Topic: How a redeveloped Anfield would look:

[LiamG]

That's a 55,000-seater keeping the Centenary and Kop. Looks like Anfield Road is shut and the new Anfield Road stand extends quite a way into the park. The new Main Stand is horribly unbalanced. If the Annie Road is say 12,500 then the new Main Stand would have to be 20,000 or more.

Is the Main stand the most difficult problem we have due to the lack of space behind it? What do you reckon could be the maximum capacity we could get from that side? It is intresting that they got 55,00 without touching the KOP or the Centenary

[TSC]

any further news on the liverpool city council blocking anfield redevelopment with the new owners?

Council wants a groundshare.  Too many blues on the council.  Only way to avoid this movement & fuck them off is to redevelop Anfield.  Was always my preference.  No need to move if we can redevelop the current into a 60k plus stadium.

[xerxes1]

My guess is that once you start altering the Kop and Centenary as well, the costs soar to New Stadium plus  levels.

A significant problem is that significant extra capacity in the Mian Stand will equal significant extra height, that will prompt rights of light objections from neighbours. A Council that has granted a PP which avoids such problems may be pretty sympathetic to such objections.

[TMOI]

My guess is that once you start altering the Kop and Centenary as well, the costs soar to New Stadium plus  levels.

A significant problem is that significant extra capacity in the Mian Stand will equal significant extra height, that will prompt rights of light objections from neighbours. A Council that has granted a PP which avoids such problems may be pretty sympathetic to such objections.

Rights of light are a matter between property owners and can be diminished on negotation between the parties (not council). Loss of amenity is another matter, subject to objection. In other words pay enough with the former and the latter can magically disappear.

[davenorthwales]

Council wants a groundshare.  Too many blues on the council.  Only way to avoid this movement & fuck them off is to redevelop Anfield.  Was always my preference.  No need to move if we can redevelop the current into a 60k plus stadium.

liverpool city council were quick in to 'quash' any plans before the sale.. jumped in pretty sharpish if you ask me.. ah, the council aren't impartial then? hehe

[The Manhattan Project]

I like La Bonbonera

They ran out of space on one side, so they just built a narrow vertical stand of executive boxes and a few seats.


If we redevelop Anfield, the new Main Stand needs to be loaded with those executive boxes.

[Butcher Knife Roberto]

Looking at the aerial shots of the stadium, it suddenly dawned on me that the space to extend Anfield is already there, it just isn't being used creatively. For instance, the 20 or so metres behind the Centenary stand: if you were to extend the stand to a 3rd tier, the car park could be built underground. The Anfield Road stand could be extended and the road moved to where the houses have been demolished, or the road even built under the stand. Given that the main stand can be demolished and converted to a double tier, all of a sudden you could be looking at a 57 - 60,000 with no major impact on the existing footprint.

OK, I know some of the above may sound far-fetched or could be prohibitive from a cost point of view, but it is possible in my opinion, and certainly something that the new owners should explore. If it isn't feasible then so be it, we build on Stanley Park and sell the naming rights gooner-style. I do hope that John Henry explores all options because Anfield is unique in world football, and if we can preserve the heritage then it should be the only way forward.

[conman]

Looking at the aerial shots of the stadium, it suddenly dawned on me that the space to extend Anfield is already there, it just isn't being used creatively. For instance, the 20 or so metres behind the Centenary stand: if you were to extend the stand to a 3rd tier, the car park could be built underground. The Anfield Road stand could be extended and the road moved to where the houses have been demolished, or the road even built under the stand. Given that the main stand can be demolished and converted to a double tier, all of a sudden you could be looking at a 57 - 60,000 with no major impact on the existing footprint.

OK, I know some of the above may sound far-fetched or could be prohibitive from a cost point of view, but it is possible in my opinion, and certainly something that the new owners should explore. If it isn't feasible then so be it, we build on Stanley Park and sell the naming rights gooner-style. I do hope that John Henry explores all options because Anfield is unique in world football, and if we can preserve the heritage then it should be the only way forward.

this would be my view too..

[sunny_LFC]

came accross these pictures on the official forum a while back:

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

would be great if it could be done

[PhilV]

came accross these pictures on the official forum a while back:

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

would be great if it could be done

no chance of that I am afraid - maybe the idea is sound but the amount of money making those modifications would cost for only a rough 10,000 seat increase would not be worth the money by any stretch of the imagination

[LiamG]

At least they give us an idea of what a 2 tiered main stand and 3 tiered centenary would look like

[davenorthwales]

once i had a seat in the upper centenary stand, just past halfway up towards the back, may 1996 against middlesbrough. view was just about bearable and vertigo.. a third tier would make the players look like ants.

another solution could be knock down the 1991-92 and rebuild it again a bit higher..

will there ever be a solution?

