Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

KSS Response

By Tom Hughes :  23/08/2007 :  Comments (76) :
Unfortunately, having only just returned home, I am only now able to respond to the report by KSS architects. Below I list their points followed by my response:

"1 - Setting aside additional land acquisition, phasing complexity, the likely difficulty in obtaining planning approval and the overall financial non-viability, the report does not demonstrate in the first instance that a larger capacity stadium can be built on the site."

The plans, which are only briefly summarised in the write-up, are a scale representation drawn over full site plans. Therefore, they literally do demonstrate what is physically possible on this site given the conservative land-take proposed. The scheme illustrated in the write-up is just one of several linked possibilities to redevelop the site. The phasing complexity of which is nothing extraordinary for any of these related options, as is the proposed land acquisition which for one of the options mentioned in the write-up is non-existent.

"2 - The holistic redevelopment proposal impacts heavily on the surrounding residential area. The oversailing of site boundaries on Goodison Road and Bullens Road, and loss of amenity and adverse effect on daylight and sunlight to adjoining residential properties are raised as potential problems (which they are), but not addressed as part of the solution, whilst the loss of the junior school on Bullens Road is simply ignored altogether."

The School infringement is shown and is minimal. Certainly not to the extent of requiring its ?loss.? I believe there has been some speculation regarding the school's future, and there is also the potential to incorporate some elements of a new school building within a redeveloped Bullens Road side if the school is not to be relocated. This will further connect the club to the local community. The light infringement is also mentioned and resultant shading calculated. This results in the property acquisition mentioned. Following a planning consultation, a further amendment to the proposed new Gwladys street was required for full compliance at this end. This was mentioned in the write-up; although the drawings were not shown as there was insufficient time to complete these. Of course this could be offset by increased build elsewhere or indeed by the acquisition of these properties also. However, this is all outlined in the report, and again has little effect on the final capacity.

"3 - The principles behind the provision of safe access and egress for the increased number of spectators in and around the stadium are not understood or addressed. The proposal continues to rely on the existing surrounding road infrastructure to accommodate the additional match day capacity without demonstrating the additional space necessary to do so safely. Access to seating areas oversailing the site boundaries is not addressed."

This is the same infrastructure that has served not only one but 2 major football clubs for over a century The same infrastructure that is soon to be enhanced to accommodate a potential 75,000 seater stadium in the Park only a few hundred metres away. The same infrastructure that enjoys something like a 10:1 public transport advantage over Kirkby, as well as the obvious benefits of being more central with far better access/dispersal to and from ALL directions as opposed to just ONE direction if situated at the periphery of the main catchment in Kirkby. The circulatory routes are shown to be increased on all sides except the Goodison Road side (Where there are other possible solutions). The Bullens Road circulation can take place on 2 levels for its entire length, and is substantially widened for most of its length at ground level, the width of Gwladys street is doubled, and the Park end is wide open. The only area oversailing a boundary is at the straightened end of the Top Balcony. This is illustrated, however, it is also stated that this aspect of the plan is not obligatory for the new configuration to work. However, there are several precedents for oversailing existing roads in any case.

"4 - The proposal concentrates on providing as much seating as possible, but ignores the detailed requirements of current safety design legislation, which will have a major impact on overall capacity. Seating and gangway provisions to upper tiers do not comply with acceptable standards, and huge cantilevered upper tiers will either require intermediate support columns which in turn blight sightlines, or alternatively massive balancing structures to the rear. Access and seating provision for disabled spectators is ignored completely."

Having spoken to the person responsible for the report?..There are some minor issues regarding the number of gangways in the corner sections as depicted in the drawings shown. In some places the limit of 14 seats per end of row has been exceeded. Some vomitories/gangways also require widening. These issues were already known about and were actually stated by me in our conversation. Other than that, overall the concept?s seating plan complies sufficiently for a preliminary outline. Conversely, there are some areas shown where there is an excess provision of gangways which has not been mentioned or allowed for in his ?analysis?, therefore any perceived seating loss in the affected corners, which is negligible in any case, can be made up there. Regardless, the capacity of each section is calculated using a spread sheet incorporating the general formulas for 14 seats per one ended row, and 28 per 2 ended row. These are therefore not affected by the depiction in the drawings. Therefore the actual calculated capacity will not be affected by these minor amendments. As regards cantilevered upper tiers: Having spoken to the architect, he tells me he is not a structural engineer and that NO structural analysis of this configuration has been carried out. He insists that his judgement was only in terms of a general rule of thumb that is normally applied. When I asked what that ?rule of thumb? was he was unable/unprepared to disclose. When asked what dimensions were used or what structural section sizes he applied those rules to, he was unable to answer other than to say he estimated the depth of the cantilever. When I offered to supply examples of similarly cantilevered structures he did not comment. Furthermore, the insistence on the necessity of counterbalancing structures is at best misleading. They are not always required as he has stipulated (although I included a massive one at the Parkend which appears to have been ignored), otherwise new stands such as this could not exist:

Or any number of similar structures around the world. There is no static or dynamic loading study, no natural frequency calcs to support this assertion. There is no consideration or appreciation of additional rigidity/support supplied by the horse-shoe configuration which is an intrinsic quality of this structural format.

"5 - Goodison Park is already one of the tightest larger stadia in the UK with poor seating and back of house standards for general spectators and a relatively low hospitality capacity. Even accepting that the moving of the pitch to the south will generate space for a larger (but not necessarily larger capacity) Gwladys Street stand, and the release of car park area will allow a larger Park End stand, the higher space standards required for modern stadia mean it must be questionable whether it is feasible to build a modern stadium of the same current capacity of just over 40,000, let alone one at least 25% larger."

