Stadium thread: Reprise edition

[Paddock]

Is anyone else feeling a bit torn about this - wanting to go to make the club a bigger force but tied to Goodison like a family member who has been there through good, bad and hard times?

I'm not torn one tiny bit to be honest Jess. I'm absolutely gutted we'll leave the old lady one day but I resigned myself to the fact that it was going to happen sooner or later a long time ago now.

 

It's heartbreaking having the wrench of leaving her bit we MUST make the break if we want any hope of investment and moving on. Lots of teams , big teams Arsenal, Man City, Soton, soon Spurs have all done it and the harsh reality is Goodison is just not up to being redeveloped. We're desperate for the corporate hospitality a new ground will bring we really are.

 

Sooner it happens the better I think, lets just get it out the way and move on so we can all grieve and get used to the fact Goodison will no longer be there. Hopefully the club will build a fantastic new stadium that has it's stands right on the pitch and is even more intimidating to away fans. It's the best we can hope for in all this.

 

Common sense must prevail over all of our hearts. What's important is the club moves forward and is brought into the 21st century and we have s modern ground that maximises our revenue .

Edited September 20, 2014 by Paddock

[Cornish Steve]

Here in Atlanta, the city (note - the city, because of all the additional sales tax revenues) built a brand new 50,000-seat baseball stadium in 1996 (actually, it was the stadium used for the Olympic Games). Now they're building a new stadium to replace it. Same with the (American) football stadium. It, the Atlanta Dome with a retractable roof, opened in 1992, and the cost of building its replacement (again, paid for by the city) is $1.2 billion. From my perspective, I have a hard time understanding why it's so difficult to replace a 100-year-old stadium and why the city won't pay for it.

[Guest John Burns]

Here in Atlanta, the city (note - the city, because of all the additional sales tax revenues) built a brand new 50,000-seat baseball stadium in 1996 (actually, it was the stadium used for the Olympic Games). Now they're building a new stadium to replace it. Same with the (American) football stadium. It, the Atlanta Dome with a retractable roof, opened in 1992, and the cost of building its replacement (again, paid for by the city) is $1.2 billion. From my perspective, I have a hard time understanding why it's so difficult to replace a 100-year-old stadium and why the city won't pay for it.

Unlike the USA, cities have no additional tax raising powers in the UK. Liverpool, wanted to impellent Land Value Tax to get rid of abandoned and derelict buildings, but Whitehall prevented this. The recent Scots debate has brought this to the fore and we may have such power, but years off. The North Of England is considering a loose Northern alliance akin to the Confederation of the Rhine (The cities and towns in the Ruhr) that would be a real powerhouse. One that assembles every couple of months where the cities meet up to discuss shared interests at a different venue each time doing away with the need for a capital. The North has to do this to fend off the South East who suck in all resources.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[markjazzbassist]

Here in Atlanta, the city (note - the city, because of all the additional sales tax revenues) built a brand new 50,000-seat baseball stadium in 1996 (actually, it was the stadium used for the Olympic Games). Now they're building a new stadium to replace it. Same with the (American) football stadium. It, the Atlanta Dome with a retractable roof, opened in 1992, and the cost of building its replacement (again, paid for by the city) is $1.2 billion. From my perspective, I have a hard time understanding why it's so difficult to replace a 100-year-old stadium and why the city won't pay for it.

Same here Steve. I'm an American and every city here foots the bill or pays most of it and makes their money back in 10 years and then just banks the cash after that. Helps the city, and boosts the local economy, creates jobs, and it pays for itself, win win. Not sure why liverpool is so apprehensive.

[Cornish Steve]

All the counties in our region have the power to levy a Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST). During a local election, a referendum is put on the ballot to, for example, add 1% sales tax for one year to raised funds for a specific purpose - new park, improve schools, improve roads, and so on. If a majority vote for it, it happens. While it couldn't be done for just one team, couldn't Liverpool Council suggest a 1% sales tax to raise funds for new stadia or stadium improvements for its local teams?

