Bramley-Moore Dock

by   |   10/02/2020  40 Comments  [Jump to last]

Readers of ToffeeWeb will no doubt be aware that the club submitted its full and detailed Planning Application for the new stadium to Liverpool City Council on 24 December 2019. The People's Project website also posts the amended images and fly-through of the new stadium, reflecting the design changes since Summer 2019.

The Planning Application has the distinction of being the first to be recorded for 2020, having the reference number 20F/0001. Anyone who may wish to track its progress should use this reference when searching Liverpool City Council's website and the area dealing with current applications.

I viewed the relevant application pages last week and noted that, aside from a full description of the proposals and notification that the application has been validated, it has yet to be registered. Until that takes place, the application will not be the subject of formal consideration. Nor will arrangements be put in place for Public Consultation.

Similarly, notification of the application and an invitation for their comments will not be sent to all the relevant public authorities – frequently referred to as the statutory consultees. In layman's terms, all this means is that the clock will not start ticking on the process to determine the merits of the application until formal registration takes place.

I have had contact with the Case Officer for the application and much of what I note above reflects his advice. He has also indicated that they are hoping to make some arrangements with the club to enable members of the public to look at a paper copy of the application. Particularly useful if you want to pour over the architect's plans. Details of where and when will probably pop up on the Council's website, if not also at the People's Project site (my assumption).

I am aiming to keep track of the progress of the application and will post further notes on ToffeeWeb as and when there is more to report. Readers should in particular note that the formal process of public consultation on the application will afford the opportunity to submit comments to the Council expressing your whole-hearted support for the scheme. Every little helps!

back Return to Talking Points index  :  Add your Comments »


Reader Comments (40)

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


Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
1 Posted 10/02/2020 at 21:47:45
Thanks, Alistair, it's great that you're keeping track of the Planning Application and letting us know what is (or isn't) going on.

Seems kinda weird that it would just sit there for 5 or 6 weeks, when time is of the essence and there's all that great work to be done on the Goodison Legacy...

Why do you think it has not even been registered yet? Or is this just more fuel for the itinerant naysayers hiding amongst our number?

Brent Stephens
2 Posted 10/02/2020 at 22:25:33
Great stuff, Alistair. Thanks. Look forward to further updates.

Those who “know” it ain’t going to happen will no doubt give this all a pass.

Jay Harris
3 Posted 10/02/2020 at 22:36:04
Thanks for the research and the update Alisdair.
Tom Fazal
4 Posted 10/02/2020 at 22:47:42
Alisdair, thank you for tracking this and your update.

I know nothing of the process for such a project and wonder if it is the Club's responsibility to register the application - anybody know?

Joe Corgan
5 Posted 11/02/2020 at 00:03:45
Us: “So you’ll submit it by the end of the year?”

EFC: “Yes, we’ll submit it by the end of the year?”

Us: “Definitely by the end of the year?”

EFC: “Yes, definitely.”

Us: “Hey! Why haven’t you submitted it?”

EFC: “Well we’ve submitted it but we haven’t, y’know, submitted it.”

Us: “FFS.”

Karl Masters
6 Posted 11/02/2020 at 00:33:35
Presume there’s a ‘registration fee’ to pay to the Council to register it.

Bill offered to pay in Panto tickets and finally left the Council offices saying Fortress Sports Fund or NTL would be paying the fee tomorrow.

Derek Thomas
7 Posted 11/02/2020 at 01:02:18
I would think there's a time limit on these things can 'sit', mostly so they can charge you 2 fees when you have to eventually re-submit.

But once registered, as Alasdair says, the clock is ticking and PP, or rejection will, in the fullness of time pop out the other end like a peice of toast.

I think not registering is about getting all the financial ducks in a row.

Joe @ 5; going further with your dialogue...

EFC: "No, erm, wait, bit harsh that, we have submitted it, look" *does Chamberlin thing with piece of paper*

Us: *snatches* "gis a look"...*reads*

...'We are in receipt of your Planning Application, Ref: 20F/0001, please quote this Ref in all future correspondence.'

Us: "hmm" *reads further*

...'However, no assessment of your application can take place until it has been Formally Registered and all fees paid...see table of fees below...'

Us: "FFS."

Eric Myles
8 Posted 11/02/2020 at 01:28:55
I'm guessing that it's not registered 'cos the Club has said they want the Council to review BMD and Goodison Legacy applications together. So when the Goodison application is ready they'll register them both at the same time.

