A new home for Everton

[liverpolitan]

I have decided to start a new thread for this, as I don't want to disrupt the main Everton one with my plan.

I have an idea – for a new city centre stadium, that would be home to Everton Football Club, sited in a new city centre park that unites districts of the centre and consolidates the “new” city centre as a larger and more important city. Indeed, I believe my plan, if implemented, would be that last big step required to push Liverpool ahead of any other regional city centre in England.

There are few factors that led me to this idea, all problems that I think should be taken together to find the optimal solution for the city:

First, Everton needs a new stadium. This should be as central and public transport-accessible as possible, not simply for the convenience of fans but to optimise the commercial return of the stadium for other uses and events. A central and public-transport accessible site reduces congestion and has a powerful regeneration benefits. A multi-use facility, that is used more than once a week, every week of the year, will attract huge custom for the bars, restaurants, cafes and shops in a half mile radius from it. Evening events in particular are hugely valuable, creating an evening economy and sense of buzz in the vicinity that Liverpool city centre desperately needs to foster.

Secondly, the city needs a large covered stadium, preferably in or near the city centre, and in a place that is accessible to public transport and also motorists in a place that won’t cause undue congestion. The Kings Dock Arena has seating capacity of 9,500, which may be optimal for that development, but compares to the 20,000 seating capacity at the Manchester Evening News Arena. There is a need for something additional and bigger, as the Kings Dock Arena design doesn’t lend itself to significant modification or expansion.

Thirdly, the city needs a decent sized city centre park. This is not a luxury, it is essential if the city centre is to become an attractive and sustainable place for people to live in. Especially as more people move into flats, some of which lack even balconies, there is a need for green and attractive public space. However, it is expensive, for land acquisition, so I have tried to find a way of making a large new park affordable (by combining it with other uses).

Fourthly, low density, low-rise housing – particularly estates that concentrate particular social groups together (and don’t permit social mixing) are not desirable in or near city centres, and are a drag on regeneration. There are large pockets of such housing that effectively collar the city centre, stifling regeneration and preventing new districts achieving their potential.

Fifthly, there is still some European money around, for the next few years, and the city needs one big landmark investment to transform itself. The big statement never arrives. It was going to be the cloud, that is gone. The trams were a form of statement, they are gone, for the foreseeable future. The word “world class” is constantly used by organisations like Liverpool Vision and the NWDA to trumpet parochial and mean-spirited developments that are anything but “world class”. Liverpool needs something fantastic, something that transforms it and becomes its pride and joy.

The proposal

To create a huge park that slopes up the hill to the Cathedral, and incorporate within it a landmark design-led stadium that would, amongst other things, be home to Everton Football Club. It would, however, serve many other purposes, key to regeneration and job creation, and deserve maximum European and other regeneration fund monies.

The location is shown roughly on the map at the end of this thread. The boundaries of the park are fuzzy and would need to be worked out, to ensure that valuable structures are retained on the boundaries, and street form respected. Great George Street would close to through traffic, descending below sight as one of the main routes out of the underground car-parks, (with main routes out onto Park Lane or St James Street - I imagine it would require a few routes in and out, to avoid delays and congestion). An underground link could be made to a new Northern Line undergound stop at Ashwell Street, roughly on the junction of St James Place and Parliament, I think such a "Cathedral" stop has been mentioned before, but this development would make it viable).

Imagine that whole gentle hill cleared, of houses, flats, streets, everything. Also, see it in 3D, remembering the scope for underground car parks, access roads, and where necessary to recess the stadium to ensure that its overall height is not problematic for cathedral views (which I don’t think would be a problem). Current residents, in the fringes of Chinatown, and the Bungalows, would have priority for living a few minutes walk away in a new high density mixed community residential district, basically everything south of the Park to the Strand, a sort of extended and larger Baltic district.

The park would be a modern, high quality one, offering a ceremonial route from the steps of the main entrance of Liverpool Cathedral down towards the river. The new Stadium would nestle half way down, in the middle of the park – with broad tree-lined paths able to cope with the very “peaky” numbers of people who would be entering and leaving for matches and other events. A circular watercourse could flow down from near the cathedral, to a small pond at the bottom of the park, and back up again round the other side of the stadium. This would be somewhere to paddle on hot days, something badly missing in central Liverpool (and it’s not a crime, people paddle and cool their feet in fountains and water courses in other cities, it’s the sort of thing that civilised cities facilitate). The park could be privately funded, owned and operated under an agreement with the city, funded by the operators of the Stadium and its car parks (which are underneath the park) and kept open, cctv monitored, and patrolled by wardens well into the evening to keep it safe. Being private owned and patrolled, scallies and drunks could be banned and removed.

