How not to regenerate an area

Status
Not open for further replies.

davek said:
Liverpool Echo.co.uk - Liverpool FC - News - Liverpool's Anfield regeneration: special report

...Liverpool FC style.

Get the authority to knock down 800 homes and displace 2-3,000 people; board up hundreds of other homes making the area a ghetto; close local community centres...then sit back and say you're in no hurry to build a new stadium and redevelop the area.

How the **** are they not held accountable for this?
Click to expand...


Deja vue. Liverpool Football Club and accountability, don't go in the same sentence.
 
I know it shouldn't - given the stuff they've gotten away with in the past - but it amazes me that a whole district in a major British city is in the process of becoming a wasteland because of the (in)actions of a football club. I suppose, as well as demonstrating the influence LFC have in the area, it shows how football has way too much influence over everyday life.

The same was happening at Kirkby, with the town centre there being affected by the plans for DK. But at least there (and whether we supported it or not) something tangible would have been put in place if the go ahead had been given. But LFC have had since early 2005 to get cracking (three and a half years before the recession). A complete disregard for the community it sits in.
 
How long does planning consent remain valid for ?
I remember reading that if they don't start soon then it will be withdrawn, that was a statement made by Bradley/LCC I think ?
 

davek said:
I know it shouldn't - given the stuff they've gotten away with in the past - but it amazes me that a whole district in a major British city is in the process of becoming a wasteland because of the (in)actions of a football club. I suppose, as well as demonstrating the influence LFC have in the area, it shows how football has way too much influence over everyday life.

The same was happening at Kirkby, with the town centre there being affected by the plans for DK. But at least there (and whether we supported it or not) something tangible would have been put in place if the go ahead had been given. But LFC have had since early 2005 to get cracking (three and a half years before the recession). A complete disregard for the community it sits in.
Click to expand...

It plays into the two-Yanks hands.

Surrounding land values are no doubt dropping.... further lowering their stadium cost.

Sly they are.
 
Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian said:
How long does planning consent remain valid for ?
I remember reading that if they don't start soon then it will be withdrawn, that was a statement made by Bradley/LCC I think ?
Click to expand...

They can keep on re-applying to get it renewed. If the city council approves they're ok. I'm not sure if the threat of removal didn't refetr to the NWRDA funding. If Bradley threatened scuppering it they dont have much alternatives in place.
 
davek said:
I know it shouldn't - given the stuff they've gotten away with in the past - but it amazes me that a whole district in a major British city is in the process of becoming a wasteland because of the (in)actions of a football club. I suppose, as well as demonstrating the influence LFC have in the area, it shows how football has way too much influence over everyday life.

The same was happening at Kirkby, with the town centre there being affected by the plans for DK. But at least there (and whether we supported it or not) something tangible would have been put in place if the go ahead had been given. But LFC have had since early 2005 to get cracking (three and a half years before the recession). A complete disregard for the community it sits in.
Click to expand...

it might not be the fault of lfc- theres about 50,000 empty houses in the city, when a localised area reaches a certain % of empty properties it qualifies it for european grant ££££s- so you could say it benefits the local powers that be (bradley) to run down certain areas
 
zed said:
it might not be the fault of lfc- theres about 50,000 empty houses in the city, when a localised area reaches a certain % of empty properties it qualifies it for european grant ££££s- so you could say it benefits the local powers that be (bradley) to run down certain areas
Click to expand...

I have no idea if that's true on grants, but it would be a reaction to things rather than a strategy of LCC for that scenario to unfold...a reaction to the wanton destruction of the area by a housing association and a private business: LFC.
 

davek said:
I have no idea if that's true on grants, but it would be a reaction to things rather than a strategy of LCC for that scenario to unfold...a reaction to the wanton destruction of the area by a housing association and a private business: LFC.
Click to expand...

some of the european money for the restoration of stanley park etc was dependent on the project being completed, otherwise lcc had to pay the grants back....
Regeneration work must be finished by the end of 2008 or the European money will have to be returned to Brussels, putting pressure on Liverpool to get started.

Cllr Warren Bradley, leader of Liverpool council, said: "It is great news for the people of Anfield that this grant was agreed. At long last, after 20 years of decline, we are sure we can deliver a better life for people there.

"Improvements around the stadium must be completed by the end of 2008 and it would be a fantastic legacy of Capital of Culture year if a real future for the area is in place.

"I would now like to see the club come out and tell people with real confidence how they are going to pay for it. This issue has gone on for three years and they let it go right down to the wire."

Approval of the European grant was crucial because the council would not let Liverpool build a new home without im proving the area around it.

Equally, the regeneration scheme cannot go ahead without the stadium at its heart.

That is why the Reds' board had to give guarantees to the European Objective One committee that the club can afford the £180m ground before the money was released.

No taxpayers' money will be used for the stadium.
Click to expand...

http://myliverpoolfc.org/newanfield-08.htm

so by the r/s not building, does that mean it has cost lcc?
 
Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian said:
some of the european money for the restoration of stanley park etc was dependent on the project being completed, otherwise lcc had to pay the grants back....


The New Anfield Stadium

so by the r/s not building, does that mean it has cost lcc?
Click to expand...

I doubt it mate if the last line is anything to go on: no taxpayers money used on the project. The report I linked in the OP stated that LFC had matched the funding for some work done in the park. Perhaps that's where at least some of the Euro cash went and LFC are slightly out of pocket?
 
davek said:
I doubt it mate if the last line is anything to go on: no taxpayers money used on the project. The report I linked in the OP stated that LFC had matched the funding for some work done in the park. Perhaps that's where at least some of the Euro cash went and LFC are slightly out of pocket?
Click to expand...

just read something about 1st 1/4 2010 and significant work.

they must be getting one of those tv shows in then, cos they'll have to get a move on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top