[Brian Blessed]

no chance of that I am afraid - maybe the idea is sound but the amount of money making those modifications would cost for only a rough 10,000 seat increase would not be worth the money by any stretch of the imagination

Surely that depends on how the cost compares to add 15,000 with an entire new stadium?

[tyrolean_red]

The pics sunny_LFC posted look outsanding!!! If Anfield would look something like that redeveloped, I'd never consider anywhere else!!

[TMOI]

The pics sunny_LFC posted look outsanding!!! If Anfield would look something like that redeveloped, I'd never consider anywhere else!!

It's a great effort but there are too many restricted views.

[annieroader]

Architects at anfield today with ged poynton looking into redevelopment if it would work ect.

[paul j]

Looking at the aerial shots of the stadium, it suddenly dawned on me that the space to extend Anfield is already there, it just isn't being used creatively. For instance, the 20 or so metres behind the Centenary stand: if you were to extend the stand to a 3rd tier, the car park could be built underground. The Anfield Road stand could be extended and the road moved to where the houses have been demolished, or the road even built under the stand. Given that the main stand can be demolished and converted to a double tier, all of a sudden you could be looking at a 57 - 60,000 with no major impact on the existing footprint.

doing all that wouldn't make sence it would probably be easier to build a new stadium and be more cost effective.

[iwasthere]

You are not alone there. It definately doesn't sound/feel ok.

Do we really think that we can fill a 70K+ every week.

Not saying that we haven't got fans, alas I reckon that few have got more then us, if at all. But I think that maybe the majority of our type of fans are normal working people that maybe do not afford to go to all the matches. Or am I wrong?

I think we will fill 70k because the likelyhood is that ticketprices will be more encouraging at the bottom while others can pay top dollar for tickets too or so I would hope, well seems to be the model with the two big Spanish clubs.

[LFCRulesOK]

While I would prefer staying at Anfield, is it too much to ask that all the stands be of the same height and have a similar look?

Of course still keep the single tier for The Kop, but all those designs look disjointed and amateurish.

[its cold in the stands]

While I would prefer staying at Anfield, is it too much to ask that all the stands be of the same height and have a similar look?

Of course still keep the single tier for The Kop, but all those designs look disjointed and amateurish.

mate, honestly, who gives a shite what it looks like, it`s not about what anfield looks like it`s about what it is.
it is the raison d`etre of this entire club, the only reason there is a LFC is because john houlding had a stadium but no team to play in it.
john houlding didnt particularly want to start a new team, he was happy enough at everton, infact when he first registered LFC with the f.a he tried to use the name everton claiming the name belonged to his team because they were still going to play at anfield but the f.a agreed with the bluenoses and told houlding as he was practically starting a new team from scratch this new team had to have it`s own name.
you know that pitch where you watch the likes of gerrard and torres run around on?, well in the 1890`s john houlding stood in the middle of that same pitch and decided a great city like this one should have a football team that carry`s it`s name.
anfield was there before we existed, anfield was there when we used to play in a kit like blackburns, anfield was there when we decided to play in red, anfield was there when we overtook bootle to become the second best club in the city, anfield was there when we overtook everton to become the best team in this city and anfield was there when we became the best team in the country and the best team in europe.
in terms of this club and infact in terms of league football anfield has always been there and i hope it always will be, whatever it looks like.

[SkrtelStare]

mate, honestly, who gives a shite what it looks like, it`s not about what anfield looks like it`s about what it is.
it is the raison d`etre of this entire club, the only reason there is a LFC is because john houlding had a stadium but no team to play in it.
john houlding didnt particularly want to start a new team, he was happy enough at everton, infact when he first registered LFC with the f.a he tried to use the name everton claiming the name belonged to his team because they were still going to play at anfield but the f.a agreed with the bluenoses and told houlding as he was practically starting a new team from scratch this new team had to have it`s own name.
you know that pitch where you watch the likes of gerrard and torres run around on?, well in the 1890`s john houlding stood in the middle of that same pitch and decided a great city like this one should have a football team that carry`s it`s name.
anfield was there before we existed, anfield was there when we used to play in a kit like blackburns, anfield was there when we decided to play in red, anfield was there when we overtook bootle to become the second best club in the city, anfield was there when we overtook everton to become the best team in this city and anfield was there when we became the best team in the country and the best team in europe.
in terms of this club and infact in terms of league football anfield has always been there and i hope it always will be, whatever it looks like.