The stadium should be striking, landmark modern architecture, of the type of structure seen in cities such as Valencia, and blend within its modern park-setting. I gather it should have a 50,000 - 55,000 capacity for matches, and should convert very easily and inexpensively into a good quality concert venue (which doesn’t just feel like a sawn-off warehouse) with seating for around 25,000 people (to out-bid MEN for some acts for whom 20,000 isn’t enough). This would complement Kings Dock, rather than compete with it, although given its setting, it would provide ferocious competition to MEN Arena. Walking out, into a magical modern well-lit park, the floodlit Anglican Cathedral would loom above, and the bars of Ropewalks and the Kings Dock district would be minutes away. It would out-class MEN anyday as a really enjoyable city-experience. And, for Everton supporters and visitors, don't they deserve to be somewhere good, not in some flat field outside Kirkby?

Sorry for the quality of the map.

[bluesnapper]

Originally Posted by liverpolitan

To create a huge park that slopes up the hill to the Cathedral, and incorporate within it a landmark design-led stadium that would, amongst other things, be home to Everton Football Club. It would, however, serve many other purposes, key to regeneration and job creation, and deserve maximum European and other regeneration fund monies.

Thats the first thing thats wrong with the idea.

The will not be anything built in front of the Cathederal that impedes the view from the city centre/river vantage points.

[liverpolitan]

Originally Posted by bluesnapper

Thats the first thing thats wrong with the idea.

The will not be anything built in front of the Cathederal that impedes the view from the city centre/river vantage points.

It is a hill, and I have suggested that the stadium be dug into the hill, so its roof structure is not too high. I don't see that as a problem, I invited you to consider that slope in 3D and discussed recessing. Unless you have specific ideas about the topography, degree to which recessing is practical, and probable height of a stadium, how can you so quickly dismiss the proposal?

A lot depends on the quality of design as well, I am not taking about something that looks like a footy stadium, but a striking modern piece of architecture. You could easily recess it up to 50 feet down, which would dramatically reduce the impact of the stadium roof. Some of the buildings it would be replacing are quite tall themselves. I will not allow current stupidity by EH and LCC planners to stifle my creativity, especially as I myself love the cathedral and believe my plan would actually enhance its setting (partly by clearing away the low-quality housing in front of it). Edited: Arsenal Stadium will be less than 100 feet high, and that is a bigger stadium, so I think your concerns are cmopletley misplaced. A stadium does not have to be that high on the skyline, especially if it is at least partially recessed into a slope or hill.

I believe that good ideas (and mine might be dreadful, I'm an amatuer so I don't care) will ultimately be able to see the light of day. There are only a few more years of big investments (with European money to back them), and I'm appalled at the design quality that gets trumpeted as "world class" by Liverpool's drunk-on-euros second-rate quangocracy. If we can't get a decent city centre out of this boom, then we have failed. We should be able to look to organisations like Liverpool Vision (read their objectives, the gap between aspiration and reality is rather tragic) to champion a new planning and development culture for the city centre. They behave like small-town property developers. Vision isn't their thing.

(Ps, you said "the first thing", so that implies a list....what's the "second" thing wrong with it?)

[kung_fuzi]

A great idea Poli but I can't honestly see LCC agreeing to it.
I think they will only sanction a new stadium on vacant land and not somewhere that entails demolition of new housing.

It deserves to be given an airing though.

[paulmac35]

great idea. i hope it gets proper consideration.

[Evertonian]

I think your idea is absolutely spot on mate.

All major world cities have vast spaces of public parkland with water spaces and beautiful examples of sculpture and lighting.

I think your idea of linking the park to the grand old cathedral is beuatiful and imaginative.

In my dreams and as a side idea complimenting yours, i'd like to see a "third garden cathderal" built at the bottom of the park....a magnificent large multi faith building of world beating design....not neccesarily of any fixed religious leaning, but more a building of reconcilliation where ALL faiths would meet to worship together on special occasions and a place of contemplation. I'm thinking something along the lines of the beautiful temple in Japan (the name escapes me) which is in the middle of the forrest at the foot of a mountain.