I believe this is covered in point 1. A significant stand footprint increase has been achieved by the pitch movement, and bridging Bullens Road. More than 100% increase at the Parkend alone, more than 30% on both Bullens Road and Gwladys Street, with increased and more efficient utilisation of ALL corner sections (3 of which are currently redundant areas). The drawings are to scale, and capacity calcs taken from number of rows and their lengths measured from these drawings. At this preliminary stage there was no requirement for a complete people movement analysis. As an individual with limited time and resources this was not practicable with the imminent vote. However, for this I used my own empirical ?rule of thumb? based on the fact that the site has accommodated a stadium for over a century, a stadium that at one point in its history held double its current capacity, a stadium for which I have over 35 years experience of attending. The result is an increase of internal and external circulation and concourse areas in much greater proportion to that of the proposed capacity increase.

In Summary, instead of requesting to see the full and amended plans, the club have decided to attempt to rubbish a scheme that is based around physical dimensions and facts, which was put together by an individual (although I have received professional guidance from very experienced sources) in a very limited time. The Architect has been employed by the club directly to paint the worst possible picture of a CONCEPT DESIGN that is by definition not a final plan but a flexible solution (one of several) that can be manipulated and shown to comply with all relevant standards. There is no direct referral to any dimensions or suitability of structural elements, but the application of ?rules of thumb? via various assumptions and without key criteria. Most issues are totally unsubstantiated and unfounded. The criticisms are without referral to any actual drawings since they have not been requested. Despite this there are NO ?show-stopping? points within the list, which in any case would be irrelevant at this preliminary stage. The list consists of mainly throw away statements and jargon passed off as ?analysis.? I asked the Architect to supply substantiating evidence, this he said required permission from the club, as they are his employer on this project. He has since been unattainable.

Suffice to say, it would be interesting to see a similar ?analysis? of the proposed stadium in Kirkby.

However, I would like to state that as an Evertonian more than any technical issue; I have to question the club?s motives in even undertaking these actions (although it is consistent with the hard-sell tactics applied throughout). Likewise the similar treatment of the Bestway proposals?? this has been at the very least unprofessional. In terms of a fair voting process it has been misleading, manipulative and in my personal opinion abhorrent! NIL SATIS NISI OPTIMUM indeed!

Reader Comments

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


david moyes
1   Posted 23/08/2007 at 16:57:00

Report abuse

boring. Let it go. move on. they dont want your plans. accept you are powerless in the process. thanks for your time.
McKinney
2   Posted 23/08/2007 at 16:58:03

Report abuse

Tom

You are obviously far more knowledgable on this stuff than me and I commend your dedication and insight.

The only problem I have is that you are another ’expert’ pulling apart an analysis from another so called ’expert’.

Where do us laymen turn? At every turn we are greated by a so called unrefutable set of facts that are then instantly refuted by another ’expert’!!!

However, I always have time for those fans who go to these lengths to inform, and thank you for your efforts as it was an interesting read.

COYB
Dirty Harry
3   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:13:11

Report abuse

Thanks for your time and effort Tom, unfortunately the board seem hell bent to move us to Kirkby and dismiss any other optitions such as yours or the Loop. Sadly our hertitage and proud history will be sadly tarnished in the near future if they get their way.

Nil satis nisi optimum...in a perfect world!

RE: David Moyes comment ’ boring ’, grow up Idiot!!
Julian
4   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:13:35

Report abuse

It might be (just) physically feasible to redevelop Goodison as you have suggested. However, that doesn’t get round the problem that the club can’t afford to do it!
Rob F
5   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:17:50

Report abuse

As much as the no vote would like them to, why should the club request to see the full and amended plans?

whether you think the board is great or shite is by-the-by, the job of the board is to make decisions and run with them. If they had to stop and analyse every proposal by every person on every decision no matter how far fetched (I admit, this proposal is not far fetched and seems very well thought out but the line has to be drawn) nothing would get done and no progress what ever should be made.

The board are consulting the fans on this issue, and they have answered a lot of queries, but just because we want them to, or just because this is a football club, are not reasons for them to address every question put their way. Even on this emotive issue.

I’m sure if they did, those that think the board are shite would find another stick to beat them with - after all the boards of other clubs are capable of decision makeing and leadership, why cant Everton’s be?
KJ
6   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:37:48

Report abuse

Thanks Tom for your hard work.

You have added a great deal to what has been a vitally important debate.
david moyes
7   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:40:48

Report abuse

Rob F, best bit of sense talked on this website ever. Why is everyone an expert. Let them run the club the way they see fit. They have done well so far, nothin but progress since walter left (on average) there has been ups and downs but we are now goin in the right direction. I trust KW, BK and rockys mate to keep doing what they do, and the rest of us should follow their lead, and support, since that is what we are, supporters!!!!!

PS Dirty Harry, you bore me too, " oh we will tarnish our history and heritage..." blah blah blah our history wont change you fool, niether will our heritage. We are progressing, move with the times and stop living in the past, i bet you still want old money and dont trust microwave ovens.
Michael Brien
8   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:45:36

Report abuse

Thanks Tom - at least you have tried to explore the possibilities of redeveloping Goodison,
I would rather we stayed at Goodison and tried to rebuild.If that would prove to be too costly and unrealistic then I am ready to move.However I am not totally convinced that the club has really looked at ALL the possibilities. I think they have gone for a "quick fix" solution.
Tom Hughes
9   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:41:24

Report abuse

DM: it is boring I agree, the whole thing is.....but we should always seek the facts don’t you think? Julian: read the points I have responded to.... KSS themselves have put the finances aside in their crit. Whilst important, it is not the issue otherwise why commission the crit at all? Rob F: I believe the board’s ONLY objective is to do what is best for the club. In order to do this they surely need to know all the options. They stated categorically that GP could not accommodate 50k seats..... what else didn’t they know? McKinney: I’ve never said I am an expert.... I am however a fully qualified engineer, I have tried to respond to the issues in simple terms to show that this is not an analysis at all, and was only used as a VOTE winner.
Dirty Harry
10   Posted 23/08/2007 at 17:55:04

Report abuse

Our history and heritage has been as a Liverpool club and by moving out of the city boundary, it will be tarnished. Wasn’t born when ’old money’ around and you probably prefer a big wave with a foam hand at a JJB clone.