Holy fuck mate, hairs on the back of my neck great post.

[LiamG]

If we do re-develop Anfield they should really get in touch with the engineers/architects who developed the Westfalenstadion

[LiverpoolKopKings]

mate, honestly, who gives a shite what it looks like, it`s not about what anfield looks like it`s about what it is.
it is the raison d`etre of this entire club, the only reason there is a LFC is because john houlding had a stadium but no team to play in it.
john houlding didnt particularly want to start a new team, he was happy enough at everton, infact when he first registered LFC with the f.a he tried to use the name everton claiming the name belonged to his team because they were still going to play at anfield but the f.a agreed with the bluenoses and told houlding as he was practically starting a new team from scratch this new team had to have it`s own name.
you know that pitch where you watch the likes of gerrard and torres run around on?, well in the 1890`s john houlding stood in the middle of that same pitch and decided a great city like this one should have a football team that carry`s it`s name.
anfield was there before we existed, anfield was there when we used to play in a kit like blackburns, anfield was there when we decided to play in red, anfield was there when we overtook bootle to become the second best club in the city, anfield was there when we overtook everton to become the best team in this city and anfield was there when we became the best team in the country and the best team in europe.
in terms of this club and infact in terms of league football anfield has always been there and i hope it always will be, whatever it looks like.

One small correction if I may there mate. John Houlding had a field not a ground.

Anyway your's is a brilliant post. Whatever the timeline the only constant factor has and is that sacred field. That patch of land is our mother we shouldn't move away from it.

I am sure if NESV can grasp this they'll definately find a way to redevelop anfield.

Tell me one thing. When I was at Anfield 2 years ago I saw a lot of derilict houses behind the main stand, why is it so impossible to expand that way? Or was I dreaming?

[fizzyp]

I think the length of the pitch (or lack of it) is a big factor in moving.

the big factor is more seats and corporte boxes resturants and all that shit. dont think the pitch comes in to it much.

[Ngogs 10 Incher]

came accross these pictures on the official forum a while back:

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

would be great if it could be done

Third one down looks a bit like OT

[PhilV]

It's a great effort but there are too many restricted views.

not only that but redevelopment of Anfield would cost so much it might just be worth getting a whole new infrastructure that will outlast us instead of maintaining an aging one - which again, in the long run, proves to me more expensive.

[fizzyp]

doing all that wouldn't make sence it would probably be easier to build a new stadium and be more cost effective.

why do clubs extend own stadiums rather than build new ones?

nesv have already done this with red sox and the reports i have seen are that the results are really good.

would the decision to either re build at anfield or build a new stadium come down to what is most cost effective?

[fizzyp]

not only that but redevelopment of Anfield would cost so much it might just be worth getting a whole new infrastructure that will outlast us instead of maintaining an aging one - which again, in the long run, proves to me more expensive.

yes thats probably true this club is not just about saving money on things as important as the stadium. if thats the case sell
all the best players buy cheaper ones on less wages and that will be more cost effective.

[TMOI]

why do clubs extend own stadiums rather than build new ones?

nesv have already done this with red sox and the reports i have seen are that the results are really good.

would the decision to either re build at anfield or build a new stadium come down to what is most cost effective?

Hopefully it will come down to what's right to maintain long-term support from the fans to make the most sustainable income for the club and the team. Clearly it has worked at Fenway.

And there's no way adding 15,000 seats is going to cost as much as building a new 60,000 seat stadium.

[Acaustiq]

Some interesting 3D models of Anfield throughout the years, as well as the HKS proposed stadium.

http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/cldetails?mid=aa4cc8be846bcc64b5b622de57aa9151&ct=mdcc

[paul j]

Hopefully it will come down to what's right to maintain long-term support from the fans to make the most sustainable income for the club and the team. Clearly it has worked at Fenway.

And there's no way adding 15,000 seats is going to cost as much as building a new 60,000 seat stadium.

it probably wont cost as much as a new stadium but it wont be as cheap as some think,as for fenway they were only dealing with a stadium holding just over 37000.the work needed at anfield to take it to 60,000+ is alot more than was needed at fenway.

[Jonny5]

Surely its worth spending that little extra to get to stay at Anfield, we would be crazy to knock it down for the sake of serving up a few extra portions.

