YO! Liverpool
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 75

Thread: Shanghai-style plan

  1. #31
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by az_gila View Post
    I'm all for preserving heritage, but what use is too many docks and no boats/ships to use them?
    Click on my sig
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  2. #32
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Peel want it filled in - another water space will then be gone. The city fathers are fools for not drawing the line on dock filling. IF they ddi then no application would come in with docks filling as a part of it.
    I guess in an ideal world, you could do that. In the real world you have to balance posterity with 'progress'.

    There seems to be a basic contradiction in what you say. You want to preserve the remnants of the past and presumably the spirit that built them. Back in the day, that same spirit would have had no hesitation whatsoever in filling in every dock if it made more money.

    Peel may have wanted to fill the East Waterloo Dock (did they own it then???) but the fact is, it isn't filled and no docks will be filled for Liverpool Waters (or Wirral Waters) either. So something is working in your favour.

    Just reading the red text on your signature, no we wouldn't visit Venice if the canals were filled because that's all there is. Venice's canals are the lifeblood of the city. They are the only way to get around. It's different, unusual and attractive.

    What else does Venice do but be seen? Do you mean all Liverpool does or did or has to offer is derelict docks? Do people really come to see derelict docks or even working docks? I think not.

    For the greater part of Liverpool Docks' lives they've lived behind high walls cutting the city off from the river. I don't think that's what's made Liverpool unique. The comings and goings of a great working port are what has given us a unique character - not empty docks.

    Yes, water is attractive to live by and even play in or on but if you can't get life out of the docks, they may as well be filled. As it happens it seems that Peel and the city agree. Why else would Peel apply to create marinas and the like and the city support them?

    If you're not flogging a dead horse perhaps you're fighting a battle already won?

  3. #33
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grekko View Post
    Want a few docks for Havasu City?
    Nah... little boats so I think they dig their own....


    http://maps.google.com/maps?q=havasu...vasu+city&z=17

  4. #34
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    There seems to be a basic contradiction in what you say. You want to preserve the remnants of the past and presumably the spirit that built them. Back in the day, that same spirit would have had no hesitation whatsoever in filling in every dock if it made more money.
    We live here now with what they left us. We do not have to think like them. Most of the history has gone which was the buildings around the water spaces. We can make a future Amsterdam out of them. You can't do that without water.

    Peel may have wanted to fill the East Waterloo Dock (did they own it then???) but the fact is, it isn't filled and no docks will be filled for Liverpool Waters (or Wirral Waters) either. So something is working in your favour.
    I think British Waterways may own West Waterloo - not sure. The master plan is filling in West Waterloo - Peel claim to build a cruise liner terminal off the dock so it needs filling. So this is not working to "our" favour.

    Just reading the red text on your signature, no we wouldn't visit Venice if the canals were filled because that's all there is. Venice's canals are the lifeblood of the city. They are the only way to get around. It's different, unusual and attractive.
    The docks were lifeblood of Liverpool --and still are. Amsterdam and Venice were commercial cities - that is why the canal;s were built. They converted the redundant commercial canals and buildings to residential and leisure use. Which is exactly what Liverpool should be doing.

    Do people really come to see derelict docks or even working docks? I think not.
    They do now that many of them are expanding onto them and opening the river up to the city beyond.

    Click on the link in my sig and read the pages.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  5. #35
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    We live here now with what they left us. We do not have to think like them. Most of the history has gone which was the buildings around the water spaces. We can make a future Amsterdam out of them....


    I think a new cruise liner terminal (in part of the West Waterloo Dock) is a very significant step forward and very much in the city’s favour (and in favour of your position). I would thank Peel for it. I’ve no need to react to Peel’s thinking, I prefer to think for myself, thank you.

    I don’t think you can be referring to ‘Old Amsterdam’ (with the canals). Liverpool docks have neither ever had nor ever will have, that character. The canals are Lilliputian in comparison. Different entirely.

    ***

    Perhaps you mean the regeneration of the Eastern Harbour District (ie., the docks) in Amsterdam. As it happens someone gave me a large coffee table book on the ‘New Amsterdam’ a while back.

    From what I can see, very little use is made of the water. It’s a dull place indeed and may just as well have been entirely dry. It hasn’t enticed me to go there and have a look.