It would be a calm relaxing place were people could come together in a spiritual way, reminding mulsims, catholics, jews and all faiths how much we have in common. It would be a sancturary against war and violence and a learning centre for kids in Liverpool to study the various religions and have talks with priests, mullahs and rabbis about what it is to be a mulsim, Jew or Christian and promoting peace between the religions.

In my wildest dreams it would be visited by the pope and the dalhi lama and other faith leaders, all of whom would come together occasional;ly to pray together.

In todays modern climate of needless fear, I can think of nothing more important....and there is nothing like it anywhere else in the world as far as i'm aware, it could be the thing that puts Liverpool on the world stage for a good reason for once.




....and now the realism.

1. LCC have absolutely no vision whatsoever and the city is overrun by quangos and non-electable bodies that dictate what happens in OUR city. They tell us we can't have talls, they tell us we can't have striking design. Everything is about money and backhanders. They're certainly not going allow vast tracks of prime real-estate land in the middle of the city go to a bunch of "treehuggers" when there billions to be made out of selling the land to low quality, fast build/easy marketable crap builders.

2. They have absolutely no desire to raise taxes to pay for public space and have failed monumentally in keeping the land we do collectively own. They in collusion with English Heritage allow the shocking rotting away of our historical buildings while interfering with design of new proposals.

3. We as a people have lost the great victorian value of philanthropy. The days of greats like the Harrison family leaving massive parkland spaces top "the people" (Harrison Park, Wallasey) the Lever Bros building and maintaining the beautifull Port Sunlight, individuals purchasing park benches and building public conveniences out of the good of their own hearts....are DEAD. Sad but true. No private company or individual will let the land go for free. No private company or individual is going to pay for it ubless there is massive returns.

4. The last attempt to do this, the garden festival 1984, was not maintained and look at the state of it now. Public parks and city gardens require maintaining. Take a look at how many public WC's there are being closed down and demolished because the council won't pay for their upkeep. People have to piss in the streets as a result of their shortsightedness.

5. Policing. Central park in NYC requires hundred upon hundreds of police man hours to police....and it is still a dangerous place to be at night, despite Guilliani's attempts to zero tolerate crime there in the mid 90's - 2001.

6. LCC had no desire whatsoever to help Everton FC, in fact good old Warren (supposedly and Evertonian) in his first day on the job stated that his wish was for EFC to share with Liverpool (basically becoming their tennants). They are only now putting a team together to look for a site within Liverpool city boundaries after the club started looking out of the city and the risk of loosing a multi-million pound franchise was looking likely.

Previous to this LCC did sweet FA to help the club, while bending over backwards to allow LFC to build on public parkland, ripping up 30% of stanley park in the process.

Everton have always been the poor relations, when it come to the council's blatent bias.



Sorry about the negativity, but I feel what i've written is a fair and true assessment. I wish it weren't so and people like yourself, with great ideas and thinking, were in charge instead.

[liverpolitan]

Evertonian, I love the idea of a multi-faith temple, so there would be three cathedrals all linked by one park. I think we should call it Faith Park. I've been thinking about the park today, and thought it would be good (but probably very expensive) if it was extensively faced with sandstone, which is I think the rock of the escarpment upon which the park would be, and that sandstone should also feature in the Everton stadium structure as well as glass and steel. I have this vague idea of it as a sort of geological/organic whole, and the two great cathedrals (Everton being low-form but immense) being like the temple and ampitheatre of a Roman city.

I've also been thinking about the water feature, and wanting that to start with a wellspring with a large religious statue up near the cathedral (junction of St James Road and Upper Parliament Street - I think there is water underneath that area that could be tapped), before flowing down through modern rockeries. That watercourse could have a secular counterpoint as a water feature near your pagoda or temple or whatever it is at the bottom of the park. I also wanted some cherry blossom trees because while they only do their thing for a few days, it's pretty spectacular. They might go well near your temple as well.

I love your idea of the Pope and Dalai Lama getting involved - maybe joining with and Archbishop of York and Chief Rabbi and other religious and secular worthies starting a global pilgrimage for peace in the Metropolitan Cathedral, proceeding down its splendid new steps, down Hope Street into the Anglican Cathedral, out of its currently under-used "front door" and down through the park down to your temple, then snaking up to lead a multi-faith service in the new Everton stadium in front of 55,000 people. Liverpool would be capital of the world for the day.