[Cornish Steve]

Incidentally, when cities refuse to build a new stadium in the US, the owners usually threaten to take their team to a city that will. This is why Atlanta is paying for a new football stadium: If they had refused, the owners of the Atlanta Falcons were going to take the team to somewhere else. Imagine the furore if Bill Kenwright threatened to take the team to Bristol, for example, if the city wouldn't build a new stadium. All of a sudden, there would be a major change in tune.

[markjazzbassist]

Incidentally, when cities refuse to build a new stadium in the US, the owners usually threaten to take their team to a city that will. This is why Atlanta is paying for a new football stadium: If they had refused, the owners of the Atlanta Falcons were going to take the team to somewhere else. Imagine the furore if Bill Kenwright threatened to take the team to Bristol, for example, if the city wouldn't build a new stadium. All of a sudden, there would be a major change in tune.

 

amen dude, you've lived here a while haven't you?

 

yeah they just threaten to move and have some pics taken in the paper of them in "other possible location city" and the whole city goes in an uproar, unanimously passes the stadium tax, and life is good. i think the teams are so ingrained in the fabric of life in england this couldn't happen.

[Matt]

A stadium will be huge. A stadium cannot be partially sunk into the ground as the tributaries of the old Lyver Pool (the Liverpool 1 centre is on it) run under the site. After high rains and high tides basements around Paradise St fill up - over 300 years ago boats berthed in Paradise St, the land was reclaimed. Liverpool needs to keep its human feel about it. I do not see a stadium in the centre being a tourist attraction, more a tourist put off. All aspects have to be carefully looked at - with lengthy legal battles from retailers, this idea is a non-starter. The influential English Heritage will hit then roof over this.

 

 

The docks would be accessed via a number of large locks strung across the barrage. Access would be 24/7 as the lock are in the permanently deep channels not dependent on the tides, so ships do not have to wait at the Mersey bar for 12 hour waits for the tide making the port far more attractive with fast turn arounds. The port should expand increasing employment for sure. Post Panamax ships can be on the sea side of the barrage. All the dock gates can be left open 24/7 as the Mersey will be at high water permanently and ships berthed anywhere in the river. Ships can freely move from dock to dock 24/7 to load and unload.

 

The rail access across the barrage would need to be in a tunnel under the ship locks, built in into the barrage wall. I like it. I think it would work. The problem is the time to design, approve and construct and get the stadium/barrage up and running. The city of Liverpool needs an adventurous high profile idea like this, fulfilling many needs and functions.

i think that's the first post I can agree with! Except that a stadium is a detraction. Ask Barcelona for example. The Nou Camp is a massive attraction because of the club, which should be our goal Edited September 20, 2014 by Matt

[Bluey_bird90]

Does anyone remember the boys pen? Would love to see a picture of it - if anyone has one floating around?

[Romey 1878]

Does anyone remember the boys pen? Would love to see a picture of it - if anyone has one floating around?

 

You should ask Kenwright; he went in there every week in bare feet.

[Guest John Burns]

 

You should ask Kenwright; he went in there every week in bare feet.

It was just a railed off section in the upper corner of the Street end where it meets Bullens Road. In the 1970s they had to put chicken wire up to the Street end balcony as the kids would constantly throw things out. Then they got rid of it - maybe because of fire or whatever as the whole thing was caged in - a death trap.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[Guest John Burns]

All the counties in our region have the power to levy a Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST). During a local election, a referendum is put on the ballot to, for example, add 1% sales tax for one year to raised funds for a specific purpose - new park, improve schools, improve roads, and so on. If a majority vote for it, it happens. While it couldn't be done for just one team, couldn't Liverpool Council suggest a 1% sales tax to raise funds for new stadia or stadium improvements for its local teams?

