New stadium update...

[bobbyfallon]

I've just downloaded & read the BS EN 13200-1:2003 'Spectator facilities. Layout criteria for spectator viewing area' from our Architectural Database... doesnt mention 80m - in fact the max distance is around 190m

If any of you (boring *******s) wants a read I can send it to 'em

ive **** all to do PM me cheers

[RedProf]

Anyone know if the revised HKS design still has the cafe situated at the top of the Kop still included? The one which would supposedly give fantastic views over towards the Welsh mountains. Imperative to keep the Welsh contingent amongst us happy, I would have thought.

[Scratch]

I've just downloaded & read the BS EN 13200-1:2003 'Spectator facilities. Layout criteria for spectator viewing area' from our Architectural Database... doesnt mention 80m - in fact the max distance is around 190m

If any of you (boring *******s) wants a read I can send it to 'em

A simple google search on "maximum viewing distance football spectator" brings up the 190m figure.

If a pitch is 100m long, then the goal line is already 50 metres from the centre circle. Then you got pitch edge, hoardings etc, say another 5 metres...is someone going to tell me that it's only 25 metres from the front row to the back of a major stadium like OT, Emirates, even City of Manchester? Nah, that 80m figure you got given RS4 can't be right??

[dawmdt]

I've just downloaded & read the BS EN 13200-1:2003 'Spectator facilities. Layout criteria for spectator viewing area' from our Architectural Database... doesnt mention 80m - in fact the max distance is around 190m

If any of you (boring *******s) wants a read I can send it to 'em

But is that to the centre of the pitch or to any part of the pitch?

A football pitch can be up to 119m long (although I doubt our new stadium will have the maximum possible length pitch) so on a maximum size pitch the furthest the rear seats could be from the centre spot would be about 130m... assuming our pitch will be about 100m long the furthest back the Kop seats could go would be about 90m (from the closest touchline)

[Darth Marty]

I hate all this "should have been built 15 years ago" bollocks, 15 years ago or whatever £150 mill would have been ****ing skyhigh! I purchased my house for £40k 7 years ago, its now worth £200k, I was still ****ing skint spending the £40k. Your reasoning could be turned around so that by building it now we are actually saving lots of money,because in 15 years it will cost £2 billion to build!

Rubbish arguement.

[StevieG08]

I hate all this "should have been built 15 years ago" bollocks, 15 years ago or whatever £150 mill would have been ****ing skyhigh! I purchased my house for £40k 7 years ago, its now worth £200k, I was still ****ing skint spending the £40k. Your reasoning could be turned around so that by building it now we are actually saving lots of money,because in 15 years it will cost £2 billion to build!

Rubbish arguement.

How can you compare purchasing a private property to constructing a stadium which will lead to millions of extra revenue and be pivotal to commercial success for now and the future? Your house is now worth 200k because of a financial boom period coupled with a chancellor who kept interest rates down allowing people to borrow more thus feeding the buy to let market etc. You may find that your house will lower in value over the next 7 years as they have done before. So i would suggest that it is your argument which is flawed.

The stadium build cost has gone up due to materials and labour cost mainly. The argument still stands as to why Moores didn't borrow the money required himself, regardless of being 100mil or 300mil. Arsenal have proved it can be done without the use of outside investment.

[Skullflower]

I said last night I would post some more today about why the HKS design is 'unworkable' (my word not AFL's). If you look at the aerial shot below you will see that the distance from the back of the Kop (bottom left corner) is actually more than 80 metres away from the centre spot.

My architect buddy reckons that 80metres is the maximum allowable under some rules or regulations (not sure if the rules are FIFA's or more to do with RIBA construction standards or something). Basically this means that the back of the Kop will be unusable (unless they rework the design) thus it might not hold 18,500 fans as they've claimed.

Also, there is a large triangular addition to the stadium (top right on the picture below) that wasn't in the original plans and doesn't seem to do anything! It could possibly be a small multi-storey car park which would replace the much larger underground car park that has been sacrificed to get HKS's proposed build cost down by over £100m to be close to AFL's £290m.

is that it?

[Vermilion]

Wow, just looked at the stadium pictures side by side, Hick's 1st next to the cheaper managable version, WHAT A KOP OUT, look's like they have totally stripped it out & given us a measley shell, A SHELL, that,s all it is. ****in Rotten to the core them ****'s. THIS IS LIVERPOOL FC, we should have a great stadium, we'll only build it once then we're stuck with it for our lifetime. Lets make it SUPERB eh, not some CHEAPER option, it's been the same with players, always having to get the cheaper option, NO MORE PLEASE. Come on DIC, kick there arses out of OUR club.

