Welcome to Liverpool Confidential
Reset Password
The Confidential websites will be undergoing routine updates. This may cause the sites to go offline. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience.

You are here: Liverpool ConfidentialNews & Comment.

Sefton Park's Meadowlands in £10m housing sell-off

Ex leader Storey accuses Mayor Joe of copying Militant

Written by . Published on March 19th 2013.


Sefton Park's Meadowlands in £10m housing sell-off
 

SEFTON Park’s historic Meadowlands is set to be sold on the recommendation of Mayor Joe Anderson as part of a £10m sell-off by the city council.

The Meadowlands, close to Aigburth Vale, has survived at least two previous sell-off bids to make way for housing developments.

But a report to the council cabinet on Friday says the land will help the Mayor’s mission to provide high-banded executive homes in the city.

'Anderson is copying everything that the Militants tried to do by destroying the very green essence of the character of the city' - Mike Storey

The proposal is certain to spark fury among environmentalists and protectors of Liverpool’s parklands and green spaces.

In the 1970s a housing co-op had it sights on the Meadowlands, surrounded by mature yew trees, to replace terraces homes in Dingle. It was one of the first campaigns to be fought by the then newly elected Liberal councillor Mike Storey, backed by David Alton, then a city councillor.

Sefton Park LiverpoolSwings and roundabouts: What Sefton Park is all about

In the 1990s another bid was made to sell the Meadowlands. In 1998 Mike Storey, by then leader of the Lib Dem group, came to power and vowed there would be no sell-off of Liverpool’s parklands and open spaces.

But in the report to the cabinet, the Meadowlands is described as “incidental open space in Park Avenue”, with a recommendation that it is declared “surplus to council requirements”.

The “incidental open space” spans 2.62 hectares and is not classified by English Heritage as part of Sefton Park. 

If, as a report to cabinet members suggests, it is offered on the open market it would attract considerable developer interest. It should also realise a significant capital receipt which would support delivery of the city’s investment priorities. 

Marketing of similar south Liverpool sites at King David Primary School and New Heys Comprehensive will realise capital receipts in excess of £10.0m, providing quality 4/5 bed housing and increase the number of higher council tax banded properties in the city.

Objections

The council considers the marketing of the land at Park Avenue will offer the same financial benefits.

If the cabinet, consisting entirely of Labour councillors, backs the Mayor’s recommendation, the city solicitor will have to advertise the loss of open space and “in the event of any objections report them (the objections) to the cabinet ‘for consideration”.

The regeneration director, Nick Kavanagh, will, subject to any objections being resolved, be authorised to dispose of the Meadowlands on the open market, with the millions raised ring-fenced to support delivery of investment priorities in the city.

An April 23 deadline for any objections will be set.

Mike Storey, now Lord Storey of Childwall, told Liverpool Confidential: "It's back to the future. Anderson is copying everything that the Militants tried to do by destroying the very green essence of the character of the city.

 "We are back to the days of selling off our green and open spaces to the highest bidder. The only people who will benefit will be the property developers.

 "Sadly, there is no one to oppose him. He has an iron grip on the city, and anyone who stands up against him is ridiculed and threatened.

"Hopefully, the local residents and the people of Liverpool will stand up against him to protect our open and green spaces – the very lungs of our city."

Maintaining the description of the Meadowlands as "incidental open space"  a report to councillors says it is opposite Sefton Park and accounts for just 1.58pc of open space in the surrounding area.

The report adds the disposal and development of the site will remove any maintenance and management risks for the council associated with retaining public open space.

The proposal, put forward by regeneration executive member Malcolm Kennedy and Regeneration chief Nick Kavanagh, outline the reasons for the sell-off in a report to the cabinet.

They say the "incidental open space" would provide high quality housing (in support of the city’s emerging Housing Strategy) and generate a significant capital receipt to assist delivery of the Council’s investment priorities.

Their report adds: “The financial constraints which the council will continue to have to operate under will require the authority to maximise the effectiveness of its asset base in order to generate savings and realise capital receipts to support its  investment programme across the city.”

Losing the plot

In 1999, environmental campaigners seized control of a tiny strip of land, adjacent to Princes Park and less than a mile away from Meadowlands.

'Liverpool can ill afford to lose any more
parkland and trees' - Fritz Spieg
l, 1999

They claimed that dozens of species of birds, animals, plants and trees were endangered by a planned development of flats on Park Nook, Ullet Road; land which had been owned by builder Peter Webb's family since the 1960s, but which had been left overgrown for decades.