The rest of what you write is sadly very true, and realistic, and well explained. I tried to tie together the funding of maintaining a park with the stadium and car-parks, but that is probably of itself not enough, and I think that putting together good public-private deals to maintain the public realm requires skills and competences that LCC probably don't have much of. In fact I know they don't, as they allow parts of the public realm to be locked early by lazy security guards, not even monitoring or enforcing deals to keep places like the river-front near Albert Dock open during set hours.

Oh well, apparently the city has two sites up its sleeve, so I hope one of them is remotely central.

Thanks for joining in the plan though, and making it better. I definately think the flat dwellers of Ropewalks need a nice park to go and do their Tai Chi in.

[Evertonian]

Originally Posted by liverpolitan

I love your idea of the Pope and Dalai Lama getting involved - maybe joining with and Archbishop of York and Chief Rabbi and other religious and secular worthies starting a global pilgrimage for peace in the Metropolitan Cathedral, proceeding down its splendid new steps, down Hope Street into the Anglican Cathedral, out of its currently under-used "front door" and down through the park down to your temple

This is the idea. In my wildest dreams this area becomes a recognised centre for peace and a refuge from war as is the case with Vatican City with an internationally recognised "neutrality" status....an internationally recognised refuge for those that reject war and violence where one can shelter.

A (garden) city within a city, if you like.

Thanks for joining in the plan though, and making it better. I definately think the flat dwellers of Ropewalks need a nice park to go and do their Tai Chi in.

....again sorry about the negativity, it's an amazing, beautiful idea you have. I also love the idea of the new Everton Stadium being clad in sandstone and glass, lit up in a similar way to the Anglican would be stupendously magnificent!

[Multivac]

[kung_fuzi]

Originally Posted by Multivac

Yes i'm afraid it is never going to happen.

[Scarecrow]

Even so, the thread is a discussion and far from dead.

[kung_fuzi]

Originally Posted by Bunnyman

Even so, the thread is a discussion and far from dead.

Discussion wise yes,i'm all for that.

[liverpolitan]

Okay, I’ve been working this out in slightly more detail.

Here is a revised map, I’ve been trying to find the right boundary for Ropewalks / Chinatown and the park. I may have got this wrong, but is it fair to say that Lydia Ann Street is the end of Ropewalks? I’ve left that road alone, so if it hasn’t already been, it can be extensively and intensively redeveloped as the end of Ropewalks / Chinatown. Possibly some seven storey city apartment blocks, with shops and restaurants at the ground floor – and – at the front, facing directly onto the park – possibly with a 1st floor “gallery” level of cafes restaurants at that side. But a lot of the remaining housing in that area covered by the park is poor quality, and there is actually a lot of unbuilt on space, including small parks, car parks, vacant plots etc (at least, according to Google maps there is , although that is sometimes out of date). I think if you wanted to find the least developed area currently disconnecting parts of the city centre, and where there is the lowest density of housing and other uses, you’d have difficulty beating the area indicated for this park. I know the modern housing in front of the cathedral would be expensive and controversial to clear, but it’s necessary.

The other change is the location of Everton stadium. Because I’ve had to narrow the park (to expand the area available for Ropewalks / Chinatown) I’ve put the stadium straight up against the road. I’ve also hopefully positioned it so that a nice church can be retained, which is shown next to it.

The area shaded in brown is where the current plans for the recently announced extension of Baltic end, at Blundell Street, and contains one of the prime “Warehouse” districts - there are photos of it on the Warehouse thread. I see that as part and parcel of the project, as it could be redeveloped as a mixed-community, including social housing for people relocated to make way for the park, and owner occupiers and private renters. Anchored around conversions the old warehouses, each of which should be retained, the rest could be redeveloped in modern tall 5 storey blocks of flats, with balconies and internal courtyard and rooftop gardens – with an emphasis on mixed use, with three and four bed flats and maisonettes as well as bedsits and 1 beds and 2 beds. This area should keep to the current street pattern.