Tom Hughes had made an big effort, just thought the boring comment was uncalled for.
McKinney
11   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:00:59

Report abuse

Tom

Thanks for the response. Sorry for lumping you in with the ’experts’, I was trying to be complimentary of your knowledge of the subject and yes, the "analysis" may have only been a vote winner. However, as I said, I am a layman, and if your article is in simple terms then I’d hate to see the ’expert’ version.

"I’ve never said I am an expert" you said, then "I am however a fully qualified engineer" (closer to an expert than me then)

Sorry
david moyes
12   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:07:35

Report abuse

when we first started we were not in the liverpol boundaries. JJB isnt great, but it brings in more money than goodison and its a lot smaller. plus if i pay £5-8 to park my car, Id rather efc were gettin the money rather than some random scouser who bought some land a while ago. I know TH went to a lot of trouble but I think he needs to take the hint, if the blues were interested in him they would have called him in. He is like the kid who keeps training with the team but isnt good enough to get in, nobody has the heart to tell him to go home. He has had his say now leave it. 10.30 tomoro cant come quick enough for me, then we can stop debating this hypothetical nonsense.
karl
13   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:04:15

Report abuse

i cant wait until we finally move to kirkby and i can get back reading about football on this website.

maybe you should change your name to
www.toffee-architect-chat-roomweb.com
paul ross
14   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:20:02

Report abuse

18:27 just been reported on sky sports news that the vote is YES for the move to kirkby !!!!!!!!!
ajj
15   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:14:08

Report abuse

This is the most important decision that the club has faced for over 100 years , The fact that BK has given the fans the opportunity to vote on this decision is unique in not just business terms but in football terms as well . No other chairman has given the fans the chance to decide on the ultimate fate of the progress of their team . Thats why Tom’s input is vital in order for us to have an alternate viewpint ..... as i’m typing this a newsflash from sky ... unofficially its a yes decision to kirkby .. rather took the wind out of my sails ...
Tom Hughes
16   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:13:53

Report abuse

DM: You’ve got me all wrong..... If you knew me you would know I seriously don’t need a game for this team, nor am I looking for a commission at all! The subject matter interests me, and it’s possible outcome concerns me, but my only motive initially was to respond to an inaccurate assertion that was being sold to Evertonians as part of a reason to move to kirkby. Seeing as I only work for 4-5 months a year I decided to show it was untrue. No big deal!! BTW when EFC first started, we located to an area that was already massively and densely populated and was soon taken over by Liverpool. This was a city that was growing by approx 100,000 people per decade at the time, with the urban sprawl already begining to stretch far beyond our new home to the extent that it had already progressed for many miles beyond Walton by the time we arrived. There is no sign that this will ever happen at Kirkby...... it is the end of the line. There is very little beyond apart from egg chuckers a few ex-pat scousers..... and Man U fans. JJB though? Where are you going to park? there is only 1,000 spaces, there could be 10-15,000 cars spaces needed, so you may be still paying the urchins!
Bootle Blue
17   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:41:11

Report abuse

Ian Mac - couln’t have put it better myself!

Anyway it’s too late. Let’s accept our fate.
Chris Davies
18   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:48:20

Report abuse

Haven’t you heard we’re moving. let that be the end of these infernal boring discussions! Now Tom think of something more constructive to do with your time!
John Crawley
19   Posted 23/08/2007 at 18:57:55

Report abuse

Tom, Thank you for taking the time and trouble to do something that frankly the club should have done. What your comments above all else show is the underhand methods that the club have used to rubbish alternative proposals and to spin a result for a move to Kirkby. I must admit I was incredulous at their point 3 about the movement and transport of spectators. It defied all logic when Liverpool are building a 70,000 seater stadium a few hundred yards away! I really could weep with the news that the vote is Yes for Kirkby.
Tom Hughes
20   Posted 23/08/2007 at 19:04:15

Report abuse

Chris... no worries!
Ian Macdonald
21   Posted 23/08/2007 at 19:20:59

Report abuse

Right, whether you think this subject is boring or not, look at the bigger picture of what has been going on from the bullyboys at Goodison. Tom’s plans were not set in stone; it was a preview with an awful lot of detail and drawings. This took a hell of a lot of time and effort and sacrifice.

Tom set out on a quest to show Goodison can be re-developed, in sections, with a will when it was categorically said it can’t be done. Even that professor fella said the other night our gates would go down to 24,000 if we decided to rebuild Goodison. What a two faced man he is. EGM anyone?

A hell of a lot of clubs have done the same re-builds but not us - we neglected our stadium for years. No investment put in you see just sell sell sell and raise the debt without anything tangible for shown it. I ask anyone pouring scorn on this how much detail have we seen of the photoshopped picture on the retail park in Kirkby and how long did they have to get in right?

Was it over 18 months?

Who are KSS? Would they have a vested interest to pour cold water on Tom’s plans, played the damming game for Everton. Oh and by the way architects I have spoken too said what KSS did was deplorable and unethical in the industry.