Park Nook TodayPark Nook Today

Within days of contractors' hoardings going up, the protesters had torn them down to use as barricades at the plot on the edge of Princes Park.

Overnight, the protest became a cause célèbre with activists living in the trees and enlisting high profile supporters to the fight. One resident, the late writer and broadcaster Fritz Spiegl, said: "Liverpool can ill afford to lose any more parkland and trees".

In a rare legal move, campaigners applied for the site to be declared a "town green" under the Commons Registration Act - "land on which for not less than 20 years a significant number of local inhabitants have indulged in lawful sports or pastimes". Landowners were barred from developing TVGs even if planning permission had been granted.

However, new TGV legislation was announced last autumn as part of the Government's Growth Bill to "end abuse" and "boost aspiration".

The Park Nook row went to a public inquiry in 2001. Backed by city planners, it ruled in favour of Mr Webb, who, exhausted by the two-year wrangle, sold the land on to another developer.

AS

Like what you see? Enter your email to sign up for our newsletters which are chock-a-block with more great reviews, news, deals and savings.

76 comments so far, continue the conversation, write a comment.

Smithdown RoadMarch 19th 2013.

We have plenty of green spaces to develop on in Liverpool. How about the whole of Smithdown Road or the whole of Kensington which are now grassy fields going for miles thanks to the ludicrous policy of flattening street after street of perfectly good houses>

What a coincidenceMarch 19th 2013.

It's tempting to suggest that this plan, which has failed twice before, has everything to do with the TGV law being changed, but Uncle Joe would dismiss the very notion as "conspiracy theory" like everything else which goes against the will of the mayor.

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

This north-centric council won't be happy until the leafy south end of the city is turned into a concrete jungle. The Meadowlands are part of a beautiful green lung benefitting the whole of the city. They should not be allowed to build on parkland while there are brown sites available for development. To describe this site as 'incidental open space' is an insult. They just want to avoid being accused of flogging off our parks. Do they think we are stupid. I'm a lifelong Labour supporter, but I'd say come back Mike Storey, come back Warrden Bradley, save us from this destruction of our city.

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

Plenty of trees with cats up them for Warren to rescue in Sefton Park

Ena SharplesMarch 19th 2013.

Shame there is nobody to hold this council to account. I too am a lifelong Labour supporter but I am not happy with their behaviour. Plenty of land in South Liverpool to landscape and build houses on.

3 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 19th 2013.

Yes but not with the view that would allow the upmarket development they want, with the increased Council Tax that would bring.

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

So to allow wealthy people a good view, we have to sacrifice our parkland. That's not fair John Bradley. Haven't developers got permission to build right up to the edge of Otterspool prom. Nowhere is safe from the grip of developers.

John BradleyMarch 19th 2013.

We are not sacrificing it if we get other open spaces in return and money for council funds. We are using it, it never seemed busy to me, why would anyone go there when they can wander around Sefton park?

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

1. If this piece of land is 50m from the park then it shouldn't be built upon it should be made part of the park.

2. If its currently just used for dog fowling then that is not an attribute of the land. The real issue is the council is not enforcing its policy of giving dog owners fines. This can't be used as an excuse to sell the land.

3 Why is the construction of a stage dependant on the sale of a piece of land.? Again this sounds like another way to bribe the public into agreeing to let someone build "in" the park

4. There is plenty of undeveloped land in Norris Green and Garston, We are not desperate for "new" land.

Greedy property developers and dodgy councillors are NOT to be trusted!!!

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 19th 2013.

Land in Norris Green is not worth as much so the council would not get as much money. The type of building that attracts top rate council tax would not sell in Norris Green, so the council would not get the income.
Part of the present problem for the city is not enough council tax income because of the generally low banding, the purpose is to get income for the council for services per square meter this land can generate more income than Garston land.

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

Mike Storey is talking utter crap, but I am afraid Joe Anderson seems to be swelling his pension again. It's just outraageous to build here when so much of Liverpool needs redeveloping. He is Liverpools answer to The Wire's Clay Davis!

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

Remember the Standards Board that Uncle Joe always used to go running to every time the Lib Dems made a cup of tea? It must be great when there is nobody to hold you to account. Like a cross between Colonel Gadaffi and Mr Blobby.

Paul WardMarch 19th 2013.