Oh & for the record, i dont think the other firms design is worthy of Liverpool & carrying the name Anfield on it, it s dire, both designs we are left with are crap, The 1st Hks design was ok, Grand enough. But guess what, we cant have it, it's to expensive, SO TYPICALLY LIVERPOOL.

[bobbyfallon]

id be happy IF DIC BUY THE CLUB.......... to wait an extra year or two, get a new design with a capacity that could see us expand into the
80-000 - 100-000 region.

how do we make more money than united?? more bums on seats ??

done like this new one. mentioned above some where, we are only going to do this once. world class is what we should be after. IMO

[dom9]

Wow, just looked at the stadium pictures side by side, Hick's 1st next to the cheaper managable version, WHAT A KOP OUT, look's like they have totally stripped it out & given us a measley shell, A SHELL, that,s all it is. ****in Rotten to the core them ****'s. THIS IS LIVERPOOL FC, we should have a great stadium, we'll only build it once then we're stuck with it for our lifetime. Lets make it SUPERB eh, not some CHEAPER option, it's been the same with players, always having to get the cheaper option, NO MORE PLEASE. Come on DIC, kick there arses out of OUR club.

Oh & for the record, i dont think the other firms design is worthy of Liverpool & carrying the name Anfield on it, it s dire, both designs we are left with are crap, The 1st Hks design was ok, Grand enough. But guess what, we cant have it, it's to expensive, SO TYPICALLY LIVERPOOL.

Can you post the pictures to compare?

[Vermilion]

Can you post the pictures to compare?

They are on the Daily Post site i believe.
Sorry, i saw them on Anfield road.com, next to the Sheik is boyhood Red story. I was looking on news now about the Sheik story, went from the link to Anni Rd & there they were next to it.

Ignore, just been back & can't find them. Will look again now in my web history to find where i saw the images.

[Redpross]

Some of you might remember that I've got a mate who works for the architects in Manchester who did the original 'New Anfield' 'stadium in a box' design. You might also recall that in March he gave me some info that they had been sacked and a new firm (HKS) had been appointed to revise the plans (I was told on a Friday night, posted it on the Saturday and it was all over the news on the Monday).

Anyway, I was out drinking with him again last night and he said that his firm had been approached again to build a new 70,000 seater stadium based on the original design, i.e the one that looks like the City of Manchester / Emirates / Reebok / José Alvalade Stadium in Lisbon and lots of other grounds across the world.

So... it looks as though this could link in with the rumours about the fall-out with Tom Hicks and the club struggling to raise the funds for building the new design which is a lot more expensive than the original plans. Apparently the AFL design would cost around £300m including the 'fit out' (i.e. the interior) whereas the HKS design would cost around £180m more without the 'fit out'.

Remember, I'm just passing on what I heard so don't shoot the messenger but he was 100% accurate with his information in March...



From this...

http://www.supanet.com/media/00/16/14/poll-new-stadium2.jpg

...back to this...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1990000/images/_1992484_newanfield300.jpg

...spot the difference - the José Alvalade Stadium, home of Sporting Lisbon...

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium..._alvalade1.jpg

Don't like those Stadiums.......

[Redpross]

Wow, just looked at the stadium pictures side by side, Hick's 1st next to the cheaper managable version, WHAT A KOP OUT, look's like they have totally stripped it out & given us a measley shell, A SHELL, that,s all it is. ****in Rotten to the core them ****'s. THIS IS LIVERPOOL FC, we should have a great stadium, we'll only build it once then we're stuck with it for our lifetime. Lets make it SUPERB eh, not some CHEAPER option, it's been the same with players, always having to get the cheaper option, NO MORE PLEASE. Come on DIC, kick there arses out of OUR club.

Oh & for the record, i dont think the other firms design is worthy of Liverpool & carrying the name Anfield on it, it s dire, both designs we are left with are crap, The 1st Hks design was ok, Grand enough. But guess what, we cant have it, it's to expensive, SO TYPICALLY LIVERPOOL.

What are you on about.....they look pretty much identical......anyway would be happy with a shell that we can add to as we win the League year after year!!!!

[Vermilion]

What are you on about.....they look pretty much identical......anyway would be happy with a shell that we can add to as we win the League year after year!!!!

No they dont, are you blind, the only thing thats the same is the shape, all the detail is different, look at the poxy roof compared to the original, look at the Big Shiny Steel Bulge, No more. This is what we can see, the bits we can't see are most likely even more drastically downgraded. If you'd be happy with a shell believing it will bring us title after title, well hey, say no more.

Look deeper than the overall image will you. Most of what made it look like a collosuss, a strong sturdy filled out stadium has GONE. Looks Cheap & nasty compared to the original.

[Vermilion]

http://picasaweb.google.com/anfieldroad.com/LFCNewStadiumTake3/photo#5159404484583241154