The Tunnel site, same tactics by a transport official egged on by Everton no doubt to rubbish another option at its embryonic stage. HOK, you know that world renowned stadium designer, blew that myth of it can’t be done /it?s too small out of the water in a 18 page document.

Where is our 18 page document on Kirkby after how long again? Where?s our business plan after 18 months? When will many of our fans wake up and smell the coffee?

What our club did during the voting period was an insult to many peoples intelligence and employed bully boy tactics driving statement after statement down bewildered fans throats in the street who are left with the Echo and Posts literature on the subject. It was move or we die. I really do despair at times with some of our fans. The vote was a sham no other voting procedure would be allowed on such an important issue. The ballot papers came with ONE side of the story so how do you decide which is best long term? You look in the local papers and what did you find? Stories like the above. We will get what the fans vote for but it was always stacked against a fair vote based on literature shown.

Can anyone really argue on this? Remember not many of our fans are internet wise to see the other side of the coin .We were battling big business with vested interest all round. I do respect other fans opinions but on the internet many fans push it too far with acid remarks after someone has put effort in to show another opinion in detail. Tom has the right to reply to the sham written regarding his informed piece. He has family and friends who read the Echo and saw what was written. It?s easy to pour scorn on other peoples efforts with a simple message on a message board or in a local paper. Think about what the People’s Club did to this fan, they never asked him in to discuss his plans just set him up to be put in the stocks and laughed at by the ill informed or simple minded.

Tom you did a sterling job lad, proud of your works and sacrifices whilst the employed at the club sat throwing darts at you. For shame on them and their ilk. It was not the Everton way I was led to believe.

I?ll be in a ditch fighting for Everton with you Tom, anytime lad. Chin up. Divide and conquer, should be the club’s motto now. They will reap what they sow. Short term gain long term pain. We will not grow in Kirkby!

Ian Mac just another ordinary fan
John Crawley
22   Posted 23/08/2007 at 19:33:21

Report abuse

Ian I couldn’t have put it any better than you have. That is exactly how I feel about the whole situation. The club have based their arguments against the options on spin, plain and simple. They have obviously learnt a few lessons from Alastair Campbell. It really leaves a sour taste in the mouth. I can’t help but feel that the whole strategy adopted by the club in the recent past is all based on short term gain but long term loss. The local journalists on the echo and daily post should hang their heads in shame for the way they have gone along with this without raising any serious questions.
ryansloan
23   Posted 23/08/2007 at 19:38:35

Report abuse

i would love to stay in liverpool too. BUT THE SIMPLE TRUTH IS THE CLUB CANNOT GO IT ALONE !!! therefore kirby is the only option for us but im more concered what goes on the pitch
Paul Collyer
24   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:09:46

Report abuse

ryansloan you sum up the whole debate from the yes side there. How do you *know* its the only option? What if something better comes along in 2 years? You do realise the loop site option only came onto the agenda a few months ago but couldnt be discussed because Everton had committed to talking to Tesco alone. What if the loop site is feasible and the finances stack up? Do you honestly believe the club dont owe it to the fans to take all possibilities seriously rather than dismiss them publically and cheaply?
Danny Mullally
25   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:09:37

Report abuse

It is wrong to tarnish Tom’s analysis as "yet another voice on the stadium debate". If the narrow minded, short sightd easily led dickheads actually lifted their heads out of the big pile of turd that Wyness has dumped all over you, you may actually see what heis trying to point out. But hey it’s a lot easier to think about the green green grass of Knowsley, and I should imagine they would’nt want to injure their brain.
Ian McDonald great post too. We hve give it all we have got, and if we (the No camp) fail in the majority vote it wont be for the lack of trying. But to anybody who thinks this debate is over when the result is announced tommorrw-dont hold your breath...its only just getting started.
dgf
26   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:13:58

Report abuse

Tom unlike many others from the no campaign I have found your comments both informative and useful. You genuinely are appreciated for all your hard work.
What a pity however that many of the people who supported your stance followed a much more loutish and abusive path.
Perhaps if they had acted in a more dignified manor the result would have been different.
jayharris
27   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:14:56

Report abuse

Ian Mac
I’ll be right there in the trenched with you.
All Bullshit Billy has done is sell the family silver because he hasnt got the time nor money to invest in our once proud club.
I hope all the yes sheep live long enough to see what they have done to our club.
Terrymarsbar
28   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:13:25

Report abuse

I dont want you to take this too personally Ian..but can you tell me ..logically..just exactly why Everton Football club should have to release "an 18 page document on Kirkby"..or why, in partner ship with Tesco and KCC..they should be releasing their buisness plan into the public domain..?
You were given a vote..obviously .in your opinion.anybody who voted yes..was misled, ill informed , one of a flock of headless sheep..

So...if the majority have voted "YES".. that would..in your opinion ..make them misled, ill informed , one of a flock of headless sheep..

I once went to a sportsmans dinner in South road Waterloo..opposite the Alex.. a mate of mine was the comedian...and for our side we had Brian Labone and Gordon West..a very enjoyable day..then we had questions from the floor..and up jumps " Ian McDonald..Everton independant Supporters Club"..thats how you actually introduced yourself..This was meant to be entertaining, but you tried to turn it into a one man political rally..and it became blatently clear to me why your "club" is independant.
Its one view ..your view..you cant see further than the end of your nose , you really cant.

