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.

REVEALED: Builder's vision for Sefton Park Meadowlands

27 trees axed in detailed plans for 'luxury' housing estate

Written by . Published on January 19th 2015.


REVEALED: Builder's vision for Sefton Park Meadowlands
 

A QUARTER of the trees around Sefton Park’s Meadowlands will be chopped down to make way for Redrow’s proposed development of 34 executive homes.

Details of the scheme have been revealed for the first time in the full planning application submitted by the developer which is owned by Garston-born multi-millionaire Steve Morgan.

The line of trees fronting Mossley Hill Drive and Queens Drive will stay, with Redrow saying special protection measures will be taken during the building programme.

But of the 110 trees on the Meadowlands – mainly London Plane, Horse Chestnut, Lime and Ash – 27 will go, though semi-mature trees will be planted as a replacement.

Now you see itNow you see it

 

Now you don'tNow you don't

Most of the doomed trees currently line Park Avenue, though tree experts deem only six of the trees to have “high value”.

The new detached homes, with four or five bedrooms and multiple bathrooms, have been designed by Cheshire-based Calderpeel Partnership to reflect the Victorian Villas that line Sefton Park.

What has not been disclosed is how much Redrow will be paying for the site.

When Major Anderson first declared that the Meadowlands – or “incidental space” in Park Avenue, Mossley Hill, as the council persists in describing it – the unconfirmed price tag was up to £10m. That was based on the likelihood of more than 50 homes being built. 

But the mayor ordered a smaller number of homes, and it is not yet known if that will have an impact of the size of the cheque signed by Redrow.

Redrow starts its main report by acknowledging that the land is allocated as “protected green space” under the council’s own planning blueprint, its urban design plan, or LUDP.

Screen Shot 2015-01-19 At 11.23.11How the Meadowlands will look

That plan, adds Redrow, prevents permission being granted for developments on green space unless the proposed development can be accommodated without causing material harm to the function of the land.

Redrow contends the fact that across the road lies the massive Sefton Park, therefore meeting the criteria to allow the development.

“The scheme does not conflict with the aims of the policy because Sefton Park borders the site,” it states.

For almost a year Redrow has been working on the plans along with the city council and English Heritage, the Government’s own cultural watchdog.

Their publication will open the door to public comments, objections and support, with the scheme heading for a meeting, in the next month or so, of the city council planning committee when a decision will be made.  

As Redrow is seeking full planning permission, if the go-ahead is given they will be able to start work quickly, unless campaigners can find ways of halting or delaying the scheme.

Finishing job envisaged by Victorian planner Hornblower

Screen Shot 2015-01-19 At 11.32.44Hornblower's plan shows just nine plots for villas on land which will see 34 homes built

The application documents take a journey back in time to the original plan devised in the days of Queen Victoria which envisaged a park encircled by grand villas.

Redrow’s scheme will “complete Lewis Hornblower’s original idea of a strong boundary around Sefton Park”, it says.

Hornblower’s original design map is reproduced, though even on his plan no more than nine villas would have been built on the meadow, a fraction of the number Redrow wants to build.

Redrow describes the site as “currently a vacant meadow and has been since its allocation for development in the 1880s”.

It seems to be suggesting that almost 140 years later they are coming along to finish the job envisaged by Hornblower.

The houses facing the park will have direct driveway accesses onto it, in the same way the rest of the park villas access the perimeter road.

Redrow, working with the Calderpool Partnership, has devised a bespoke development of homes that are, they say, modern versions of the existing villas. It adds that in 150 years times have changed, reflected by the fact most of the original large homes around the park have been divided into apartments.

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.

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

Clare ShawJanuary 19th 2015.

"For almost a year Redrow has been working on the plans along with the City Council and English Heritage"... How time flies, it seems such a short time since Redrow were confirmed as the Council's preferred developer......Methinks stitchup

Paul WardJanuary 19th 2015.

tree experts deem only six of the trees to have “high value” ... One of the more chilling uses of the word "value". As to reflecting the Victorian villas. Morgan really is taking the ****.