[Alan_X]

came accross these pictures on the official forum a while back:

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

would be great if it could be done

The problem with a lot of these amateur designs is that they take no account of the realities. It's a piece of piss to copy an paste another tier but a redevelopment would need to take account of modern standards. It seems wreckless to spend that amount of money and not address the basic inadequacies of the Annie Road and Main Stand.

[..Bruiser..]

Some interesting 3D models of Anfield throughout the years, as well as the HKS proposed stadium.

http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/cldetails?mid=aa4cc8be846bcc64b5b622de57aa9151&ct=mdcc

I always used to love the different coloured seats. I'd like to see that in a potential new stadium, nostalgic. It reminds me of the kop who made his horse tread on me brother's foot because that's near where it happened outside, round the back of Annie Road, that's the stand I was looking at when I thought of that. He got away with it.

[crazeehorse]

came accross these pictures on the official forum a while back:

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

would be great if it could be done

This design maybe unrealistic, but if we could get anfield looking anything like this, with a 60k plus capacity, lets do it.

It may cost as much as a new stadium, who cares? If we can get plenty of corporate facilities and 60-70k seats, anfield deserves to re-developed. Use the stanley park site for a football quarter/hotel to increasse revenue again, and we are laughing.

[scouse29]

This design maybe unrealistic, but if we could get anfield looking anything like this, with a 60k plus capacity, lets do it.

It may cost as much as a new stadium, who cares? If we can get plenty of corporate facilities and 60-70k seats, anfield deserves to re-developed. Use the stanley park site for a football quarter/hotel to increasse revenue again, and we are laughing.

Dont like the idea of the upper tier in the Centenary being restircted with beams in front, thats a pain in the arse in the main stand. Also the view from up there like watching ants anyway so dont see the point.

As for adding another tier in the main stand it needs a complete re build, its so tight and basically out of date in there its untrue.

[caronia]

If we do re-develop Anfield they should really get in touch with the engineers/architects who developed the Westfalenstadion

Yeh nice one,not seen this before,more in keeping with Anfield i.e. the supporters very close to the pitch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westfalenstadion

[fisher_lad]

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

If this was possible I would much rather stay at Anfield any day. If you could get rid of those posts at the top of the Centinary stand it would be spot on!

Im sure you could get round it. Something this at the top maybe?

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.datm.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/St.-James-Park-3.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.datm.info/terriers-on-tour/terriers-on-tour-200910-newcastle-united&usg=__vepbXxCbPkpaHYOimKMp8Qinw8I=&h=480&w=640&sz=146&hl=en&start=15&zoom=1&tbnid=eN3XA-qoF6NT1M:&tbnh=166&tbnw=219&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dst%2Bjames%2Bpark%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1G1GGLQ_ENUK350%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D685%26tbs%3Disch:10,376&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=348&vpy=402&dur=2&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=178&ty=201&ei=xIXFTIPQNom9jAfs3Oy4BQ&oei=ToXFTNgcgc2MB7m6wLgF&esq=2&page=2&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:15&biw=1280&bih=685

[beejay]

I really like the idea of staying at Anfield but working with the Council to help regenerate the area through the Football Quarter.

It seems to me that if the Council can approve a huge new stadium inside Stanley Park then why should they not be amenable to some less prominent but commercially more valuable development in the Park as a gateway between the 2 stadia? A scheme that would re-create the Anfield Plaza of hotels, shops plus community facilities and car parks on the Park instead of the site of a demolished Anfield. Some of the Plaza & the parking was to be located in Stanley Park anyway.

As for redeveloping Anfield, we are talking about 2 new stands so far as I can see, I don't see any necessity for a 3rd tier to the Centenary. A massive 3 tier Main Stand with vast corporate facilities plus a bigger Anfield Road stand, now that we don't have the restrictions on housing behind. That should give us our 60,000 seater stadium and at far less cost than the new stadium which requires massive groundworks.

[Alan_X]

http://forums.liverpoolfc.tv/showpost.php?p=2389093&postcount=29

If this was possible I would much rather stay at Anfield any day. If you could get rid of those posts at the top of the Centinary stand it would be spot on!

Im sure you could get round it. Something this at the top maybe?

There are loads of things wrong with that - not just the stanchions in the third tier. It's the curse of SketchUp. Easy to produce images of things that look impressive but simply don't work in practice.

Basic things like a squared off Kop over hanging the Walton Breck Road, no structure to support that massive Centenary Stand roof, The scoreboard hanging from the Kop roof? (so the Kop can't see it), same with the Screen and the Anfield Road, I don't think his capacities stack up, and there are only a couple of new boxes etc.