But then I know FA about the planning application process so could be way off.

Alan J Thompson
9 Posted 11/02/2020 at 03:37:48
Wouldn't also have anything to do with when it is withdrawn from the accounts for FFP purposes, would it, even though they take 3 years in to account.
Rob Halligan
10 Posted 11/02/2020 at 08:52:18
Pretty certain the club said it could take up to sixteen weeks for this to be approved, so don't know why some people are worrying?

While we're on the subject of BMD, I was speaking to someone before the game on Saturday, who works down on the docks and will be working on BMD once planning application is approved. He told me the amount of work outside of BMD is progressing well, infrastructure etc. He also told me to fill in BMD alone will take over six months. Basically he said they are just waiting for planning permission and then they're going in!! While the dock is being filled in other work around the dock will be on the go.

Brian Harrison
11 Posted 11/02/2020 at 09:31:16
Alasdair

Nice to have feedback on how the application is progressing, thanks for supplying the application number now anybody who wants can track the application. I admit I am excited about the project as well as being mindful of Wengers comments about the Emirates lacking the soul that Highbury had.

I read some months ago that they plan to fill the dock with sand so in the future if people wanted to resurrect it back as a dock it would be easy to do so if its filled with sand. These big projects always seem to have a habit of over running the predicted opening date, lets hope it doesnt happen with this project.

Brent Stephens
12 Posted 11/02/2020 at 10:04:48
At my last place of work we built a new campus and every couple of months there was an update (recorded video images of the new building etc; virtual tour; interviews with site manager etc). It would be great to see Everton produce a regular update like this.
Jerome Shields
13 Posted 11/02/2020 at 12:22:17
Moshiri obviously has to still. give the go ahead.
Alasdair Jones
14 Posted 11/02/2020 at 13:16:20
Many thanks to those who have responded to my post. Quite a number of points have been raised and I hope my note below addresses most of them.

Once an application has been received it must be both validated and then placed on the register before it is determined. This is a major and complex application. In a recent briefing on the Peoples Project web site Ian Jenkinson from CBRE, Planning Consultants for the project advised that the application was accompanied by 50 technical documents covering 30 specific areas. So the authority have to be sure, despite extensive pre-application discussions that all is in order before they can start the process of determination and consultation.

Once registered the application could take up to 16 and possibly 26 weeks before a decision is issued; i.e up to 6 months. The latter timescale will arise if the City ask for an extension of time for determination but cannot agree with Everton on that matter. The Government have a Planning Guarantee which tries to ensure that even major schemes are determined within 6 months or 1 year should the matter go to appeal.

This application will have attracted a hefty Planning Fee which has to be paid prior to the determination period commencing.

As to the "parallel" scheme to redevelop Goodison Park the Peoples Project web site notes that the plans for this have still to be settled so the BMD application will be determined independent of this proposal.

Hope the above, whilst quite dry, addresses the points raised. If not post me further questions by all means.

Sean Kelly
15 Posted 11/02/2020 at 13:51:29
No panic folks. Billy has this ring fenced along with the Arteta money. Problem is he’s not great at climbing fences.
Danny Broderick
16 Posted 11/02/2020 at 15:27:53
It’s not Bramley Moore Dock, it’s Walton Hall Park, we’ve all had the wrong end of the stick, and work is progressing at a rate of knots to make sure we will have a new stadium in 2020. Here is the link:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-women-confirm-stadium-move-17721804.amp

Tom Hughes
17 Posted 11/02/2020 at 16:35:12
It was also noted on another site that there was still no application docs to view on the council's planning website. A few questioned why this would be the case several weeks after the "submission", which was announced with such fanfare. I'm not sure how unusual this is, even taking into account the scale or heritage sensitivity. Unless I'm mistaken, LFC's new mainstand application docs appeared straight after submission. Maybe ours is not as clear cut as their application, but it's hard to understand why formal registration wasn't part of a formal submission.

My understanding was that the club had been working in parallel with the club since day one, so why the need for a separate registration on a project that all parties should already be fully familiar with?