1 Response: Reply To This...
Sefton ParkerJanuary 19th 2015.

Are they supposed to be "luxury" homes? I was expecting something rather better than these cheek-by-jowl sheds!

Green TambourineJanuary 19th 2015.

They should take AN AXE to the Mayor's HEAD!!! It's disgusting to CHOP DOWN TREES!!!!! Trees are lovely. They never do any HARM!!! And where will the BIRDS NEST??? And the SQUIRRELS LIVE?????

5 Responses: Reply To This...
Billy SquirrelJanuary 21st 2015.

Probably in the 235 acre park across the road?

ArousedJanuary 21st 2015.

The Grey Squirrel is actually an immigrant introduced to the UK from the United States in the late 19th Century.....I suggest that if they find themselves homeless then they move back home.....coming over here, stealing our trees and lady squirrels.....discuss. I assume that you are a Red Squirrel Billy?

John BradleyJanuary 21st 2015.

Should have added a Squirrel police to #MyUkipManifesto mind you the Red in Formby are actually Russian so perhaps it is comrade Billy.

AnonymousJanuary 29th 2015.

www.bbc.co.uk/…/uk-england-hampshire-31034325… Trees are a HAZARD and should be felled without MERCY!!!!

Green TambourineJanuary 29th 2015.

PEOPLE!!! are a hazard to TREES!!!!!!!!!

AnonymousJanuary 19th 2015.

The Council's tree officer now has the opportunity of redeeming himself. Plenty to go at here. Seven on the Chancery, small potatoes. Two at St James Woolton, even smaller potatoes. Twenty seven, it doesn't stop there, Walton Hall Park, Woolton Woods....Delamere....The Amazon.... Is nowhere safe

Eric RedJanuary 19th 2015.

Seems almost unbelievable that Redrow, recognise that the area is classed as "green space" in their application to develop it! yet our mayor calls it "incidental open space" or worse a "dog toilet". With a narrow minded and entrenched view on the value of Green space, it's about time he is booted out of office!

sickenedJanuary 19th 2015.

He'd care more about it if Everton played there.

The ManJanuary 20th 2015.

This is a fine example of why creating City Mayors is a bad, bad idea. Their power can be used to crush any local opposition, no matter how unpopular the proposition is. And building on Sefton Meadows IS unpopular. In fact it's more than that, it's an outrageous betrayal of the people and of the City Fathers of Liverpool. But no matter, Napoleon Anderson, the fat controller will have his way - and after that, who knows which green spaces will be flogged off for profit.... And let's be absolutely clear about this, it's not about social responsibility or need, it's about greed, it's about making an obscene amout of money out of a public asset. Anderson, you are an absolute disgrace, you should hang your head in shame.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
sickenedJanuary 20th 2015.

It's not even that good. Once these assets have been sold they will have gone forever. They make little money for the Council or the common good. The maximum amount in the article is £10m that the Council might have received from Redrow. The council spends more than that in a few days just running the city, so it's not as if it is some marvellous windfall that will improve the lives of Liverpool Council Tax payers. This is the same sort short-term sell-off of public assets cheaply to the private sector as Thatcher enforced in the 1980s. What profits that result will not be seen by the citizens of Liverpool.

Lark LaneJanuary 20th 2015.

Now now then. The mayor says it will pay for a big permanent stage in Sefton Park. Surely that's what is wanted by everyone?

AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

There was a programme recently on TV, about the gap between the richest one percent of population and the rest of us plebs. They cited "Trickle down economics", instigated during the blessed Margaret Hida's term in office. This is the very same policy being subscribed to by a Labour dominated council...It amounts to the same "crumbs from a rich man's table".

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

Where the "L" did that go

John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

This in example of why a city mayor and a regional mayor is essential, as it stop minority groups holding the rest of the city hostage.