They can suggest it but will not get it as it has to go through Parliament and in this centralised country it will be rejected. The city tried to get Land Value Tax, which is the perfect mechanism to raise funds for city infrastructure - Hong Kong built an underground metro using this.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[Guest John Burns]

i think that's the first post I can agree with! Except that a stadium is a detraction. Ask Barcelona for example. The Nou Camp is a massive attraction because of the club, which should be our goal

It is not. You said many times you agree with me. If you do not get my points ask and I will elaborate. A city centre stadium is a no-goer and a waste of time talking about.

 

If we want a stadium to be an attraction, then the city needs to think big and properly knocking heads together to move things on. The city needs a large sporting complex with EFC at one end and LFC the other. Other sporting attractions can be in the complex. This would have a name of course and be known world-wide. The city will have a sporting reputation and Liverpool will be synonymous with sport. That is where we should be heading, not tarting up Anfield and talking of daft ideas like stadia next to St.George's Hall. A city sports complex is all easily obtainable using LFC and EFC as the starters and simultaneously getting the mass-transit up and running (which is mothballed). I can see Liverpool hosting the Commonwealth games in 10 years or so if its gets its act together. If Liverpool had Manchester's Council the city would have held the Olympics by now.

 

EFC are moving to new stadium and LFC were to move but considering a major rebuild. The city has to seize this opportunity and use both clubs to create a sport complex that will benefit the whole city in many, many, ways. We see nothing, just a dumb, inarticulate, fat mayor with little idea.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[pete0]

A stadium near the city would be a money maker in the summer holding concert ect.

[Matt]

It is not. You said many times you agree with me. If you do not get my points ask and I will elaborate. A city centre stadium is a no-goer and a waste of time talking about.

 

If we want a stadium to be an attraction, then the city needs to think big and properly knocking heads together to move things on. The city needs a large sporting complex with EFC at one end and LFC the other. Other sporting attractions can be in the complex. This would have a name of course and be known world-wide. The city will have a sporting reputation and Liverpool will be synonymous with sport. That is where we should be heading, not tarting up Anfield and talking of daft ideas like stadia next to St.George's Hall. A city sports complex is all easily obtainable using LFC and EFC as the starters and simultaneously getting the mass-transit up and running (which is mothballed). I can see Liverpool hosting the Commonwealth games in 10 years or so if its gets its act together. If Liverpool had Manchester's Council the city would have held the Olympics by now.

 

EFC are moving to new stadium and LFC were to move but considering a major rebuild. The city has to seize this opportunity and use both clubs to create a sport complex that will benefit the whole city in many, many, ways. We see nothing, just a dumb, inarticulate, fat mayor with little idea.

Er, yes it is. I use Barcelona as an example because I lived there and have seen it. They have tours, stores and coach loads of tourists through the week. But since you will never accept anything other that your vision being the only way, indeed it is a waste of time talking about it. The city has a sporting reputation and is already synonymous with sport. We are already there.

 

I have only ever 1 question of you and you continually ignored it so, since I already understand your points quite well I'll pass.

[Guest John Burns]

A stadium near the city would be a money maker in the summer holding concert ect.

They will make money anywhere it is located. Why ruin a city centre and kill the shopping centre for a large ugly, seldom used concrete structure - next to one of Europe's finest buildings as well. Wow! Only a Philistine would build such a structure in such a place.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[Guest John Burns]

Er, yes it is. I use Barcelona as an example because I lived there and have seen it. They have tours, stores and coach loads of tourists through the week. But since you will never accept anything other that your vision being the only way, indeed it is a waste of time talking about it. The city has a sporting reputation and is already synonymous with sport. We are already there.

 

I have only ever 1 question of you and you continually ignored it so, since I already understand your points quite well I'll pass.

I will not, and most will not, accept the ruining of Liverpool's city centre for footy fanatics. You are in the minority. Some very strong negative points have been put to you but you ignore them. Move on...