Esperanso’s..is that the place?
Terrymarsbar
29   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:38:12

Report abuse

Ian
Just in case you cant remember..The "majority" booed you and asked you to shut up...or does that happen a lot?
Ian Mac
30   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:39:59

Report abuse

Terry Marsbar,
Thanks for the memory of Labby and Westy together .Yes it was a great night .I asked the question about their stamp collecting together and Westy replied now players collect houses .
By the way Matty who runs the place introduced me as Ian Mac Indy Blues I did not jump up like a jack in the box as conjured up by your goodself.
I drink Stella aswell but my memory still holds talking to decent people.
Ian
How did you get that username?
Terrymarsbar
31   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:46:44

Report abuse

Ian
It was given to me by a friend in the entertainment industry..(I used to sing)..you may know him "Davey Law"..
Anyhow..we play a lot of golf and I rought chocolate for the lads about 12 years ago and it all melted in my golf bag and covered my tee,s..Golf balls..spare gloves the lot..
Now I used to go by the stage name Terry Madison..and the next time we done a charity gig together..Dave introduced me as Terry The Marsbar Madison..and it stuck..The lads even bought me a shirt with marsbar on it..

More clues..Im from Seaforth..but now live in Toxteth..and I went to school down the road from you..when it was still manor high.

Are you bored yet?
Terrymarsbar
32   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:55:11

Report abuse

One last piece of "trivia"

I was the booked entertainment for the christmas party at Zilli’s that Walter Smith cancelled..

i called the club and Graeme Sharp sent me 4 tickets for the Man utd game to cover my fee..
Ian Mac
33   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:45:38

Report abuse

Ha ha Marsbar ,never got booed mate for asking about stamp collecting ,your a bueat and I’m not getting into your ramblings when I don’t know who you are or your agenda here.By the way I know Gordon very well and did know labby well so what sort of question would I ask friends to get booed?Matty Lyons is a very good friend who asked me for questions to put to the lads .He knows I help run the INdy Blues .Anyway why am I explaining myself to a bitter marsbar................
dingle blue
34   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:47:18

Report abuse

terrysnicker, remember the dream of a penthouse in the docks? soon we will have a council house in a ghetto....or do u really believe our loveable chairman wont be outmanouvered by tesco tel at every turn? wake up and smell the coffee - its in aisle 18 next to the souvenir shop!
Terrymarsbar
35   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:57:50

Report abuse

Exactly..why should you explain yourself...and unlike yourself.I have no agenda..I like to talk about football .mainly Everton..it just amazes me how zealous and hateful some people can be towards others that simply have a different point of view...If I could have an agenda it we be for us ALL to be happy ..but it dont happen..the fans arent always right.. E:G man utd....Chealsea and Arsenal threaten to take over..The club gets sold,,the fans revolt..it goes ahead anyway..they win the league( thats obviously the concise version)
Terrymarsbar
36   Posted 23/08/2007 at 21:03:44

Report abuse

Dingleblue

Those penthouses on the dock have obstructed views mate..somebodies went and built a stadium and a hotel
dingle blue
37   Posted 23/08/2007 at 21:05:56

Report abuse

terrysnicker, i know, and all for 30 mill. Think they must have got the deal of the century!!

Ever thought of starting a BK and KW fanclub? I am sure you would do a better job than Ian mac with his fanclub!!
Ian Mac
38   Posted 23/08/2007 at 20:57:49

Report abuse

Terry one last time .I don’t come from Crosby I come from Bootle ,Marsh Lane.I think you’ve got me mixed up.
I don’t know anything about the Walter Smith gig or Sharpies tickets.What could I say to friends (explayers)that would get me booed?
Gordon and Brian made me laugh so much like Hinge and Bracket.
Did you know Terry ,Labby died on Gordon’s birthday?
Terrymarsbar
39   Posted 23/08/2007 at 21:09:54

Report abuse

Im not a fan club type of guy...and I think Ians club is a bit "too" independant...I like to get the whole picture..as many of the facts as Im due ..and then I make a logical decision..people shouting at me or trying to forcibly push stickers onto my children just dont work
dingle blue
40   Posted 23/08/2007 at 21:14:37

Report abuse

Mr Snicker, you make me laugh. ’as many facts as im due’...think my brochure must have missed a couple of pages. oh dear oh dear!!
PantsMoustache
41   Posted 23/08/2007 at 21:14:48

Report abuse

Hi Pants here.
david moyes
42   Posted 23/08/2007 at 22:39:22

Report abuse

ian mac, ur a nutter. Why would you try and drop names like they were all your mates. Did you go round for dinner much? They probably knew you as that bloke who runs the fan club, he has qute extreme views so just humor him or he will get heated and start ranting. And before you go all I know him and i know that player, I dont care and Im related to an ex-player and know what goes on. On the stadium issue, I reckon we will go to Kirkby, and I dont know how it will turn out, NOBODY DOES, not even the experts so for people like you to start prediciting the future, "short term gain, long term pain" its laughable.
Nick Flack
43   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:05:28

Report abuse

Anyone else worried that if it infact turns out to be a "no" tomorrow, BK might chuck his chips in and resign?

I don’t want to go to Kirby, and neither does BK, but the fact is, we may have to. The loop, interesting, but not financially viable. I’m 100% convinced that there’s going to be someone at Everton who makes a sneaky and very tidy profit if we do go to Kirby with Tesco.... But it really DOES seem the only option.

I liked what Kenwright said on his interview, "I DON’T OWN THE CLUB, THE FANS DO". Spot on, He’s a shareholder, if we were owned by some Yankeedoodle dandy or Soviet Vlad, we’d have no say.

I just hope BK is still our chairman tomorrow evening.
Dave G
44   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:20:43

Report abuse

Blah, blah, blah Tom you lost the vote you sad bunch of losers so go off and found Everton Park Avenue or something.
Bootle Blue
45   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:18:09

Report abuse

Hey Nick,
despite my firm belief that a ’No’ vote is the way forward - I think Bill would love the Loop, and his ’I’m not an architect’ remark was interesting - gave me a straw to cling to.
Whatever happens he should remain as the chairman; not too sure about Wyyes tho’.