    ***

    'Most of the buildings have gone' but 'we can make a New Amsterdam out of them'??? You can see how this is contradictory.

    In any event, you are entirely mistaken that anything in the central and north docks other than Seaforth Docks are currently any kind of lifeblood for the city. They are a post-industrial wasteland. Liverpool is already converting what remains of the buildings into residential and leisure use.

    The rest are long gone, such as they were. And as they were (tin sheds), they would have restricted the kind of bold development that put them there in the first place. Perhaps unfortunate but true - but it is flogging a dead horse to try to bring them back.

    It seems to me that we've kept the best and most re-usable and leveled the rest to make way for new and bold development. Result.

    ***

    The Leeds and Liverpool canal (being the only canal) is a different story again. The Stanley Dock end is being ‘regenerated’ and the rest of the canal in the city has been re-opened/made safe and it is hoped to see sequential development along it as an important water-resource in the city.

    The city are also investigating the further exploitation of the waterfront to bring the city to the river. I’m sure we’d all like to see it as the longest and most successful waterfront in the UK.

    ***

    Peel have gone to great lengths to appease the Luddites at UNESCO. The proposed skyline respects both the Liver Building and Stanley Dock complexes, yet is still bold and imaginative.

    What more could you want? - if it's not a battle won, it's definitely getting there.

    .

  6. #36
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    What's with this new water treatment facility going ahead including the partial in-fill of a dock which UNESCO and EH have agreed to in the WHS buffer zone. Is that two faced or what?
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    What's with this new water treatment facility going ahead including the partial in-fill of a dock which UNESCO and EH have agreed to in the WHS buffer zone. Is that two faced or what?
    100% two-faced!!!

    If they were told they could not fill in docks to do it they would have found another location. They pleaded and whined that it was the only location (which is tripe) and got their way. If they are aware they could not do this at all they would never submit such plans. Naive councillors then say yes as it "creates jobs". It would have created jobs in another location and the Wellington dock used for more longer lasting more heritage developments that will be here in hundreds of years to come and would enhance the quality of life of the people of the city.

    Wayne Col' was right.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  8. #38
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    I think a new cruise liner terminal (in part of the West Waterloo Dock) is a very significant step forward and very much in the city’s favour (and in favour of your position). I would thank Peel for it. I’ve no need to react to Peel’s thinking, I prefer to think for myself, thank you.
    Gain some facts before thinking The amount of water spaces infilled is the equivalent to a whole port in come cities.

    I don’t think you can be referring to ‘Old Amsterdam’ (with the canals). Liverpool docks have neither ever had nor ever will have, that character. The canals are Lilliputian in comparison. Different entirely.
    Liverpool's unique interconnected docks system (largest in the world) can crate a whole waterscaped city in themselves. The waters are an ideal transport route as well. I'm sure people in Amsterdam say what you said when the commercial side subsided.

    Most of the buildings have gone but we can make a New Amsterdam out of them??? You can see how this is contradictory.
    It is not contradictory.

    The port is still; very important top the city.

    but it is flogging a dead horse to try to bring them back.
    Who want to put back old warehouses? A Liverpool Waters, but done properly with proper rapid-transit transport connections to ensure success, which has passed them by.

    Peel have gone to great lengths to appease the Luddites at UNESCO.
    If keeping our heritage is being Luddite then......

    Peel care only of Peel and the profits they make from increased land values. Even derelict it gains in value.

    What more do I want, well what we all need really, not a want, is stop the water space filling to line the pockets of rich organizations. Enough is enough. In fact much of it can be re-excavate, like Toxteth and Harrigton Docks when the industrial estate is moved to a proper location.

    The scope fro Birkenhead Dock, which run inland is phenomenal -right between two towns which can make a proper centre. Wallasey doesn't have a centre being realistically a suburb of Liverpool.

    BTW, Wallasey needs a rail tunnel connecting to Liverpool - Birkenhead has one. Best is North End Liverpool to Wallasey. Merseyrail then can serve large parts of Wallasey currently unserved, and the north end of Liverpool bringing both banks together. She should be easy to get from Anfield to Wallasey and beyond then.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  9. #39
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Gain some facts before thinking
    I've just read Kev's further instructions for this forum. I'm new here but this post doesn't strike me as particularly friendly or factual or that useful. I'm not particularly thin-skinned. What I do doesn't call for being thin-skinned.