1 Response: Reply To This...
'The People's Friend'January 21st 2015.

One Joe Anderson and one developer - that sounds like a minority group to me.

Katie54January 20th 2015.

No, it's an example of what happens when you have a directly elected mayor who refuses all scrutiny and who insults anyone who asks questions, a bombastic fool who decides on his whims instead of proper evidence, and is not actually accountable to anybody. Whose idea of promoting growth is based on selling off anything he personally doesn't use and/or see the value of, like the idiotic notion of selling parks and green space so his property developer mates can make money, while he chooses to cut essential services instead of reining in (and cutting the salaries) of overpaid people like McElhinney.

9 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

you're a formidable opponent who doesn't take prisoners. Nor should you, because you're absolutely right. I'd say you won that one by a country mile Kate.

John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

So yo don't count scrapping Liverpool Direct as reining in. He may be a bombastic fool but Liverpool has been held hostage to long by NIMBYs. It a choice between doing something and getting it wrong sometimes and death by a slow rotting paralysis, I'll chose the former every time, you obviously content with the latter.

AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

Oh dear, you are crediting Joe Anderson with the kudos for scrapping LDL. Have you forgotten the sterling efforts of Katie54, a seasoned campaigner, even acknowledged by Chucklebutty. I can however, concur with you having a slow rotten paralysis

Katie54January 20th 2015.

No, not really. More like burying the evidence - or attempting to. Here's why: Go and have a look at the LDL accounts for 2013/14, published last week (£1 from webcheck on the Companies House website, or free from companycheck.co.uk) - and note especially the £7 MILLION increase in council disbursements on behalf of LDL (in "Related Party Transactions", near the end). This figure is almost all salaries. Including bonuses, obviously. Last year this increased from £40 million to £47 million. Bonuses can't be paid unless one of the LCC directors signs off on them. That's either Ged Fitzgerald or Joe Anderson (according to the official documents). So never mind that McElhinney departed Lancashire in a hurry with the police on his heels, let's pay him a nice fat bonus and then leave him in place until October 2015 "winding up" LDL. Which means transferring all the lucrative external business to BT.

John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

So you cannot tell whether it was Ged Fitzgerald of Joe who did the hiding? It was the Lib Dems who set up LDL and presumably they way it has to be disposed of is what put in the agreement by them.

Katie54January 20th 2015.

No, John. That is confidential. The documents specify an LCC director, which means one or the other. Most probably Fitzgerald, but that's a guess, not a demonstrable fact. As for the non sequitur about the Lib Dems, what they set up, and what was in the agreement, was fine, best practice, all in line with HM Treasury guidelines. The point that I and a number of other people have been making for years is that McElhinney has just run roughshod over the whole lot, and continues to do so. At first, the only LCC person who had anything whatsoever to do with LDL was Henshaw - there were no politicians on the board. Henshaw clearly allowed McE to do what he wanted. The LibDems expected the CEO of the Council to represent the council's interest. Which isn't actually unreasonable. To be fair, after lots of muttering about overcharging, the LibDems tried to do something about it

Katie54January 20th 2015.

(cont) from 2006. But McE systematically stymied all attempts at reform, and continued to do so right up to the election in 2010. We all know what happened after that - McE's period as CEO allowed him to get rid of just about any senior officer who knew anything about LDL or who had been involved in trying to rein it in. Since then, things with LDL have been worse than they ever were before, with the active connivance of a number of people.

Katie54January 20th 2015.

And if you bothered to actually read the official documents on LDL (all in the public domain), or failing that the comments made by me and other campaigners, quoting chunks of said documents I wouldn't have had to write all this and you wouldn't have made such a fool of yourself.

John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

ls executive arm.And how have a made a fool of myself by not agreeing with you in the case of Joe? I have never supported LDL and I know a fair amount through direct experience of the corruption in the council. Enough that I record all phone calls with them and have had to use them to disprove allegations.