The one insane thing - through all of this is the squad is looking pretty good (assuming the signings arrive). Normally we’d all by dancing round in joy at this news. Bill has done good backing DM and in a normal year we’d be very pleased with him.

As an aside.
I keep banging on about this, but we don’t know if the Loop is viable because no-one has release costings for it.
Peter Connor
46   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:20:42

Report abuse

You support the club not the ground. Goodison has many awesome memories but the time has come. Some has come up with a method of getting a new ground that aint gonna put us in massive ammounts of debt. Liverpool Council crying into their beer have all to late come up with alternatives. No matter who gets a wedge of cash I dont care so long as everton benefit and the club and fans can have a ground thats not derelict unsafe and can be called home

coyb peter
Dave G
47   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:25:38

Report abuse

By the way, since we live in a democracy, what is all this 60% of vote and mandate crap that Toffeeweb are trying to peddle. Absolutely pathetic.
Bootle blue
48   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:25:01

Report abuse

Dave G.
Tom spent a lot of time trying to come up with a plan to keep us in Liverpool. If we had the cash then the build may have even been viable. But we don’t.

Your comment defines belief. Christ, give us a break! We’ve fought for something we really believed in and lost.
AJ (London)
49   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:25:17

Report abuse

Once again, I comment the work done by Tom. He is a true blue legend. He has proved that Goodison can be re-developed, as far as I am concerned beyond a doubt, and without losing what had been assumed to be 150 homes.

That said, the plan lacks one tiny piece of detail - the funding!!!

We could "build it and they will come" meaning that we could get an outline planning permission, then invetors will somehow rush in to develop the idea.

I really don’t think that is realistic.

The only other answer is likely to mean that we invest in New Goodison to the detriment of squad development.

The loop is rumoured to offer us that, but its only an rumour - and I suspect that those glamouring fo the loop because "its in the city" may find a nasty financial surprise waiting for them.

Last point, whatever their political colour, never, ever trust a politician.
Steve Ryan
50   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:33:41

Report abuse

David Moyes, you insipid lowlife; do you feel tough throwing insults at dedicated Evertonians from the safety of your keyboard. No doubt you are trying to compensate for your lack of intellect or small penis.
Marc R
51   Posted 23/08/2007 at 23:45:30

Report abuse

Nice One Tom. Youve produced a terrific report. I doubt you will pay much attention to those slagging you off, but know that there are thousands of fans who appreciate your efforts and can clearly see the truths you have stated.
However, it’s a great tradgedy that the Everton chairman Bill Kenwright is who he is; A publicist, a stage manager, a (bad) actor, but most of all a man without vision.
He who has allowed the club to be pushed into this corner (sic) by people who see his weakness as a source of money, and by the people he employed to make the club money. The (only) solution they have come up with is the wrong one. Long-term pain - probably, Short-term gain - maybe?
Your GP solution is the right one for so many reasons but Bill is being bullyed into the corner and just like his mate Sly Stallone, he is not actually Rocky just a weak old actor more interested in his appearance than standing up for the things what his character (Blue Bill) is meant to represent.
Enjoy the encore.
Fin.
Eric Myles
52   Posted 24/08/2007 at 02:18:49

Report abuse

david moyes, from your comments to Ian Mac you obviously have never met Labby or Westy.

If the vote is Yes I don’t reckon Kenwright will be Chairman much longer than getting the planning permission for the stadium then he’ll be laughing all the way to the bank with the proceeds from selling his shares, to Robert Earl is my bet.
forgot about football?
53   Posted 24/08/2007 at 07:42:36

Report abuse

Have we all forgot about the one important thing... the football. Look who we signed! Pienaar, Baines, Jagielka, some (James Blunt)german, Manny and Yakubu (soon)and more importantly Cahill and Arteta on long terms. Isn’t it about time we started thinking that we now have the best team we had for a long, long time. It’s about time we stopped slagging each other off and got back to being a group of supporters instead of being split by this ground shit. I would love us to stay at Goodison but if it means less revenue and sliding down the leagues then let’s see what the future holds. Would we rather play top flight football in a spangly new flat pack stadium or league two in a dilapidated old Goodison? I can see good times coming back to Everton, I just think we should all be in unison to see it happen.
Philip Higgs
54   Posted 24/08/2007 at 09:20:56

Report abuse

Tom,

Good work yet again. even if the vote comes back as a yes. This doesn’t mean Kirkby is a done deal. It just means we contiune the negotiations. Lets not give up. Keep producing these alternative plans/ideas/arguments and they will have to take note.
Ste
55   Posted 24/08/2007 at 09:40:43

Report abuse

Well said Philip. Tom, thanks for another informative and well structured article, again showing up the underhand tactics that this board have adopted.
Im not one to bad mouth people but some of the comments on here about Toms work are small minded and disgraceful to say the least. If you cannot even appreciate the work Tom has done and why he has done it then you deserve your small tin pot stadium in Kirkby.
Steve Lyth
56   Posted 24/08/2007 at 09:19:58

Report abuse

Tom Hughes thank you very much for all of your hard work, your a gentleman and a scholar sir.
Terrymarsbar, you are quite the most ungracious Evertonian I have ever come across.
I dont know Ian Mac very well but I do know he does a hell of a lot for his fellow supporters and for this club as a whole. Whats with the personal attack Terry ? I hope you and your bretheren will be happy at Kirkby Town FC, you should have plenty of room for your comedy act there.Sadly cant help thinking that the crowd will mirror Boros average gate going forward.
realblue
57   Posted 24/08/2007 at 10:18:39

Report abuse

Too little, too late.