[Matt]

I will not, and most will not, accept the ruining of Liverpool's city centre for footy fanatics. You are in the minority. Some very strong negative points have been put to you but you ignore them. Move on...

minority? You ran a poll or you just assume everyone agrees with you? You must have missed where I said I would support St John retailers being relocated, Again, is not ignored the points, I just challenged you and as usual, instead of accepting another point of view you skip over things and continue to believe only your opinion can be correct.

 

I repeat, it's an excellent proposal in theory.

[pete0]

They will make money anywhere it is located. Why ruin a city centre and kill the shopping centre for a large ugly, seldom used concrete structure - next to one of Europe's finest buildings as well. Wow! Only a Philistine would build such a structure in such a place.

Central so it would be more attractive to non liverpool people who don't want to mess about going into the residential bit. Much better than St. John's which is a old cheap lump of concrete and already run down and vacated by the big shops thanks to L1.

[Guest John Burns]

minority? You ran a poll or you just assume everyone agrees with you?

A poll of people in the city? Yes. A poll of footy fanatics? Maybe not. Forget a city centre location for a stadium. It is NOT going to happen. Believe me.

Edited September 21, 2014 by John Burns

[Cornish Steve]

What this discussion is impressing on me is the importance of leadership and vision. What if, indeed, the appropriate authorities in Liverpool used the space between the two current stadia to implement a sports complex? A golf course, a skate boarding park, a housed Olympic swimming pool, a jogging or cycling area around the perimeter, even a cricket ground - with a renovated Goodison Park at one end, a renovated Anfield at the other, and transport options to the entire complex? It really would put Liverpool on the map for sports, and the stadia could be used for all kinds of other events - concerts and the like. Vision!!

[Guest John Burns]

Dixie, that has been proposed. Stanley Park is a grade two listed park. It is best to move the two clubs to the Merseyrail mass-transit lines, or mothballed trackbed and get them up and running. A large complex is ideal and Garston Docks, retaining the docks using them for water sports, at one time was the ideal location. However I fear that maybe out of reach. The two clubs can be at different sites and have other sports facilities along the mass-transit line linking the sports complexes - say call it the Olympic Line. The city of Liverpool can do this very easily. As you wrote, "leadership and vision" is needed.

 

Roughly this area can be used to accommodate both clubs and used as a sports complex, holding the Commonwealth and then the Olympics. Rail lines enter the site, mass transit Merseyrail and lines to London and Manchester, North Wales, etc, and can be extended further and extend into the airport giving a much needed station. The complex would be in easy reach of all the country. The airport is adjacent and in easy reach of other countries. Even Mersey ferries can be used on big sporting occasions from the Pier Head and the Wirral. Gradually the buildings can be compulsory purchased to accommodate additional sport complexes, hotels, etc.

Edited September 23, 2014 by John Burns

[Cake]

New stadium news is wonderful and so close to our spiritual home, too. Looking forward to more detailed updates as they arise.

[Guest John Burns]

There is a rumour that Peel had a meetings with Everton officials about a stadium near the docks. The club prefer WHP as it can be up and running quickly having no buildings on it and not far from GP and with the potential to have mass transit rail at stadium (mothballed trackbed is adjacent). However the docks are a world heritage site, and would create controversy if plans were drawn up to have a stadium there. English Heritage and UNESCO would get involved causing great delays. I would assume any stadium would be on the land side of the Dock Rd.

 

It needs the Council, EFC, LFC, Dpt for Transport, and others to bang out a sports complex location. Any viable locations would not involve Peel.

[Matt]

There is a rumour that Peel had a meetings with Everton officials about a stadium near the docks. The club prefer WHP as it can be up and running quickly having no buildings on it and not far from GP and with the potential to have mass transit rail at stadium (mothballed trackbed is adjacent). However the docks are a world heritage site, and would create controversy if plans were drawn up to have a stadium there. English Heritage and UNESCO would get involved causing great delays. I would assume any stadium would be on the land side of the Dock Rd.

