Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

When are we likely to get definitive stadium news?


Nathanzx
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Numero Veinticinco

Since when can councils reject applications for planning permission? They can deny planning permission, of course, but they surely can't reject applications? And what about the building costs? Since when are building costs the same as 2006?

 

Also, I'm not convinced the updated Parry Bowl, which wasn't actually a Parry Bowl, would need new planning permission, just adjustments to the existing application.

 

Any experts on that here? Stronts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
Since when can councils reject applications for planning permission? They can deny planning permission, of course, but they surely can't reject applications? And what about the building costs? Since when are building costs the same as 2006?

 

Also, I'm not convinced the updated Parry Bowl, which wasn't actually a Parry Bowl, would need new planning permission, just adjustments to the existing application.

 

Any experts on that here? Stronts?

 

Yes it would need new planning permission, the greenhouse kop AFL stadium was a 72k capacity and it didn't go any further than a proposal. Hicks was always going to go with his mates at HKS.

 

They don't reject applications but they can give strong clues on what they are willing to do, maybe the club understand that the council will not entertain a new consent so feel it's not worth spending money on?

 

No idea about building costs but material prices fluctuate and labour costs can't be that much different than 2006 given the current job market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when can councils reject applications for planning permission? They can deny planning permission, of course, but they surely can't reject applications? And what about the building costs? Since when are building costs the same as 2006?

 

Also, I'm not convinced the updated Parry Bowl, which wasn't actually a Parry Bowl, would need new planning permission, just adjustments to the existing application.

 

Any experts on that here? Stronts?

The council cant though the underlying point is the Council/Blueshite cunt will delay a new plan for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
Yes it would need new planning permission, the greenhouse kop AFL stadium was a 72k capacity and it didn't go any further than a proposal. Hicks was always going to go with his mates at HKS.

 

They don't reject applications but they can give strong clues on what they are willing to do, maybe the club understand that the council will not entertain a new consent so feel it's not worth spending money on?

 

No idea about building costs but material prices fluctuate and labour costs can't be that much different than 2006 given the current job market.

 

It's materials, especially steel, that's the major cost. Anybody know about stuff like that?

 

As for the updated Parry Bowl, that can be tweeked to fit in with the 60k of the original. What a clusterfuck. If this is 100% true, and my first reaction is that there's probably elements or truths and half-truths mixed with misunderstandings, then we need to stay where the fuck we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
It's materials, especially steel, that's the major cost. Anybody know about stuff like that?

 

As for the updated Parry Bowl, that can be tweeked to fit in with the 60k of the original. What a clusterfuck.

 

Steel is cheaper today than it was in 2006.

 

Edit: That's incorrect, it peaked in 2008

 

world steel prices - price charts - pig iron, scrap, billet, slab, hrc, rebar - pricing history

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
Steel is cheaper today than it was in 2006.

 

The Parry Bowl original was originally going to be 80m, wasn't it? I wonder how that compares to today's steel prices.

 

Sorry, just trying to get my head around this bombshell. Maybe disbelief is just shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The council cant though the underlying point is the Council/Blueshite cunt will delay a new plan for years.

 

I'd rather wait 3-5 years to get the perfect stadium, rather than rush a rubbish design now just for the sake of having a new one. The new stadium is likely to be ours for 50+ years. Whats a few years now if it means getting an unique stadium everyone likes instead of settling for a generic one which not many are keen on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want us to have anything to do with those 2 cunts, they can stick their stadium up their bellends.

 

I'd rather that stadium than that generic Parry bowl!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
I'd rather wait 3-5 years to get the perfect stadium, rather than rush a rubbish design now just for the sake of having a new one. The new stadium is likely to be ours for 50+ years. Whats a few years now if it means getting an unique stadium everyone likes instead of settling for a generic one which not many are keen on.

 

It'd be a total fucking disaster to build a slightly modified version of the Parry Bowl. That's short-termism of the highest order. That doesn't sound like them to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather wait 3-5 years to get the perfect stadium, rather than rush a rubbish design now just for the sake of having a new one.

 

Whats to say its rushed? And whats to say the next one would even get planning permission?

 

We should probably wait a while before declaring designs we havent seen rubbish too! The Parry bowl was crap granted but a lot of years have gone past since then and who knows what changes can be made to stay in the planning permission, there might be a lot of leeway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
The Parry Bowl original was originally going to be 80m, wasn't it? I wonder how that compares to today's steel prices.

