Topic: Bascombe Story - let's wait for confirmation before discussing it ok?

[Scud02]

I want to stand here on a European night and sing my lungs off!

[Michaelanscombe]

that kop does look great imagine that on a european night !!!!!!!

[Rome-77]

I want to stand here on a European night and sing my lungs off!

that looks about 2 million capacity,

i just want the kop the be different from the rest of the ground, a stand alone steep kop
its got to be unique,i,d hate a bowl stadium.

[gorgepir]

I want to stand here on a European night and sing my lungs off!

Too bad you won't be able to go to there since that is not the stadium that will be built. I could live with the 2008 design, but alas there is no PP.

[BaZ87]

The 2003 design had a single tier Kop. Who said it doesn't?

It does? I was just going off the pictures on AFL's site and it looks to me as if there's a break half way up the 'Kop' stand.

Are there detailed plans for the 2003 design around?

[Scud02]

Too bad you won't be able to go to there since that is not the stadium that will be built. I could live with the 2008 design, but alas there is no PP.

How do you know this?  Was their information released on the official site, all we have is the word of Bascombe.  It could be this design, it could be the other one.  Who knows?

Because we certainly don't.

[shelovesyou]

I want to stand here on a European night and sing my lungs off!

The acoustics of that would be shite.

Anyway, new pics in.

Retractable roof.

[Alan_X]

So this is speculative Alan, but as people are doing it I'll ask anyway.

We can see the revised plans referred to in the stories on AFL's website. But we know there are 'tweaks' and changes to be made.

In your experience, can we even begin to speculate as to how extensive they might be? Or are we in the realms of pure guesswork, from next to no change, to a complete rethink on top of the same footprint?

The planning approval relates to the size (which impacts on local residents right to 'quiet enjoyment' and the visible appearance from the surrounding areas and Stanley Park in particular.

Anything that happens within that visible envelope is up for grabs but the underside of the stands and their upper profile are what you see from outside.

The revised AFL plans from 2008 are completely irrelevant and should be discounted. In my opinion they are also a fucking diabolical design with too much of a nod to the HKS design with huge areas of glass and wanky arches that had fuck all to do with anything apart from Hicks' ego.

[Scud02]

The acoustics of that would be shite.

Anyway, new pics in.

Retractable roof.

Paul Dalglish's twitter by any chance 

[Alan_X]

How do you know this?  Was their information released on the official site, all we have is the word of Bascombe.  It could be this design, it could be the other one.  Who knows?

Because we certainly don't.

'We' do. Planning approval is a public process. The 2003 scheme has approval. The 2008 scheme doesn't. It's fuck all to do with Bascombe.

[gorgepir]

How do you know this?  Was their information released on the official site, all we have is the word of Bascombe.  It could be this design, it could be the other one.  Who knows?

Because we certainly don't.

Alan

The modified design I was referring to was the HKS scheme, which was effectively treated as a modification to the AFL scheme, in that it re-used all of the site-finding rationale, the traffic plans, the land transfer proposals including the Anfield Plaza. The 'amendmemt' was the design of the stadium, which went through quicker than would have been the case for a completely new application. The cost-saving HKS scheme then went through as a further revision.

The revised AFL scheme never went to planning.

Sorry for any confusion.

We do know that the only designs that have planning permits are the 2003 design and the HKS design. This 2008 design never got planning permits so will need to go through the whole process again. And if that is the case, why limit ourselves to these designs if we are going to go through the process again.

[Alan_X]

It does? I was just going off the pictures on AFL's site and it looks to me as if there's a break half way up the 'Kop' stand.

Are there detailed plans for the 2003 design around?

There is a gangway across the Kop but it's a single tier. Hopefully one of the things they'll do is reduce the impact of the gangway across the full width of the stand. The HKS scheme had a much larger 'gap' that would have prevented the Kop surfer from being passed up but it only went half way across.

[royhendo]

Thanks Alan - excellent as always mate

[Scud02]

There is a gangway across the Kop but it's a single tier. Hopefully one of the things they'll do is reduce the impact of the gangway across the full width of the stand. The HKS scheme had a much larger 'gap' that would have prevented the Kop surfer from being passed up but it only went half way across.

Touche Alan  .  I just hope it looks at least different from the Parry Bowl, because that was awful.

[BaZ87]

My personal opinion is that you could expand the AFL design in the future but it would need a new roof.

The need of a new roof would mean it wasn't practical I assume?

[Alan_X]

Alan
We do know that the only designs that have planning permits are the 2003 design and the HKS design. This 2008 design never got planning permits so will need to go through the whole process again. And if that is the case, why limit ourselves to these designs if we are going to go through the process again.

The 2008 scheme is not the one that Bascombe is talking about. It's the 2003 scheme with 'tweaks' (non-material amendments) so there will be no need for a new planning application.

[TepidT2O]

There is a gangway across the Kop but it's a single tier. Hopefully one of the things they'll do is reduce the impact of the gangway across the full width of the stand. The HKS scheme had a much larger 'gap' that would have prevented the Kop surfer from being passed up but it only went half way across.

I think they described it as a viewing platform in the hks design (or similar).

I think a remnant of the US sports legacy of HKS you talked about where viewing galleries are common

[gorgepir]

The 2008 scheme is not the one that Bascombe is talking about. It's the 2003 scheme with 'tweaks' (non-material amendments) so there will be no need for a new planning application.

That is what I mean. The only designs that have planning permits are the HKS design and the 2003 design. So noway for the 2008 design.

[BaZ87]

There is a gangway across the Kop but it's a single tier. Hopefully one of the things they'll do is reduce the impact of the gangway across the full width of the stand. The HKS scheme had a much larger 'gap' that would have prevented the Kop surfer from being passed up but it only went half way across.