Brian Harrison
18 Posted 11/02/2020 at 16:45:14
I see that Man Utd have made an application to have 1500 rail seats fitted at Old Trafford, and if approved could be trialed before the end of the season.
Should this application be successful then I see no reason why large sections of BMD couldnt be rail seats, which would mean we can have our 60,000 seater ground after all.
Steve Carse
19 Posted 11/02/2020 at 17:59:10
Following on from Brian's post, am I right in thinking that any introduction of rail seating at BMD would, unless the whole terrace was to be standing only, mean the end of the idea of the home end being one continuous, untiered area, since otherwise the views of those seated immediately above the rows of standing fans would be lost. In other words, there would need to be a break the length of the terrace of perhaps two yards between the two sections.
In any event the possibility of standing getting the capacity up to 60,000 seems fanciful. It would require the removal of at least 8,000 seats compared to as currently planned, even on the most optimistic expectations of what the permitted seat to standing ratio might be.
Brian Williams
20 Posted 11/02/2020 at 18:19:25
Steve.
Two things. One solution to the first problem you raise is to have any seated section in front of the rail seating as opposed to behind it. Viewing problem solved.
Secondly if the capacity was to be increased to 60k by the introduction of "safe standing" only 5,333 seats would have to removed as the ratio of safe standing to seats is 1.5/1.
Kevin Prytherch
21 Posted 11/02/2020 at 18:34:10
Brian - it’s more like 16000 seats would have to be removed at a ratio of 1.5/1 to increase the capacity from 52000 to 60000.

If you removed 5333 seats and replaced them with 8000 safe standing spaces, you would only gain the difference in the overall capacity (52000-5333+8000), so would end up with 54667.

To gain an extra 8000 capacity, you would remove 16000 seats to replace them with 24000 safe standing spaces, being left with 36000 seats and 24000 safe standing spaces.

I think

Brian Williams
22 Posted 11/02/2020 at 18:34:50
That 1.5/1 by the way is what Everton would propose.
Dortmund's yellow wall actually works on a 2/1.
Steve Carse
23 Posted 11/02/2020 at 18:44:04
Brian, Kevin has already corrected the maths, but another of your solutions, is there any stadium that currently has the standing area behind its seats without a 'corridor' between them? Presumably there is no technical reason why you can't.
Brian Williams
24 Posted 11/02/2020 at 18:53:38
Kevin, you're right mate. That's what I get for replying /posting in a hurry, lol.
Everton do have contingency plans though for a 10k increase in capacity by introducing safe standing.
Steve Carse
25 Posted 11/02/2020 at 19:36:54
If we look again at Kevin's numbers, then it becomes apparent that, to get to 60,000, there would have to be standing in more than just the home end. If I recall correctly, this section as presently planned would house 14,000 seats, or alternatively using the 1.5:1 ratio 21,000 standing spaces. So another 3,000 standing spaces would be required elsewhere to meet the 60,000 capacity.

My question would be whether, in this day and age, when several new generations will never have experienced standing and when all others will have become used to the relative luxury of seating, there would ever be the demand for 24,000 safe standing spaces. I'm not even sure that there would be the 21,000 wishing to stand and fill the home end.

Mike Benjamin
26 Posted 11/02/2020 at 19:38:32
On the website there is also a progress sheet (in Word) which has a target date for completion of the various processes of the 24th March. Before people start moaning there is only so much the club can do.

For staff at the Council this is not the usual planning application, reflected in the number of separate documents that have been submitted to cover the main aspects of the project, involving thousands of pages.

If LCC work in the same way as other councils, then the first thing they will do is scan every page submitted prior to being sent to each agency/relevant Councillor. An initial decision is due 16 weeks from the date of submission.

Dennis Stevens
27 Posted 11/02/2020 at 19:46:23
It'd have to be a standing side, rather than an end, Steve.
Brian Harrison
28 Posted 11/02/2020 at 19:49:09
I know my memory is not what it used to be. I am sure that during the consultation periods, many said that they would like us to build a 60,000 capacity stadium. And I am sure it was stated that, if the government agreed to safe standing, then we could have a 60,000 capacity.

Now don't ask me what percentage of seats would have to be replaced to achieve the 60,000, but that is what I believe was said during the consultation.