Eric RedJanuary 20th 2015.

Liverpool is not being held hostage by "Nimby's"take your blinkers off and see what is really happening! Anderson is behaving like a obstinate bully toward the people he is supposed to represent. Not listening to local opinion ie"Nimby's" who are the only people trying to save our parks for no financial gain!The decisions he has made trying to save money for the City will ultimately cost us more. Cunard buildings, Millennium house, Finch farm and the Gold tap fiasco, just to mention a few faux pas. This man is no financial genius like warren buffet, so he needs to get back to the classroom and gain his cap and gown before it is too late!

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

Liverpool has been held hostage for years by small groups who would sabotage everything to keep their neighbourhood as it was. It is how we got where we are to day. The nay sayers never produce an alternative, they just say not in my back yard. The come up with some half arsed idea about doing something somewhere else which doesn't meet the objectives of the first scheme. He might not be a genius but a large part of the opposition is made up of self interested imbeciles who's interest is themselves. Any plan which doesn't benefit them directly and impinges on their existence is a crime against humanity.

AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

..."designed to reflect the Victorian Villas that line Sefton Park." Yeah, sure they will. What a stitch up.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
Peter PanJanuary 20th 2015.

"It (Redrow) adds that in 150 years times have changed, reflected by the fact most of the original large homes around the park have been divided into apartments." _________________ Of course, because that is more profitable for the landlords. It also shows how versatile the original 150 year-old villas are that they can be converted into flats. I doubt the flimsy new cardboard wonders will be as versatile or last anything like as long. They certainly don't look as good but they will be very profitable for Redrow.

AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

We hate landlords we love the past we hate change ya da ya da ya da Ad nauseam Etc

AnonymousJanuary 20th 2015.

"self interested imbeciles whose interest is themselves". . . Well it would be , wouldn't it ?. They wouldn't be self interested, if they were interested in someone else. Anyhow regardless, Katie still won by a distance.

Eric RedJanuary 20th 2015.

I suppose then that that would reflect on the Labour imbeciles who opposed the selling off of Sefton Meadows when they were in opposition! How times change when the Labour group are in power and also their values? so in exactly who's interest are they representing, and why are they know objecting to the so called sabotage and hostage taking in 2014 but supported the same set of ideals when they wanted to protect the Green spaces! Are you really so naive as to believe this is so clear cut, or do you want to moan about crimes against humanity. sabotage and hostage taking ......Wake up and smell the coffee!

9 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

It not naivety at all but 50 years of watching in action strangled the city. The waking up that needs to be done is by those who have only ever objected to plans and never proposed viable alternatives and who have always put getting themselves elected above leadership and who think that the masses of this city will be saved by another bunch of over priced artisan shops.

Eric RedJanuary 20th 2015.

Any true Democracy needs a voice! The people who object against the short term financial gain that flogging off the Green spaces will bring, Then I salute them!We do not live in Joe Stalin's era ? Or would you rather we did and roll over every time that our "mayor Anderson" comes up with a brainstorming idea, then we all follow him like sheep!.... I don't know where you artisan shops come from? but million pound houses will not save this city either, unless you are going to bring the millionaires in yourself. The people who buy these proposed houses will already live in the City and it will just become a merry go round of house snakes and ladders! As for viable alternatives, when you have a majority of almost 70 Councillors on board do you think that Joe really needs one or listens to them? Welcome to the real world!

John BradleyJanuary 20th 2015.

The sheep are the people who mindlessly object to everything, when anyone suggests change of any form The real world is where a small minority of people decide to stop things because it effects them directly, where they all deny being NIMBYs but all live in close proximity.

Review FieldJanuary 21st 2015.

Surely sheep go along with whatever is shoved in front of them without resistance? We all know that you are a big fan of urban blight, but surely even you can see that this is a popular recreational and residential area as it is (I couldn't afford to live there) and unlike many other areas of Liverpool it needs no "regeneration".