Thanks for that mate. That's one concerns out of the way.

[paulrazor]

The acoustics of that would be shite.

Anyway, new pics in.

Retractable roof.

that has to be a spoof, sure it looks like a toilet

unless were getting sponsored by Armitage Shanks

mightnt be a bad thing, Shanks Anfield

[Alan_X]

The need of a new roof would mean it wasn't practical I assume?

Not really - depends when you do the work. The roof is a relatively simple structure with most of the load being taken by the masts. There will be some kind of write-off period for the current scheme and ten years down the line the cost of a new roof would be absorbed in the overall costs.

Adding extra tiers is a cost-effective way of undertaking planned expansion. AFL have overseen the expansion of Old Trafford up to it's current capacity, each new expansion required a new roof.

[gorgepir]

The acoustics of that would be shite.

Anyway, new pics in.

Retractable roof.

That should have excellent acoustics to be honest.

[Alan_X]

I think they described it as a viewing platform in the hks design (or similar).

I think a remnant of the US sports legacy of HKS you talked about where viewing galleries are common

Yes - it had a view across the pitch from the Kop concourse - a load unnecessary wank in my opinion that would have fucked up the HKS Kop. Designed for NFL and baseball where you get up during a three hour game to buy food and have a wander. Shite for a 90 minute football match.

[Alan_X]

Touche Alan  .  I just hope it looks at least different from the Parry Bowl, because that was awful.

In what way was it 'awful'? 

[Zlen]

Alan is like some bias and opinion powered fact and reason producing robot.

[paulrazor]

That should have excellent acoustics to be honest.

whole new meaning to a "bowl stadium"

[BaZ87]

Not really - depends when you do the work. The roof is a relatively simple structure with most of the load being taken by the masts. There will be some kind of write-off period for the current scheme and ten years down the line the cost of a new roof would be absorbed in the overall costs.

Adding extra tiers is a cost-effective way of undertaking planned expansion. AFL have overseen the expansion of Old Trafford up to it's current capacity, each new expansion required a new roof.

And that was the other major concern out of the way. Thanks for the info mate.

While I'm not overly keen on bowl stadiums, we've got to be realistic in our expectations. A single tier Kop and the ability to expand at some point if necessary changes my opinion on the parry bowl massively.

[Scud02]

In what way was it 'awful'?

I don't know it's not unique enough or maybe I just prefer the look of the 2008 AFL design

Also where is the Kop end, is that it on the left ?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

In what way was it 'awful'? 

It's all about opinions isn't it though? Personally I think it looks totally shite myself.

[Alan_X]

And that was the other major concern out of the way. Thanks for the info mate.

While I'm not overly keen on bowl stadiums, we've got to be realistic in our expectations. A single tier Kop and the ability to expand at some point if necessary changes my opinion on the parry bowl massively.

The original AFL scheme wasn't designed for expansion but any building can be modified within reason - I'd be out of a job if they couldn't as half of our work is modifying, updating, expanding and refurbishing existing buildings.

[Scud02]

All I want in the stadium is a huge ass, single tier Kop stand that can hold around 15-18 thousand.

[Alan_X]

Oh and for those who like Dortmund's ground - this is the AFL Kop and the Sudtribune at the same scale:

[Red Beret]

I'm slightly peeved to see this at the same time United are looking to expand to 90k.

[Alan_X]

All I want in the stadium is a huge ass, single tier Kop stand that can hold around 15-18 thousand.

Why? The current Kop is already losing its voice because it's become a destination for day-trippers and sightseers. Making the Kop bigger isn't going to solve that. The days of 25,000 hairy-arsed working men singing their hearts out on the Kop is gone.

[SP]

I'm slightly peeved to see this at the same time United are looking to expand to 90k.

Really? They are struggling to fill OT now. There is no waiting list for season tickets. I cannot see them being able to guarantee a decent return on investment for that...

[shelovesyou]

I can see the Millenium Stadium influence , and we shouldnt judge it alone by the previous images.
I like Galatasary's ground. But from the top it looks terrible. Inside it looks amazing, especially as to how close to the pitch the fans are.

EG:

[Alan_X]

I'm slightly peeved to see this at the same time United are looking to expand to 90k.

I doubt they will now - they are maxing out at around 76,000, and that's based on levels of success that they are going to struggle to maintain over the next few years if City keep going.

[SP]

I can see the Millenium Stadium influence , and we shouldnt judge it alone by the previous images.
I like Galatasary's ground. But from the top it looks terrible. Inside it looks amazing, especially as to how close to the pitch the fans are.

Would that work in the UK climate? With that much roof how much sunlight would the pitch get? Be a nightmare for the groundsman. And if we want to see pass and move we cannot compromise on the quality of the grass. 

[gorgepir]

Why? The current Kop is already losing its voice because it's become a destination for day-trippers and sightseers. Making the Kop bigger isn't going to solve that. The days of 25,000 hairy-arsed working men singing their hearts out on the Kop is gone.

So essentially, what you are saying is that the 2003 design is the best that Liverpool FC can ever hope for. The HKS design although unique was horribly designed, the new Reebok bowl is good, and all other designs are impractical because we have daytrippers and nobody sings anymore.


Maybe it is just we have different ambitions and viewpoints of LFC. I probably have to accept your viewpoint of us being a club that will always have to compromise in the end and will never end up with the best of anything.

[Alan_X]

I can see the Millenium Stadium influence , and we shouldnt judge it alone by the previous images.
I like Galatasary's ground. But from the top it looks terrible. Inside it looks amazing, especially as to how close to the pitch the fans are.

EG:

The fans will be the standard distance from the pitch as required by UEFA. There is just more green between the white lines and the front row of seats.

And that's a 'bowl'...