I can see one way to get some high-priced housing - convert the Town Hall. Not only would that destroy more of Liverpool's heritrage and amenities, Mayor Joe could move the decision-making to his own kitchen - there doesn't seem to be any discussion or debate in council chambers.

The price of everything and the value of nothing?

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

At least people protested up the trees in 1999. Now they will just moan about it on twitter

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

Anderson is Militant, he was a bag carrier for Hatton, he is only picking up were Militant left off when forced out of Livrpool. Anderson is just continuing Militants plan. Get rid of him and his cronies now.

AnonymousMarch 19th 2013.

Anderson is Militant, he was a bag carrier for Hatton, he is only picking up were Militant left off when forced out of Livrpool. Anderson is just continuing Militants plan. Get rid of him and his cronies now.

5 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 19th 2013.

That is bollocks. You clearly have no idea about militant.

scouse690March 19th 2013.

Sorry JB, you might think that you are the "be all and one all" for, so called, "knowing about Militant". But there were plenty of us, that had to live through the Hatton years, and beyond . He Bankrupted OUR CITY, brought shame to OUR CITY, he was only concerned with his "self image", and was an out and out disgrace...then, using the fact that Liverpool were staunch Labourites (no matter what idiots were in charge)...he promoted his idiotic ideals through the whole of the media!!

He was kicked out, for good reason, (from the Labour Party)...his militancy only ever benefitted himself, and not OUR CITY that needed to move on!!

scouse690March 19th 2013.

Let's get back to the topic of using Green belt (ie Sefton Park) for housing, when we have tons of brownbelt sites for developement!! (BTW...and stop knocking down perfectly good Victorian housing, too!!)...

Joe Anderson....Mr Mayor....why not get rid of your so called "special advisor, on circa 90k per annum", and, a chunk of your own salary....and listen to "us Scousers" out here!! We do have BRAINS...don't you know!!!!!

RobertMarch 20th 2013.

Joe and Mad Hatton go back along way, and talk shop on the city on a regular basis...
It's bad for the city not having another political force. It's even worse for there to be no questioning allowed within the local Labour Party.
Joe's little power cabinet is a throw back to militant days - and little may you wonder who advised him on how to set up a powergrab?

Labour Party policy is to develop brownfield sites first JOE.

John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

Joe isn't as concerned with his self image as Deggsy. If he was he wouldn't be that fat. I suspect in the original Sefton Park plan that space was destined to be for the big houses that go around the rest of the park.

miekoMarch 19th 2013.

I see Liverpool's answer to Boss Hogg is set to ruin what open spaces and culture this city has.

Mayor Chucklebutty. (In waiting)March 19th 2013.

I am not endorsing the comments of Lord Storeyteller but this proposal is infuriating, such spaces, whether offically part of Sefton Park or not should never be considered for housing development. They belong to us all and should be protected.

B*llocks to high band executive homes, concentrate on the houses people need in the places it's needed.

This meadow land may not be considered part of Sefton Park by the council but to the rest of us it is, and it is part of the approach via Queens Drive and part of what makes that stretch so magnificent, giving it a countryside feel.

I dont care if they could raise twice the amount (which they should be asking for anyway) You can have all the high band executive homes you want , with views of the river, courtesy of your pals in Peel Holdings when they transform the north docks. Fill the sodding docks with excutive high band homes, it's begging for it. But leave the green spaces alone.

Think again. Bleeding vandalism.

3 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 19th 2013.

It doesn't feel like the countryside at all, no one has ever fired a shot gun at me or shouted "ger off my land".

Mayor Chucklebutty. (In waiting)March 19th 2013.

Mr Bradley, as a former lieutenant of my Mayoral campaign, I am shocked that you would publicly contradict me. Any more of that and I will be asking for the return of my rosette. For your information, that area has very much the feel of the countryside. Why only the other day I saw a tatty old scarecrow right in the middle of it. Unless it was Lord Storey, of course.

John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

I sir am still your loyal chief of cyber Warfare but you seem to have left of the distribution list for policy matters it has been several moths since I last received a soiled napkin from you self with instruction and lust for the latest "Bar Wench"

Leon KayMarch 19th 2013.

Joe Stalin Anderson should really get back to Windsor street and contemplate his naval for a while.Piss poor pathetic peel holding planning or who ever the planners are for this one.Another great day for this city.Hang your head in shame Anderson and put those "executives"of yours were the sun don't shine.

scouse690March 19th 2013.

