idea of the innovative concept.
140 Posted 19/08/2016 at 17:07:31
141 Posted 19/08/2016 at 17:15:09
We could have all those who get nosebleeds at height being allocated seats in the top tier and with the away fans immediately below. They'd be wondering where all that blood came from.
142 Posted 19/08/2016 at 20:58:39
In simple engineering terms the higher you build the deeper you're sinking foundations as well. Obviously there have been tall buildings along the dock frontage, but, not where we are looking around Trafalgar dock from memory.
Plus, if the article is to be believed, we'll be revisiting the 'Football Quarter' concept...just somewhere that tourists might actually want to go...and removing the distasteful red element!. That means scaling the site to fit hotel and leisure elements as well as the stadium. Something similar to a scaled down, 50k seater, Neuvo Mestella or Allianz type design would likely tick all the boxes.
...and I'd settle for that.
143 Posted 19/08/2016 at 21:23:12
"Contrived" seems to me to be the operative word here. Basic project management: identify potential problems and plan ahead to negate them.
The KD cock-up is the biggest EFC regret for me (on a par with selling Bally). To have a stadium on the second most iconic waterfront in the world, come on... go for it!
"How to get to Anfield? Erm... it's a bit out the way, mon brave, but..."
144 Posted 20/08/2016 at 06:11:36
145 Posted 20/08/2016 at 10:58:32
146 Posted 21/08/2016 at 16:10:34
147 Posted 21/08/2016 at 16:18:48
148 Posted 21/08/2016 at 16:27:03
149 Posted 21/08/2016 at 19:58:18
Trouble is it only holds 40,000 but I'm sure it could be made bigger. No running track. Crowd right on top of the pitch. Very futuristic look in keeping with the school of science. Probably cost a fortune to build but it would certainly be iconic.
151 Posted 25/08/2016 at 12:50:17
If it's no longer needed for dock related business, it should be handed back for its initial cost, nothing.
152 Posted 26/08/2016 at 10:09:34
153 Posted 10/09/2016 at 10:09:40
155 Posted 10/09/2016 at 12:38:27
That's if it's all kosher and we're really not going to Crocky...come what may
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.