    However I do have a lot of facts at hand as it happens, having spent a number of years studying the subject, the area and the city both professionally and privately. I'm ready to debate the issues calmly and hopefully as much for my benefit and information as yours and everyone else here.

    So what's it to be? Rational discussion or yet more internet macho and bs. Up to you (or perhaps not)

    ---------- Post added at 05:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:37 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Liverpool's unique interconnected docks system (largest in the world) can crate a whole waterscaped city in themselves.
    The amount of water infilled is pretty small considering there are seven and half miles of docks on the Liverpool side alone and a drop in a bucket compared to anything but (pick a small port).

    You’re quite right that a lot more could have been achieved with some but it wasn’t. Times change. Sometimes for the better.

    You appear to make much of the comparison with Amsterdam but the two cities are worlds apart in almost every respect

    Whilst by no means unique Liverpool or its Docks could be another Venetian or Dutch paradise but you don’t seem to say anywhere why they should be or how they could be. Like it or not, money matters.

    I’m sure you will say that profit or economics are unimportant compared with the ‘heritage’ of the place but unless you can make the economic case persuasively to those that make those decisions (or you’re ready with your own money), you really are going to have to live with it, much as the Luddites eventually had to live with the Spinning Jenny (or the like)

    And yes, if all of Peel Waters went ahead the best way to meet demand is a new rail tunnel under the Mersey. It would be a nice problem to have.

  10. #40
    Newbie The Abwehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    You may be new here Peter,but it's good to see you are now providing your informed opinion on here as well as a certain football forum.
    Happy posting

  11. #41
    pfft Spike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,254
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts

    Default

    Why do we want an Amsterdam? Why not a Liverpool.


    ADVERTISING


    BE NICE......................OR ELSE

  12. #42
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Waterways, I agree that UNESCO and EH are 100% two faced but you sort of miss the point. They will allow this partial dock infill for the waste treatment plant but have tried to run Peel out of town over a 5.5b investment plan
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  13. #43
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spike View Post
    Why do we want an Amsterdam? Why not a Liverpool.
    Exactly! Something unique. However these money grabbing sharks keep filling in water spaces, so we will end up with an anytown full of retail sheds.

    ---------- Post added at 10:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    However I do have a lot of facts at hand as it happens, having spent a number of years studying the subject,
    Do you work for Peel? Something tells me you do. No one with any knowledge of Liverpool, its heritage, the city and dock waterways system would conclude we need to fill-in any more water spaces. The amount already filled has got beyond a joke. Many wanted the Albert Dock dynamited into the docks. Look what we have! They managed to demolish the Brindley warehouses and a whole dock district called Nova Scotia. The line has to be drawn.

    The amount of water infilled is pretty small considering there are seven and half miles of docks on the Liverpool side alone and a drop in a bucket compared to anything but (pick a small port).
    You must work for Peel or British Waterways or made/make money from them to make such an ill-informed comment.

    Belwo; the south end docks that have been infilled. Manchester Dock and Chester basin on not titled, they are at the top near the Pier Head. That OVER HALF of the south end water spaces obliterated.


    Central docks. Little of those are left and they want to fill in west waterloo as well - bottom left hand dock


    The docks are still there complete with quays under the earth. Clarence dock is still there look, the oulines is still there of the quays:


    • Sandon Dock - filled in
    • Wellington Docks - will be filled in
    • Bidston Dock - filled in. This was a part of Wallasey Pool
    • Bromborough Dock - the largest privately owned dock in the world which was Bromborough Pool; filled in
    • Princes dock - filled to canal boat depths
    • Princes Half-Tide dock - filled to canal boat depths


    Look at a map. Many branch docks north of Wellington Dock have been filled in, from Canada, Huskisson, Hornby, Alexandra, Langton, etc. Even the dock at Otterspool was filled in.

    Times change. Sometimes for the better.
    Name me something for the better in docks filling? Do not write Kings. What a disaster.

    You appear to make much of the comparison with Amsterdam but the two cities are worlds apart in almost every respect
    The point with Amsterdam is that they successfully converted commercial waterway to leisure/residential. Look at what Hamburg is doing - I did mention Hamburg and you read the web sites as well:





    Whilst by no means unique Liverpool or its Docks could be another Venetian or Dutch paradise but you don’t seem to say anywhere why they should be or how they could be. Like it or not, money matters.
    Read the web site in my sig. It says a lot. Liverpool IS unique. The largest interconnected dock system in the world. Well it was until sharks got their hands on it.