Mayor Chucklebutty...you are so right! Let Joe " ooh that was lovely Peel...right up my bum, again,again".... get away with this?? He is not a Boris, and I agree Leon, put him (JA) back where he belongs,with his so called "executives". It makes me SICK that he hides under the umbrella of being "mayor" in this city....as well as having a labour City Council, who will back him all of the way.

YOU, Joe Anderson, are ripping this City apart.

I am sorry to say, that I voted for you (for Mayor) in the light of your support for making Liverpool Cruise Terminal, a proper turnaround destination,(ok and paying back the EU support)....but why oh why did you then agree to Peel Holdings development (which includes a cruise terminal in the North Docks).....and WASTE ALL OF OUR MONEY!!

scouse690March 19th 2013.

John Bradley, your quote!!

"It doesn't feel like the countryside at all, no one has ever fired a shot gun at me or shouted "ger off my land".

Surely THAT is the reason why it is "OUR" COUNTRYSIDE, on our doorstep, and needs to be cherished and protected, for years to come....!!.FFS, It was during 2008 Capital of Culture that the Lib Dems decided to decimate the trees in Sefton Park, and the lakes (during nesting time), to take it back to the Victorian (tree) plan. In 2008, lake drained, idiot timing for capital of culture...and now ALL of the local money (ie...taxpayers money) is to be wasted, yet again???

You want a gun shot, JB and someone saying "gerroff my land", go elsewhere in Liverpool, BUT DO NOT TOUCH SEFTON PARK!!!!

David ArcherMarch 19th 2013.

John Bradley wrote:

"It doesn't feel like the countryside at all, no one has ever fired a shot gun at me or shouted 'ger off my land'."

Of course this can be arranged...

Judith PattersonMarch 19th 2013.

You complain you dont have enough parks, and you let this happen, all money hungrey so called big wigs, they say know one can satand up to mike kennedy saying he would intimidate people, i would like to see him try with me, he would loose.anonymous needs to learn how to spell, it liverpool.

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

Ace!

Craig EarleyMarch 19th 2013.

Mayor Anderson give your head a wobble and stop taking the people of Liverpool for fools!! We need more green space and not less. As an L17 resident I oppose this sell off for theshort sighted swindle it is! Lets get a petition going! Me thinks a few more Green Councillors for L17!

AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

Lose £10 million so some people can appreciate the drive to Sefton Park? And drive past is the only thing you can do - its waterlogged and impossible to do anything >except< let your dog crap on it. And why would you want to use it when one of the world's greatest parks is across the road? Pay to fix the road with the money and everyone in Liverpool will benefit....

2 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

Bogus argument after bogus argument

AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

What an idiotic comment. For a start there is no £10million that is presented in the usual terms of could raise "UP TO" I am surprised there is nothing about how the scheme could create UP TO 25,000 jobs like all the other spin and nonesense. As for being waterlogged, you are simply making that up. It is not. It is part of the aesthetic approach to the park and I have seen families picnicing on the meadows and children playing there. It is regularly used as part of the park. The only argument you can present is that people let their dogs crap on it, how pathetic. I suspect you are associated with the proposal but reluctant to admit it. I also don;t believe for one minute that the money would be used to improve the park or the roads and actually, if there was a spare £10 million I would have thought using it to protect services to vulnerable people may be a higher priority. But no. The only priority there appears to be is kowtow to developers and flog off the cities assets on either empty promises or help developers to make a fast buck at our expense. There is a principal here. Once you allow the sale of green spaces like this, you start looking for the next one. Short term economic idiocy that means the psace is lost forever. As mentioned by many others, get the development and the housebuilding done on the vast brownfield sites around Kensington Edge Lane and Smithdown, get Peel to build the luxury homes on the docks site but keep away from the parks and green spaces.

If anyone can find evidence of the alleged dog crap, I suggest you pop it in the post or leave it on the Town Hall steps as evidence for the philistines.

RobertMarch 20th 2013.

Why is it that pretty much everyone across the city thinks that the majority of Councillors are in it for themselves, treat the populatin like idiots by not divulging information so as to maintain their perceived perceptions of power.. Why do they feel the Council is bent, weak, cannot say no to any developer..... What if they received a large response from residents that took them aback?

The elected Mayor blockhead one-party machine is repressive, helping to keep people in poverty - such concentration of powers in few hands has not served the city well in the past.