Finally, and again thinking partly about economics, the mystery yellow lines underneath the cathedral. This is an underground mini-visitor centre, including shops and cafes, to serve the park and cathedral visitors alike – and that would physically join up the new park with the existing St James Gardens. This would finally and properly open up those gardens, as it would be possible to walk through at the same level, under the cathedral. It would just appear as a sandstone framed portal, quite some distance down the hill from the cathedral, so not be obtrusive.

Some further thoughts on economics. As well as the big bands that can fill a 25,000 seat stadium (when EFC is converted for concert use), there is also the whole summer opera thing. Not my personal cup of tea, but it’s a big industry in towns like Verona. So, potentially, the stadium might become a significant generator of tourism to Liverpool in its own right, which, together with Kings Dock, might develop a sort of “threshold” effect and make Liverpool an overnight instead of daytrip destination for significantly more people. While I’m keen to keep a substantial space of the park, it might be possible to include an open air amphitheatre, using the natural gradient of the hill, to provide a space for open air summer concerts for just a few thousand people. I definitely think that this development would enable Liverpool to join London and Edinburgh in the big league of summer cultural destinations. And, if you look at the map, it would consolidate a far larger city centre than the city currently possesses, which would give Liverpool a far bigger and more urban and grand feel to it.

[liverpolitan]

This picture is by Doug Roberts from the Baltic thread and shows where the stadium would go.
[/URL]

(Doug, I don't know how to "quote" a picture from one thread onto another, so I re-hosted your pic to show it here - please let me know if that's not okay, I don't want to take liberties with other peoples pics).

[T0M]

Hey Poli, I think this is a really imaginative idea, and LCC could certainly do with some creative, out-of-the-box style thinking along these lines. I'd love to see a decent sized park and stadium in the city centre, and the Cathedral is the perfect backdrop for such a development, and, you might have got away with it if it weren't for those pesky houses! As others have mentioned LCC have a hard enough time putting deciding to develop on vacant land, let alone start knocking down existing housing (some of it new and some owned by John Moores).

But it is a spectacular vision and you've obviously invested a lot into it, I hope someone picks up on it and at least throws it into a larger pot to be considered.

(Ps, one bone to pick, a 'multifaith' cathedral is a bit like having a shared stadium for every football club in Merseyside)

[Evertonian]

LCC are shithouses who claimed there was absolutely no available land for a stadium anywhere in the city for years....and still insist that a task force needs to be put together to fiind a site.

You've just proven with that map that theres several areas worthy of development in that area alone.

[kung_fuzi]

Poli,one major problem is that you have 'dissapeared' a major road into the city,Great Georges street.
Looking at your map you are diverting traffic up Upper Parliament st and along Catharine st and then down Harman and Leece streets.
This could cause some horrific congestion.
The junction of Upper Parliament st and Catharine st is already busy with traffic coming from Smithdown rd and Princes road.
Didn't realise at first that you were suggesting this.

[liverpolitan]

Originally Posted by kung_fuzi

Poli,one major problem is that you have 'dissapeared' a major road into the city,Great Georges street.
Looking at your map you are diverting traffic up Upper Parliament st and along Catharine st and then down Harman and Leece streets.
This could cause some horrific congestion.
The junction of Upper Parliament st and Catharine st is already busy with traffic coming from Smithdown rd and Princes road.
Didn't realise at first that you were suggesting this.

Maybe you are right, but....

a) Liverpool traffic is very light compared to London, or even Manchester for that matter. Look at that webcam of Beetham 2 - how often is the road deserted? Often. So while particular routes may be busy at some times of the day, there is a lot of redundancy in the system so if you close one road, other roads can pick up the slack. The experience in central London (for example from the Trafalgar Square closure) is that closing roads is not as serious for congestion as some fear, as long as there are alternatives. There are loads of alternatives in Liverpool. The city paid a horrific price for it's so-called ringroad, in particular (of which Upper Parliament Street is a part), which is seriously under-used. People should use that more.

b) I have proposed a new Northern Line underground station to service this development - the so-called "Cathedral" station that has been discussed before. There could potentially be a very large residential population alone in Baltics 1, 2 (the proposed new one) and my proposed bigger one next door in the warehouse zone. Public transport is a serious option when you concentrate people together, and that reduces the need for car traffic anyway. I'd not expect most people living in this area to need a car. Nor would most visitors need to come by car. There are great train, bus and ferry routes into and out of town.

c) There might be the case for a bit of remodelling and widening of other roads and junctions in the area, maybe creating a red route or two or new one-one systems to increase capacity, I don't know - but basically I'm not terribly sympathetic, a city centre wants as few cars as possible in it.