 

It needs the Council, EFC, LFC, Dpt for Transport, and others to bang out a sports complex location. Any viable locations would not involve Peel.

I'd love a ground on the docks, but like you said thats going to take a lot of time, effort and money

[Guest John Burns]

The docks are better for other uses that promote the city. Stadia are best in other locations. The Echo Arena has killed that part of the docks to what it could have been. It is vibrant when there is an event but dead at other times. You need constant vibrancy 365 per year. Having stadium on the WHS is a no, no, with years and years of delays in court cases.

 

I went to a public meetings about the Kings Dock scheme. It was over ambitious. This was a football stadium, which by hitting a key would transform into a conference centre, an arena for concerts, athletics and wrestling or whatever and with big access roads for big trucks to enter - nothing was on a human scale like the Albert Dock. Unsuitable for such a confined location.

 

How they would have managed tens of thousands of football fans in a city-centre location, with thousands of them pouring down from Lime Street to the Kings Dock, through the main shopping streets and Liverpool One, I do not know. I was not upset at EFC pulling out. What we ended up with is a lot better for the site, than a hemmed in very large stadium, but even the Arena should have been put on the land side on the Baltic Triangle with its own rail station at the end of the Wapping Tunnel from Edge Hill, leaving the dock quays for residential, entertainment and retail.

 

The city needs vision and look to the big one in the future, the Olympics, and then build up gradually the transport and facilities to stage large sporting events with smaller events leading up. EFC & LFC are key to this. I fear the city has missed the boat through narrow mindedness, incompetence and lack of ambition.

Edited September 24, 2014 by John Burns

[Makis]

How do they manage them in other cities?

 

Great American Ball Park is in the middle of Cincinatti: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Ball_Park

As is Busch Stadium: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busch_Stadium

Safeco Stadium where I have visited was also very close to city centre.

 

And a few other baseball stadiums. Those have a capacity of 40,000+.

 

Olympics in Liverpool is a pipe dream. IOC won't give the Olympics to the same country any time soon (unless it's USA). With a rotation between continents & the fact that there will be Olympics in the other major European countries before they arrive in GB again it will probably be fifty years or more before that happens. And even then Liverpool won't be the automatic choice in England. London and Manchester would have a better case.

[Guest John Burns]

Great American Ball Park is in the middle of Cincinatti:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Ball_Park

 

As is Busch Stadium: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busch_Stadium

 

Safeco Stadium where I have visited was also very close to city centre.

 

Few US cities have mass transit rail networks.

 

 

 

 

Olympics in Liverpool is a pipe dream. IOC won't give the Olympics to the same country any time soon (unless it's USA). With a rotation between continents & thefact that there will be Olympics in the other major European countries before they arrive in GB again it will probably be fifty years or more before that happens. And even then Liverpool won't be the automatic choice in England. London and Manchester would have a better case.

 

It may be a pipe dream now, as PP has been given to Anfield. Legal objections may slow this down. The building blocks were all there for the city to get the Olympics: two club building new stadia, ample hotel accommodation being an expanding tourist city, a mass-transit network, the sites, etc. Of course it would be not soon, that is obvious. All the prime pieces were there to build a complex. Manchester over Liverpool? Now that is a pipe dream. Precious little is in place in that city. Their only chance is a joint Olympics with Liverpool.

Edited September 24, 2014 by John Burns

[Makis]

I don't understand the relevance of mass transit rail networks. They have stadiums both in the cities and outside.

[Guest John Burns]

US cities have massive roads as all is geared to the car. You will not get the Olympic unless you have enough hotel accommodation and mass transit. If you went to the London Olympics as I did you will know what I mean. It is infinitely larger than the tiny Commonwealth games. The Olympic Committee are tightening up the criteria as they go along and do no favours any longer.

Edited September 25, 2014 by John Burns