Frankly you have not addressed the most important thing here Tom:

COST.
Tom
58   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:16:57

Report abuse

We’re all going to Kirkby,
We’re all going to Kirkby,
La la la la, eh! La la la la eh!

Excellent news. Absolutely excellent.
Edge
59   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:13:27

Report abuse

Kirkby Town FC forever - your name says it all. Real supporters going to Kirkby? Am I not a real supporter then because I voted no? Despite 35 years following the team all over the world? Idiot.

To all those who helped put forward the No case - thank you for your considerable time and effort - I hope the fight to show that we can stay at Goodison will continue. 60 percent of 25,000 is hardly an endorsement to move, especially based on flawed and biased information.

To those slagging off fellow blues who cared enough to propose a plan B - cross the Park. Your smugness and gobshitery has a natural home at Liverpool FC.
TheBoyAyres
60   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:20:35

Report abuse

Oh dear me. Club announcement - ?Everton are pleased that a majority of those Evertonians who were eligible to vote in the ballot do support the club in its desire to relocate to a new home in Kirkby."



Number eligible to vote: 36,662
Number of votes received 25,698

Yes votes 15,230 (59.27%)


Can I just point out to the club that 59.27% of 36,662
is not a majority. It is merely 41.5%. Therefore a minority of those eligible to vote have endorsed this move. Simple maths guys.
And these people are to be in charge of a budget of anything from £75 million to £400 million (depending on which way the wind is blowing) for this new ground.
I’ll say it again. Oh dear.

Blue In Bolton
61   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:20:05

Report abuse

O.k the results of the ballot are in, and it shows that those balloted favour Kirkby.
Personally, i think it’s a great step forward for the club.
At the same time, i would not like to see any triumphalist posts on here regarding that fact.
Can we all now get on with the important business of supporting the team..the club.. and unite together on the journey ahead.
Onward Evertonians.
Onamish
62   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:58:28

Report abuse

Moyes - "name dropping"

"I dont care and Im related to an ex-player and know what goes on."

Hahaha.

Whopper.
Tom Hughes
63   Posted 24/08/2007 at 11:52:43

Report abuse

Real Blue: The club and Tesco had 18 months and still haven’t said how much this will cost Everton. I had a few weeks to design a stadium to fit on the current site, in my spare time. A few more weeks would have produced the business plan if the BESTWAY proposal hadn’t come along, since this has quite rightly taken that particular expertise away. All that said, less than 60:40 despite all that extra time, all those extra resources, all that extra propaganda, many out of town fans only having the glossy info included with the voting slip to go on....... Yet less than 60:40? Not bad for a No plan B one horse race!
AJ (London)
64   Posted 24/08/2007 at 12:05:56

Report abuse

To the BoyAyres, in the democracy that we live in, the stats are based on those who voted.

Therefore its 59.27% of THOSE WHO VOTED, which is correct.

All you have pointed out (as in any election), is the proportion who decided to exercise that vote and vote yes.

Actually 70% of the electorate exercised their right to vote, and on this occassion 59% of those voting voted for Kirkby.

Moral: Never use statistics in an argument, it’ll mess you up.
peter Connor
65   Posted 24/08/2007 at 12:59:32

Report abuse

Sorry Edge mate people of a different opinion to you are not evertonians there shite fans get off ya high horse will ya welcome to democracy. You also say the percentage of 2500 is hardly an endorsement but I bet ya would of moaned if it allowed "all evertonians to vote" cant win with people like you. Am sad to leave but want the club to progress and not rot like goodison is doing or the scottie rd area as well think about that no offence but if ya think kirkby is a shit hole as I have heard from some look at scottie road and the loop wtf???

Rob B
66   Posted 24/08/2007 at 13:01:10

Report abuse

AJ
you are absolutely correct.
I do believe Ayres was pointing to the innaccuracy in the wording, which I’m sure was accidental.

Tom
Interested to know where all this leaves those who have clearly put a lot of time and effort into proving that there are options. Do you intend to continue?

We are going to be paying a hell of a lot for this option, we just don’t know how much.
I personally believe the club would have got a more commanding mandate if there had been greater transparency, and less doublespeak.
Those who didn’t vote. was it "can’t be bothered either way" or "can’t decide" most undecideds have expressed the desire to know more first.
Finally, I don’t know who started shouting, but stop it now! it all looks very angry.
Tom Hughes
67   Posted 24/08/2007 at 13:07:16

Report abuse

The Loop is on top of the biggest city centre development in Europe. It is significantly higher profile than Kirkby, and is accessible from all parts of Merseyside via a single bus or train, also, the largest number of car parking spaces in the city are a short walk away. It’s hardly a dump, there is nothing there at the moment! The way the city centre is expanding, it will engulf this whole area in the coming years. Look at the cranes and the skyscrapers rising all the time. There is nothing and will never be anything comparable in Kirkby, it will always be the end of the line.
Mathew
68   Posted 24/08/2007 at 16:27:26

Report abuse

Legalities and History aside. Everton FC is still Everton FC wherever it plays its football it will always be the peoples club. if the club isnt going to be proactive and move with the times then before long we will be overtaken by the likes of portsmouth, west ham and Man City and we will be back to where we started in the 90’s eventualy filtering to the lower leagues. Our history cant be taken away and the future is in our own making. And that is the reality of it all. We will never be a chelsea, we got our morales in place.
Tom Hughes
69   Posted 24/08/2007 at 16:46:25

Report abuse

You’re dead right we wont be a chelsea..... we have won the league 9 times.
AJ (London)
70   Posted 24/08/2007 at 18:38:04

Report abuse

Tom Hughes

I really wish that the club conducted itself better with regards the Bestway proposals.