Shame the Liberals nationally turned out to be so utterly hollow... Same can't be said of Mike Storey - well said that man - the city needs another train of thought, not living in fear for their 'political life', and being sent to Siberia!

How's about building these 4-5 bedroom houses on the derelict side of the Garden Festival site earmarked for 1100 apartments (that frankly nobody needs) and 70 family houses (that people desperately need) ? ? ? ? ? ?
The Garden Festival developer cannot raise the project for love nor money....no market for apartments!!

So people, how's about e-mailing your local ward Councillors (3 for each ward I think?) and telling them what you think of the proposals, citing alternative sites for 4-5 bedroom developments that you can think of, before they destroy yet more green space when ample brownfield sites are available?

Get your invariably Labour Councillors to start asking questions. They might realise just how inconsequential they are and how the City is being run by one man and his littel cabinet of noddies.

Jonathan WalkerMarch 20th 2013.

Who would have thought? Liverpool Council give undue preference to private interests when public space is involved? Well I never....

Natalie JinglesMarch 20th 2013.

No no no no!!!
What are they thinking? There are so many places in Liverpool already earmarked for development that doesn't seem to be happening. Smithdown, Granby, Kensington. Not "sort-after" areas, but who's got the money for a big fancy house anyway, with unemployment rates being as they are.
These houses would remain empty, like the ones on tunnel road.
Also the green space and soil is precious, we need to conserve it as a resource.
Why pick on something that adds value to the local area?Surely they understand that if they shrink the greenspace, property prices will go down with it?
It makes no sense and will break my heart.
We can't allow this to happen. I will bombard them with letters and in person when it comes to it.

(On a lighter note, the protesters on Ullet Road in 1999 spurred my interest in activism, as a child at the primary school next to the site I chatted to them a few times to find out why they were always sat in the trees. And got told off for it, of course.)

Steve FaragherMarch 20th 2013.

what about building on the green field site which was Edge Lane and chunks of Kenny

Peter McGurkMarch 20th 2013.

You can argue that 'high-band' executive homes are needed (although it may just be an excuse).

You can even argue that Sefton Park is ideal (but there are many other places - Woolton, Aigburth, Allerton, Everton... The Georgian Quarter).

You can certainly argue that it would save maintenance costs and generate receipts.

But you cannot argue that the short term gains make long term sense. The attraction of the park will erode to the point at which it no longer matters.

Joe jokes that we have 'more parks than Paris'. He bemoans the cost - who wouldn't?.

But this is (yet another) kind of (self-inflicted) managed decline.

3 Responses: Reply To This...
Pierre HeadMarch 25th 2013.

Paris is famous for being a city with very few parks - it only has one or two proper big parks I think. But then it is a city that looks after its population and the conditions in which the people live, ensuring that even in very expensive areas small independent shops and bakeries can survive and the main roads are pleasant boulevards. If Liverpool could be only a little bit more like Paris it would be a massive improvement. There’d be no derelict shops and crumbling neglected architecture for a start.

Reeves GoashMarch 25th 2013.

Our politicians, planners and "business leaders" ought to drop their silly obsession with all things American.

We want to be more like Paris and less like Detroit.

AnonymousMarch 26th 2013.

You are all deluded

AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

I travelled along Queens Drive today towards Sefton Park. How can anybody say the Meadowlands is not a significant part of Sefton Park. The park and the green space of this city isn't Joe's to sell. It belongs to us, the citizens. We elected him (well some of you did!), he is therefore our servant and I for one say to him. Don't Sell this Land, you do not have my permission to sell it. Thank you Mayor Joe in anticipation of a positive response. Our parklands and green spaces are not, and never will be sold.

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

Let me guess you didn't vote, now you want your say.

AnonymousMarch 20th 2013.

Oh Bog Off John Bradley.
There's a penny of the ale now.
Go and get drunk and sleep in the Park!

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

It amazing how brave Anon posters and hoe erudite their arguments.

Peter McGurkMarch 20th 2013.

Looking at the map, it seems the area was meant for just the kind of housing now suggested. It has become park by default.

And although there's many others like it (Chavasse Park - grassed over bomb site, Everton Park - buried communities), it has become established Green Space.

Nevertheless, there's a case for developing it after all.

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

The sale of the Villa was supposed to pay for the park, that was true of Princes Park and Newsham. It has been proposed that the same thing happen at Everton Park, whoever people also object to that.
What is the semi circular feature top mid is it perhaps a concert amphitheatre.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsham_Park

scouse690March 20th 2013.