Are you convinced the traffic can't just take other routes? Having lived most of my life in London, I'm very suspicious of claims that traffic is a problem in Liverpool. I know people prefer completely empty roads, and not a seconds inconvenience, but that convenience cannot take primacy over everything else. Is Liverpool's economy sufficiently strong, do you think, for there to be some serious thought about a central toll zone soon, charging anyone for entering the ring road? This would help increase the quality and frequency of public transport routes.

[JUXTAPOL]

It's just a pity that Derek Hattons Millitant council has built a suburban "Brookside Style" housing estate on that green shaded area. Would be great as open parkland, but unfortunately this will cost millions to buy out the owners, to turn it into a park that will not produce a profit.

[Pietari]

Originally Posted by liverpolitan

Okay, I’ve been working this out in slightly more detail.

Here is a revised map, I’ve been trying to find the right boundary for Ropewalks / Chinatown and the park. I may have got this wrong, but is it fair to say that Lydia Ann Street is the end of Ropewalks? I’ve left that road alone, so if it hasn’t already been, it can be extensively and intensively redeveloped as the end of Ropewalks / Chinatown. Possibly some seven storey city apartment blocks, with shops and restaurants at the ground floor – and – at the front, facing directly onto the park – possibly with a 1st floor “gallery” level of cafes restaurants at that side. But a lot of the remaining housing in that area covered by the park is poor quality, and there is actually a lot of unbuilt on space, including small parks, car parks, vacant plots etc (at least, according to Google maps there is , although that is sometimes out of date). I think if you wanted to find the least developed area currently disconnecting parts of the city centre, and where there is the lowest density of housing and other uses, you’d have difficulty beating the area indicated for this park. I know the modern housing in front of the cathedral would be expensive and controversial to clear, but it’s necessary.

The other change is the location of Everton stadium. Because I’ve had to narrow the park (to expand the area available for Ropewalks / Chinatown) I’ve put the stadium straight up against the road. I’ve also hopefully positioned it so that a nice church can be retained, which is shown next to it.

The area shaded in brown is where the current plans for the recently announced extension of Baltic end, at Blundell Street, and contains one of the prime “Warehouse” districts - there are photos of it on the Warehouse thread. I see that as part and parcel of the project, as it could be redeveloped as a mixed-community, including social housing for people relocated to make way for the park, and owner occupiers and private renters. Anchored around conversions the old warehouses, each of which should be retained, the rest could be redeveloped in modern tall 5 storey blocks of flats, with balconies and internal courtyard and rooftop gardens – with an emphasis on mixed use, with three and four bed flats and maisonettes as well as bedsits and 1 beds and 2 beds. This area should keep to the current street pattern.

Finally, and again thinking partly about economics, the mystery yellow lines underneath the cathedral. This is an underground mini-visitor centre, including shops and cafes, to serve the park and cathedral visitors alike – and that would physically join up the new park with the existing St James Gardens. This would finally and properly open up those gardens, as it would be possible to walk through at the same level, under the cathedral. It would just appear as a sandstone framed portal, quite some distance down the hill from the cathedral, so not be obtrusive.

Some further thoughts on economics. As well as the big bands that can fill a 25,000 seat stadium (when EFC is converted for concert use), there is also the whole summer opera thing. Not my personal cup of tea, but it’s a big industry in towns like Verona. So, potentially, the stadium might become a significant generator of tourism to Liverpool in its own right, which, together with Kings Dock, might develop a sort of “threshold” effect and make Liverpool an overnight instead of daytrip destination for significantly more people. While I’m keen to keep a substantial space of the park, it might be possible to include an open air amphitheatre, using the natural gradient of the hill, to provide a space for open air summer concerts for just a few thousand people. I definitely think that this development would enable Liverpool to join London and Edinburgh in the big league of summer cultural destinations. And, if you look at the map, it would consolidate a far larger city centre than the city currently possesses, which would give Liverpool a far bigger and more urban and grand feel to it.

It`s certainly worth a go Poli - ideas for plans have to start somewhere.

I`m not sure however that `Everton` will wait as long as this splendid idea would take to materalise unfortunatley - nevertheless I`m sure that some of this forward thinking can rescue a few `chessnuts` out of the fire.