John BradleyJanuary 21st 2015.

These sheep follow anyone who claims to be standing against vested interest for them. Sheep follow anything which Leeds in this case they just follow was different view. The biggest sheep on the plant are the Conspiracy theorists who follow any put forward by anon internet people.

AnonymousJanuary 21st 2015.

When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea.

AnonymousJanuary 21st 2015.

Thank you Monsieur Cantona

Green TambourineJanuary 21st 2015.

When squirrels look for nuts, they don't want JOE'S NUTS. No way will that make them HAPPY SQUIRRELS!!!

Billy SquirrelJanuary 22nd 2015.

Are you a squirrel as well Green Tambourine? How do you know what nuts we want? I'll happy take Joe's nuts as long as he's offering acorns or hazel nuts, acorns are my favourite though.

David OwensJanuary 20th 2015.

When is the cat going to be let out of the bag about the 'true' cost of moving Greaty market, to Dryden Street. The now about turn of Sainsbury in further Supermarket new builds, or any of their previously planned developments. Which will leave Project Jennifer up the creek without a paddle. Tesco have now abandoned the Kirkby Project so there is no such thing as a done deal with the Supermarket big boys, they will walk if it suits them. Remember the picture of Mayor Joe, along with cabinet member Malcolm Kennedy with shovels making out it was all systems go. This was actually the day after Sainsbury announced their revised development plans!

SaladDazeJanuary 20th 2015.

Have the Grants bought off plan?

TourmanJanuary 20th 2015.

Join the "Joe must Go" campaign, he has proved time and time again that he is an arrogant bully. The post of Mayor needs to be scrapped as the only person to benefit from it is Anderson and his pension fund.

Eric RedJanuary 20th 2015.

what goes on in John Bradley's head god only knows! he posts rants , but never responds to the real answers to his questions? Or he is one of two things=Either he is the alter ego of "Joe" or smoking them funny cigarettes or on the white lightening!

4 Responses: Reply To This...
Oche from MusquoqueJanuary 20th 2015.

"White Lightning" is still the biggest thrill of all.

Merle Okie HaggardJanuary 20th 2015.

We don't smoke marijuana in Muskogee,We don't take no trips on LSD.

John BradleyJanuary 21st 2015.

Oh how typical of Eric and his ilk, casting random aspersions making crude allegations and then hypothetical criticising Joe for the same.

AnonymousJanuary 21st 2015.

What's this! I didn't know you had an ilk. Is it better trained than that Yak you used to have?

David ScottJanuary 21st 2015.

Corrupt, destructive, overfed, overpaid pigs. And John Bradley is obviously a true believer or on the payroll.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyJanuary 21st 2015.

and quiet obviously you put your self interest over those of the people of Liverpool.

Peter PanJanuary 21st 2015.

Self-interest is what the developers have, they stand to make a lot of money out of this.

Green TambourineJanuary 21st 2015.

JOE MUST GO because he doesn't care about WILDLIFE!!!

4 Responses: Reply To This...
Billy SquirrelJanuary 21st 2015.

Yeah he does.... He asked me and I said I fancied a move.... New scenery and all...

AnonymousJanuary 21st 2015.

Don't forget your nuts Billy boy.

AnonymousJanuary 21st 2015.

I think I forgot the apostrophe

Green TambourineJanuary 21st 2015.

You're ALL NUTS!!!

AnonymousFebruary 19th 2015.

This is not in the interests of the city. We don't need executive housing because we don't have surplus executives to fill them. Build on brownfield sites if you have to. Get rid of Anderson 2016 2016. Get rid of his dim witted self interested councillors. Stop the spread of Redrow housing.

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

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
Anonymous

Thank you Woo

 Read more

Explore The Site

© Mark Garner t/a Confidential Direct 2017

Privacy | Careers | Website by: Planet Code