In March this year, the Directors commissioned a further feasibility
study to report on the options of remaining at the ancestral home of
Goodison Park, engaging Architects Ward McHugh Associates and
Accountants Deloitte & Touche, to investigate the architectural issues
and commercial viability of the project. Remaining at Goodison Park
realistically centres around two options.
THE EXTENDED GOODISON FOOTPRINT OPTION
The opportunity to redevelop a new 55 ,000
capacity stadium would necessitate us
extending t he existing footpr int from 8 to
15 acres. If achievable this would also give
the Club the opportunity to create a mix of
commercial and retail development which
in theory should have supported t he project
financ ially. This extended footprint would
however have necessitated the permanent
closure of Bullens Road, compulsory
purchase of 91 residential properties and the
relocation of the Gwladys Street School. To
some degree a number of these issues could
have been overcome by offering to re-house
the school and approximately half the
residentia l properties on the former Eileen
Craven School site (Walton Lane). Deloitte
& Touche advised us however, that their research
had indicated that the revenue created from
any ancillary development was unlikely to
be substant ial and as such a new stadium
was likely to have a net cost to the Club of
approaching £50m, all of which would have
had to be financed by the Club itself. '
.We shared our plans with Mr D Henshaw,
Liverpool City Council 's Chief Execut ive.
Senior City Council officers responded by
suggesting that the problems associated
with such a proposal would have been
enormous and would meet with substant ial
objections from not only local residents , but
also the City Planners, as the scheme fell
outside the Liverpool Unitary Development
Plan. The Club could certainly still , and
may still have to , pursue this avenue but
our advice is that it would take years for an
eventual outcome to be made known and
with little likelihood of success.
THE EXISTING GOODISON FOOTPRINT OPTION
To totally redevelop Goodison Park on the
existing 8-acre site in a phased manner. In
these circumstances planning issues would
not be such a major obstacle . However
given the constraints of the site we would
be restricted to bui lding a 45,000 capacity There are still issues to be addressed before
stadium. This alternative scheme could only our vision could become a reality.
be achieved by a phased redevelopment over a .For instance we must receive guarantees that
3/4 year period, wit h our capacity being an integrated transport and infrastructure plan
reduced to around 30,000 for anyone period is delivered to cope with the additional
during redevelopment and would be greater pressures such a development would create.
for a major part of anyone season. That in
itself would have put a stra in on being able The Board must give detai led considerat ion
to sat isfy t he demands from our supporters to the finan cial consequences of any such
as our average attendance in recent years has proposal. This must not put an undue
reached 35,000 . burden on our financial resources. Too often
in the past we have seen clubs create a new
Infight ofall these considerations the Board had facil ity or stadium only to have to sell their
feltthey had no alternative but to investigate best players to f inance t he project. The
alternative sites within the City boundaries. Board is clearly of the view that any stadium
must be capable of increasing our revenue
THE KINGS DOCK WATERFRONT OPPORTUNITY streams, to assist with f urther strengthen ing
Thi s summer the Board decided to explore of the squad rather than weakening it. The
an interest in t he Kings Dock site currently early indicators are that the Kings Dock
owned by The English Partnership . The site scheme may ultimately cost the Club
is described as being one of the most exciting considerably less than either of the two
waterfront development opportu nities in Goodison options .
Europe and simply cannot be ignored. Our
ult imate vision would be to create a unique
55,000 super stadium, retaining many of
Goodison's traditional features.
Hist orically the name of Everton has been
synonymous with being at the foref ront of
stadium design. The Kings Dock site offers
us a once in a lifet ime chance to investigate
in detai l a proposal to build a new home for
the benefit of future generations of Evertonians.
The new stadium would be owned and
controlled by the Club and with the
introducti on of a retractable roof and pit ch
the stadium could be transformed into a
futuristic indoor arena capable of staging
major Exhibitions and Conferences. Simply
imagi ne World Championship Boxing or The
Soccer Ex event comi ng to Liverpool, not to
mention the opportunity created by joining
forces with entertainment giants SFX to
bring the top names in music to our city. All
these additiona l features would not only
benefit the Club but would attract much
needed inward investment to our city and
place the Everton Brand on the world stage.
WATERFRONT STA

• The Kings Dock is • The Club has the • A site that would
the largest available ability to secure have substantial
site in Liverpool City ownership as the site urban regeneration
Centre. is owned by English benefits.
Partnerships.
• The location has • A site that would
good access to • A site that seeks to have substantial
Liverpool City Centre. provide a facility in economic benefit to
accordance with the City of Liverpool.
• Very visual, highly Government I
prominent waterfront Regional Guidance. • A site that is within
site. an area that has
• Unlike Goodison, a access to public
site that should have funding, through ERDF.
Local Authority support.
~IUM, KINGS DOCK

THEREFORE, THE BOARD SEEKS YOUR MANDATE TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

Fully investigate the opportunity at the Kings Dock. Everton to join a Consortium,
together with a first class Development Partner, and co-ordinate with English Partnerships,
Liverpool Vision, Liverpool City Council and North West Development Agency.

Wapp m9
Basin
OPTION TWO
• This Option provides for
redevelopment of the whole area
bounded by Goodison Road,
Gwladys Street and Walton Lane,
and allows for a new Ground to be
developed on a bigger footprint to
that of Option One.
• In th is case the newly rebu iIt
Ground would provide a total
capacity of 55,000, with a stadium
which would retain many of the
features associated with Goodison
Park, as described in Option One.
• There would be excellent views of
the pitch from all parts of the new
stadium, with safe, comfortable
and convenient facilities for all
spectators, including those
supporters with d isabi Iities.
• The redevelopment would need to
be phased, and could take
between 3 to 4 years to complete,
but the Club would continue to
play all their home matches at
Goodison Park. The capacity
should not fall below 30,000 at
anyone time, and would be
greater than this for the major
part of anyone season.
• Developing the larger site would
aIlow for safer spectator
movement around the Ground,
and provide a more appropriate
setting. It would also allow
for additional commercial
development to help the Club fund
the redevelopment proposals.
• The existing Gwladys Street
Infants School could be relocated
in a brand new school building on
the old Eileen Craven School site,
which would also have room for a
significant number of new houses
to be bu iIt as replacements.