JB, please stop knocking the views of anonymous people, and those that didn't vote for Joe A...(although I do agree that "if you don't vote, you lose your voice in the matter" and that goes for ALL elections!). We are talking about using our green spaces/parks, including Meadowlands, to build on???

I reiterate, for the umpteenth time, use brownbelt land, not only to build the new houses on, but also to incorporate (and therefore increase) green space within that housing community, for more people to enjoy.

It will have a dual effect, the housebuilders could promote better living space, the housebuyers will benefit from a more, less urbanised outlook and it would all be more affordable (from the purchasers point of view), than building in areas where the house prices are already inflated.

Of course, the builders would argue against this, as they would perceive that their profit margin would decrease, but it wouldn't! They could build more properties on brownbelt sites, buy the land so much cheaper, still create green spaces within that, and generate more house buyers by keeping the purchase price lower!!! And STILL make a healthy profit, AND employ a lot more people for a longer term.....

LAY OFF OUR GREEN SPACES

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

You seem to be forgetting that part of this is to generate income for the council. The Brown field sites are available now if companies where interested they could do it now, they aren't interested, you don't suggest any way of encouraging them. You can only sell things that people want to buy. If the income from this goes to landscape one of the large fields of Smithdown then we have a net gain, the Smithdown area becomes more attractive and so gets developed.

John BradleyMarch 20th 2013.

As for arguing with the Anons seems to be a 2 way street. I wish they'd use Noms de Plume so at least work out which anon is which.
Anyway even with my narkiness the level of debate here is still 10 times higher than in the council chamber.

Angela HarrisonMarch 21st 2013.

This is Nimbyism in reverse. The idea of building 'High Brow' housing wouldn't get on the agenda for the areas of Kensington, Edgehill, Smithdown, it just wouldn't happen.

The only reason it is, is simply because of Meadowlands' location.

What Liverpool needs, isn't High Cost housing, it's affordable housing for the many - maybe on all those brownfield sites which have been created from the mass destruction of recent years.

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 21st 2013.

I'm sure the council will sell you these Brown field sites and let you build on them. When can you start?

AnonymousMarch 21st 2013.

Well how about not pulling the Welsh streets down?

Rick JonesMarch 21st 2013.

sign the petition....

councillors.liverpool.gov.uk/titionDisplay.aspx…

We are anonymous John Bradley. Big deal.

your only argument (apart from general arguing on every post) over some paultry sum of council tax serve to show you're only here to make a name for yourself. John Bradley. Big deal.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 21st 2013.

A name for myself, I'm sure this is the place to do it. The reason is to move Liverpool forward, the money is just a way to do it. Your anonymous so it hides your numbers.

Bradley JohnMarch 25th 2013.

"Forward" into what? More bad decisions? Do you deliberately intend to make Liverpool a city of nostalgia?

Too much admiration of Liverpool is nowadays in the form of moping over old photographs of irreplaceable things that have been lost and will never be rebuilt or restored.

Views of the Three Graces unobstructed by the Black Coffins, the new tower blocks and the oversized Thunderbirds-Brutalist ferry terminal now only exist in old photographs.

If you and the get-rich-quick developers carry on there'll be fewer tourists visiting Liverpool because the best views of the place will be in books or on the Web.

AnonymousMarch 21st 2013.

Good idea. Perhaps you could take the petition to Louise Ellman's office to get her support. I'm sure she would love to discuss it with you.

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyMarch 21st 2013.

Oh Brave.

AnonymousMarch 22nd 2013.

March in the morning at 8.30. For those of you can't make it, plenty more activity planned

To post this comment, you need to login.Please complete your login information.
OR CREATE AN ACCOUNT HERE..
Or you can login using Facebook.

Latest Rants

Brian Giblin

Any Phottees of the Balfour Institute ?? What was its main use Posh School I saw Boxing Club nights…

 Read more
Anonymous

I agree with the Councillor. His examples really don't go far enough, because of the complexities…

 Read more
Anonymous

Perhaps a "dolmus" system could be used in the city centre, they work quite well for tourists and…

 Read more
Fairminded

Not price related but sad to see that they are doing away with the Citylink bus. This runs around…

 Read more

Explore The Site

© Mark Garner t/a Confidential Direct 2017

Privacy | Careers | Website by: Planet Code