    I’m sure you will say that profit or economics are unimportant compared with the ‘heritage’ of the place but unless you can make the economic case persuasively to those that make those decisions (or you’re ready with your own money), you really are going to have to live with it, much as the Luddites eventually had to live with the Spinning Jenny (or the like)
    Read the web site on the sig. I am clearly not advocating recreating the past. A waterscaped city has to keep what it has in heritage, but the rest can be modern builds suitable for a waterscape, not anytown structures more suitable fro Surrey.

    And yes, if all of Peel Waters went ahead the best way to meet demand is a new rail tunnel under the Mersey. It would be a nice problem to have.
    Peel Waters is lackluste and unimaginative - it will be cheap and tatty like the first phase of Dockalnds in London. The first phase was the Shanghai Tower. Great a tall tower for us. But the wanted it in the middle of Princes half-tide dock. The footprint is so large it would leave a moat around the tower. Land by stealth. More water spaces filled in for Peel to make money from lucrative land. They are a land company. They are out to make money at all costs. It is up to us to make sure they do not destroy our heritage and legacy.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  14. #44
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Peel's Liverpool Waters sure is becoming lacklustre and unimaginative but that's due to concessions having to be made because of those that you agree are 100% two faced - UNESCO and EH.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  15. #45
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Waterways, I agree that UNESCO and EH are 100% two faced but you sort of miss the point. They will allow this partial dock infill for the waste treatment plant but have tried to run Peel out of town over a 5.5b investment plan
    Peel know the rules, but ignored them. Then claim they are being victimized.

    Two points

    1. The plans do not respect the WHS of the site
    2. The absence of any rapid-transit to the site when the city has a such a network


    The above points show they are not serious - or complete amateurs. Probably both.

    You are lionizing Peel. Peel are trying to do not much at all and make as much as possible. It is up to the city to make them do what they are supposed to do.

    Peel would concrete over the lot if they had their way. Every project has waterspace filling and obliteration. Common sense says excavate them and build around the waterspaces. They are still there complete with quays. Then the waterscape improves vastly and history is not obliterated.

    Peel create land by stealth, as they have done in Liverpool and Birkenhead. That is their mentality. They care not a jot about history or heritage. The plans for Liverpool Waters is just modern cheap tat worse than London's Docklands - in a World Heritage Site. English Heritage are locking horns with them for ignoring the history of the site. The area will flop and will not have vibrancy as seen in Continental cities. They have not even put in rapid-transit transport provision either in Wirral or Liverpool Waters. It will flop without a Merseyrail connection.

    We need modern developments to compliment the waterscape and the history. Read the link in my sig. There are pages on Hamburg and Amsterdam. Manchester is mentioned for the good work they have done in canals. Breda and Ghent are reintroducing rivers and the likes.

    The value of the land they own rises as it lays there derelict. How many years have they had to do something positive? mmm. What do we see? Nothing. What they offer is second rate tat. Nothing of any note except Shanghai Tower.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  16. #46
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Do you work for Peel? Something tells me you do....It is up to us to make sure they do not destroy our heritage and legacy.

    Liverpool had always been a dynamic commercial city. It had always moved on with the times. It was never scared of money or making a profit. It had never, ever been frightened of change.

    ***

    It’s quite laughable to conceive of an 18th century ‘Waterways’ lamenting the loss of the Pool in which the Old Dock was built or then condemning the infilling of the Old Dock for the Custom House or, the building of Liverpool One and the Hilton on the exact same spot.

    Excusing Dolphin House in between, always moving forward. always making it better.

    The city has been filling docks since they started building them but the Albert Dock was not demolished, in the 60s or the 70s. The Tobacco Warehouses are still there and nearly all of the water. You don't help yourself by exaggerating - we can all google earth it.

    Yes, mistakes have been made but the WHS has done a job. As I said, we’ve kept the best of what we had and leveled the rest.

    And it is right to argue for a balance between commercial dynamism and heritage but only where either have value. It is those people that cannot make a judgment on that value - those who say ‘keep all, at all costs’ - who would continue to hold us back. And this is where UNESCO goes too far. Way too far.