I would have talked to them in private and not have a public slanging match.

That said, I know nothing about the company, and its real proposals, and that’s my problem.

Tesco’s are said to have a devious motive while Bestway are the best thing since sliced bread - unbelievable.

Yes the loop is in the city centre, yes its in Liverpool.

What we don’t know is

1. How much the scheme will cost (we have an idea about this in Kirkby)

2. How much Everton will contribute (we have an ideal, though its conflictual and contentious)

3. Where is the money coming from, and our contribution affect squad development?

If we had full information on both proposals, and that was the basis of the vote, the Loop would win by a landslide.

If I was in charge of Everton I would want to open discussions on both fronts and see which was the best deal for the club.

I am not against the Loop, but I don’t want to dismiss Kirkby. With good negotiations, one of those cold really be the "deal of the century".

Finally, I wouldn’t trust a politician with a used toilet brush, even if they are Everton supporters. I am amazed that so many of us are so desperate that they are prepared to do just that.


Tom Hughes
71   Posted 24/08/2007 at 18:39:06

Report abuse

Rob: Personally, I’m not sure what’s next tbh. I was hoping to put some stuff together with Trevor Skempton regarding other redevelopment options that could not be finished in time. There are also some potential investors interested in the area behind the Parkend. It should be noted that throughout the process, the club has been reluctant to release the actual costs for the club. The reason for this is that it then allows others to show precisely what can be done at GP for similar. Only recently have they begun to mention an outlay of £50m, although some commentators think even this is shy of the real amount. That said, a lot could be done for £50m at GP. The vast majority of obstructed views could be eradicated and the capacity increased to 50k+. In a truly impartial vote this option would have been outlined by the club for comparison. I believe the KEIOC people will also continue with their camapaign...... and hopefully BESTWAY will still put their scheme together.
Tom Hughes
72   Posted 24/08/2007 at 19:17:54

Report abuse

AJ: Bestway have stated that they as a private company can more than match Tesco in terms of investment/contribution. The city planners have also stated that there is great scope for generating finance by land release at this important strategic site. Unfortunately, there has been nowhere near sufficient time to put this altogether. People are asking Bestway to do something in a few weeks that has taken Tesco 18 months, and they still aren’t able to state definitive costs.
Gregory
73   Posted 24/08/2007 at 21:30:37

Report abuse

LCC could have prevented this mess, instead they have identified a site when the club has already entered into advanced negotiations with Knowsley etc. LCC are to blame, they are biased toward the RS as they know it is vital to keep them here as they fill every hotel in town with their foreign fans. Don’t fight amongst each other, move on together - LCC are laughing as they look like they have done everything to sort us out with a inner city site. BOLLOCKS, they have had years to sort this since the kings dock farce. Blame the council who as a matter of fact are fucking up the 2008 celebrations as well. They have got away with it. SHAME ON YOU WARREN BRADLEY !!!!
Nick Flack
74   Posted 24/08/2007 at 22:26:20

Report abuse

So come on, who’s going to be first to put their principles where their mouth was.

Who’ll sell me their season ticket on the cheap?

I’ve heard it so many times over the years,

"I’ll give my season ticket away if we sign a coloured player", yes, I remember them days, same lads bowing down to Amo during the Newcastle and Spurs matches.

"I’ll give my season ticket away if Kenwright gets in". Same lads still going.

And so it has happened again...

So come on, I don’t see any on ebay yet.
realblue
75   Posted 25/08/2007 at 06:24:49

Report abuse

Tom Hughes:

The club have said how much, just nobody from the KEIOC side of town believes the figures.

That’s their prerogative, however I believe it was a major reason people ended up voting yes (no figures at all from the KEIOC alternatives; at least some figures from the club).

And please don’t let us get into the whole ’what figures have the club come up with’ or ’but the figures are wrong’, it’s purely academic now, the fact remains KEIOC had at no point had the faintest idea what the costs of a redeveloped GP would cost the club and the loop was even more obscure.

The club believe kirkby is affordable and ’deliverable’, and so did the majority of voting fans.

As an aside, I do appreciate that you have worked very hard on your designs, but you had little or no backup from other experts who may have helped in certain areas to point you in the right direction over costs, new safety legislation etc. But you do have talent, of that I have no doubt.
Tom Hughes
76   Posted 25/08/2007 at 09:32:31

Report abuse

Real blue:
I agree, however 2 different construction companies have seen my plans and costed them roughly. I used to work for one of the biggest construction companies in the world and have lots of contacts who have helped. The plans have also been looked at by a famous stadium constructor..... who has also costed them roughly. There was also speculation regarding an investor for the land behind the park end. The figures weren’t released because the scheme shown was in the process of being amended and these would have changed, and there wasn’t time to factor in the additional investment that was available. I was also wary of people making a direct comparison with the floating figures KW was stating (lets face it they went from a stadium for nothing to god knows what in days). Idealy I wanted to show 3 different ways to redevelop the stadium, but I run out of time. On the otherhand the club have had massive resources, and time and the media on their side. They know precisely what their costs will be, but have not released the figures, why? KW has pushed this through when there is no immediate urgency...... the reason being that if the GP ideas or Bestways proposals were allowed to be fully developed the Kirkby proposal would not live with practically any other option.... hence a 59:41 vote against a campaign run by a few individuals who had no backing and only a few weeks to put it all together, not bad for a one horse race?!.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

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 MailBag submissions across the site.



© ToffeeWeb
Menu
OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.