 

Sorry, just trying to get my head around this bombshell. Maybe disbelief is just shock.

 

That £80m was from 2003 wasn't it? I don't know anything about construction costs, steel looks like it is more than double the cost it was in 2003 though.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the changes, I don't think it would take much to make the designs look current and fairly respectable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather wait 3-5 years to get the perfect stadium, rather than rush a rubbish design now just for the sake of having a new one. The new stadium is likely to be ours for 50+ years.

 

So would I.

 

Fuck the council lets move to Spain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer the design put on skyscrapercity by some fella a couple of months ago. You may recall me posting it on the FF. Granted, he'd yet to design a roof (and still hasn't) but for me, he got the inside pretty much spot on.

 

The Parry Bowl will need a hell of a lot of tweaking to move away from the bland identikit design it currently is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss

If it can be done in a way that means it can be expanded at a later date then that would be perfect, I know the original AFL was set at 60k with no expansion possible but maybe it can be done with a respin staying within the current permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
That £80m was from 2003 wasn't it? I don't know anything about construction costs, steel looks like it is more than double the cost it was in 2003 though.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the changes, I don't think it would take much to make the designs look current and fairly respectable.

 

To me, it's Bolton Wanderers after somebody has wiped their arse clean on the blueprints. It's going to take more than a little modernisation to make it good enough for the next 100 years.

 

Looking forward to what the club has to say on this. I'd expect they'll react fairly swiftly, otherwise this'll spin out of control and be a potential PR fuck up. They'll not want that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
Personally, I prefer the design put on skyscrapercity by some fella a couple of months ago. You may recall me posting it on the FF. Granted, he'd yet to design a roof (and still hasn't) but for me, he got the inside pretty much spot on.

 

The Parry Bowl will need a hell of a lot of tweaking to move away from the bland identikit design it currently is.

 

You should post that one again so everyone can ask where the roof is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I prefer the design put on skyscrapercity by some fella a couple of months ago. You may recall me posting it on the FF. Granted, he'd yet to design a roof (and still hasn't) but for me, he got the inside pretty much spot on.

The pill box one? If so didn't think much of that.

 

The Parry Bowl will need a hell of a lot of tweaking to move away from the bland identikit design it currently is.

They wont be able to change to much as it would end up turning into a new plan/design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

Just thinking about how long does the planning for the original Parry Bowl lasts. It was granted in July 2004 or Feb 2003 (according to wiki). I'm guessing planning permission doesn't last 8 years. Maybe it does. Anybody able to track down the original planning permission?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

Also, according to this from the official site, the original was 55k.

 

Can't find the original 2003 planning permission anywhere. That'd give us a clue as to how long it was for and how many seats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
Also, according to this from the official site, the original was 55k.

 

Can't find the original 2003 planning permission anywhere. That'd give us a clue as to how long it was for and how many seats.

 

There was a design at 55k, it had a red brick exterior. It was from 2002.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

From some official document, but still nothing about how long it lasts:

 

 

3.2.1 In 2003 Liverpool Football Club took the decision to pursue the construction of a new football stadium within Stanley Park adjacent to the existing Anfield Stadium. A hybrid planning application was submitted on 26 October, 2003 for full planning permission for the erection of a new 60,000 seater stadium and outline planning permission for the redevelopment of the existing football ground for a mixture of uses including offices, retail and food and drink uses, community uses, residential, a hotel and public open space. The level of A1 retail floor space was limited to 1,000m². The Council’s Planning Committee on 30 July, 2004 resolved to grant planning permission for this hybrid planning application, and by letter dated 12 October, 2004 the First Secretary of State stated that he did not intend to require the application to be referred to him and it was for the Local Planning Authority to determine the application at its own discretion. Subsequently, following the signing of a Section 106 Legal Agreement and further consideration by the Planning Committee, planning permission was granted on 11 April, 2006.

 

3.2.2 More recently, Liverpool Football club have submitted a revised scheme for the Stanley Park site. By letter dated 5 June, 2008 the Secretary of State resolved not to intervene in the determination of the application and planning permission was granted on 19 June, 2008. .

 

3.2.3 Whilst the planning applications submitted by Liverpool Football Club were both Departures from the approved Development Plan, (ie the Liverpool UDP) neither was considered to challenge policy to the point where a Public Inquiry was considered necessary by the Secretary of State. The Club fully understood the difficulty of securing significant enabling development, hence the realistic and achievable redevelopment proposals for the former ground, comprising a mixed use development which complemented the regeneration of the wider

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...