John Chambers
29 Posted 11/02/2020 at 21:04:17
This is what it says on the Peoples Project site about where the safe standing would be incorporated "The design of both North and South stand lower tiers will make it easy to adopt rail seating and, should legislation change in the future, they could also be converted into areas for safe standing – offering supporters flexibility in the future".
If the ratio is 1.5 to 1 it means there will be fewer seats than at Goodison, 52,000 - 16,000 leaves 36,000. I can't recall seeing any numbers but surely they must be planning on 2:1, that would remove 8,000 seats, leaving 44,000 seats, and 16,000 standing
Tom Hughes
30 Posted 11/02/2020 at 21:26:59
To accommodate a standing section as part of a single-tier stand, they generally use a super-riser (or large step) to separate standing and seated sections. I believe the large end at Spurs has one. They can be quite discrete to still look like one continuous sweep of heads in either mode.
Andy Crooks
31 Posted 11/02/2020 at 21:38:38
I know I am a dinosaur on this topic but I believe that standing at football matches was rightly banished and should remain so.
Dennis Stevens
32 Posted 11/02/2020 at 22:06:34
I can't agree with you, Andy. I see no reason why masses of people are able to stand at other events but not at football, there's no reason why it should be considered less safe when watching football than, for example, a band.

The whole idea came about after Hillsborough as part of the narrative that the disaster was caused by out-of-control football hooligans who just needed the civilising influence of compulsory seating, which I suppose was a step up from being charged for the pleasure being treated like caged animals.

However, regardless of opinion either way, the reality is that people do stand at football matches in stadiums which are not designed for safe standing – arguably they never were. The various rail-seating options resolve the issue safely and should also reduce the scope for conflict between those who prefer to sit being stuck behind those who prefer to stand.

The change can't come quickly enough, imo.

Mike Benjamin
33 Posted 11/02/2020 at 22:17:35
Quite right, Dennis. The current practice at most grounds is downright dangerous. Away fans are frequently standing throughout the game, even in the Upper Bullens.
Brent Stephens
34 Posted 11/02/2020 at 22:19:36
Everton away fans stand all game every game. Never seen an incident yet.
Liam Reilly
35 Posted 12/02/2020 at 09:04:56
As soon as it's approved we should pay for those Chinese dudes to come over and build the ground in a month...
Jerome Shields
36 Posted 12/02/2020 at 09:08:32
Standing areas would probably be better designed now. Years ago, you had the odd barrier, probably an attempt to stop pushing forward en masse. Remember collapsed barriers when things went wrong.

I remember having to push back off the barrier when the surge came when a goal was scored. I do have fond memories of this with Everton beating Spurs at White Hart Lane on their way to the title.

I used to use the away supporters' end at neutral games to get more room. I got a lot of abuse as a result at some games. I once ended up with a girder at my back as the Chelsea shed, after a morning game, decided to take in another game on the first day of the season, and attacked the stewards and police, with me in their path.

The away end can be the arsehole of nowhere at some grounds, may need to stand to get a view. Clearly if it is true that our away fans are standing anyway, this is an area that needs to be looked at.

The new stadium needs a 60, 000 capacity, that's for sure.

Ryan Holroyd
37 Posted 12/02/2020 at 20:47:31
Some people on here would LOVE it if the stadium wasn't built.

Unfortunately for them, it will be built.

Richard Reeves
38 Posted 12/02/2020 at 23:32:26
I don't understand why, on an area of ground that is restricting future expansion, the club are not going for a capacity of at least 60,000 before safe standing.

As people have already mentioned, we don't know what the demand is for safe standing but, if I was making those sorts of decisions, I would be putting those standing areas at the bottom of the blue wall stand, nearest to the pitch, and depending on demand hopefully and eventually filling that whole stand front to back with safe standing.

Brian Wilkinson
39 Posted 14/02/2020 at 15:49:06
I agree in regards to safe standing. Years ago, the terracing was great but you certainly had moments of ending up with a lost trainer and four rows further down the terracing.

People stand in seated areas now which is not ideal. Putting in safe standing has to be the way forward for me.

Has anyone been in the top balcony? Now there's one area I could never jump up after a goal.

John Keating
43 Posted 20/02/2020 at 10:05:52
Unless they are keeping things quiet, I am quite surprised the Club are not looking at other amenities in the immediate vicinity of the ground which would contribute income.

I know a hotel is being built over the road but I'm surprised we haven't thought of something like that.
It would give us another stream of revenue.

Gone in to either building our own bars and restaurants or gone into partnership with more established companies. Gyms, fitness centres etc, something that would give us a steady stream of income.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, 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 Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads



© ToffeeWeb