    ***

    You say you look forward to a Venice or Amsterdam of the North. Given the constraints you put on yourself this is quite, quite impossible.

    You show pictures of cute little canals which are totally out of scale to what we have in Liverpool. We have some very, very large open docks. They are not and never will be an ‘Old’ Amsterdam - unless you start filling in docks. Or unless you mean New Amsterdam, the old docklands, which are incredibly dull and lifeless. Not the Liverpool I know.

    It’s just not what Liverpool is and to pretend otherwise is simply to bury your head in the sand and hope that the nasty bogeyman of change will go away.

    ***

    If you were looking for a model to work with, I would offer you Sydney CBD. There’s hardly a stick standing there older than 1920 (QVB, parts of the Intercontinental, the Rocks). Nevertheless, it has kept much and moved on much.

    In our own way, we are doing the same.




    ---------- Post added at 12:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Peel's Liverpool Waters sure is becoming lacklustre and unimaginative but that's due to concessions having to be made because of those that you agree are 100% two faced - UNESCO and EH.
    It's a massing model and an illustrative masterplan is all. As it happens I've always argued for something like that massing. Perhaps we'll see some more balls in it after Joe having a go at UNESCO.

    The headlines would do us good - "Liverpool abandons UNESCO to welcome Prosperity."

  17. #47
    Senior Member Samsette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    134
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was? Quote from Waterways.

    And gondolas; they'd be nice too.

    ---------- Post added at 05:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:57 PM ----------

    Forgive me for taking the mickey, WW. You write with passion, and I believe your vision of the new Liverpool docklands is one that will be unique among the old outdated seaports of the world.

  18. #48
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    So you are involved with Peel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    Liverpool had always been a dynamic commercial city. It had always moved on with the times. It was never scared of money or making a profit. It had never, ever been frightened of change.
    And?

    It’s quite laughable to conceive of an 18th century ‘Waterways’ lamenting the loss of the Pool in which the Old Dock was built or then condemning the infilling of the Old Dock for the Custom House or, the building of Liverpool One and the Hilton on the exact same spot.
    Who is doing that? No one here is.

    And the Albert Dock was not demolished, the Tobacco Warehouses are still there. Yes, mistakes have been made but the WHS has done a job. As I said, we’ve kept the best of what we had and leveled the rest.
    Only at the 11th hour was the Albert Dock saved and the 1700s Brindley warehouses were demolished, for progress of course - a car park. All of the warehouses were demolished along with the district of Nova Scotia.

    And it is right to argue for a balance between commercial dynamism and heritage but only where either have value.
    In your eyes that is monetary value. Peel fail to see the value of the site. They are attempting to make Liverpool Docks like an inland waterway full of mill town canals boats. Historic ships cannot berth in city centre docks because they have been filled in to canal boat depths. A disgrace.

    It is those people that cannot make a judgment on that value - those who say ‘keep all, at all costs’ - who would continue to hold us back. And this is where UNESCO goes too far. Way too far.
    You mean hold back Peel from creaming it in. I have no problems with Peel making money, but not at our expense. They must make it at our gain. UNESCO doesn't go far enough. The approval of filling in Wellington Dock was appalling.

    Peel know the rules and the framework they have to work inside. Peel then chose to throw the rule book away and blamed EH and UNESCO when they present 2nd rate tat which respects no one. Then Peel attempt to get the city on their side as they need things to move on to create jobs. Peel not have the intelligence to realize that if they could combine the heritage and new developments they would gain a lot. However at is not their style is it? A cowboy workman always stays a cowboy because his mind is conditioned to short cuts and the fast buck. Many are left with his poor workmanship in the long term. In the long run he always loses to the respectable professionals. Peel have the cowboy attitude. But many are fools and suck the Peel propaganda in - like many took on the cowboy tradesman because he promised a lot.

    You say you look forward to a Venice or Amsterdam of the North. Given the constraints you put on yourself this is quite, quite impossible.
    There are NO constraints whatsoever. There are water spaces and they can be left as they are and built around using the known rule book - how simple is that? But no you and your outfit want to create lucrative land by stealth - Peel are primarily a land company. Peel will build sweet nothing. They will have a master plan and sell off the construction plots to others. but land values rise like a kite and Peel take massive windfalls.

    Their naivety is there to see. How can you have two large projects like Wirral and Liverpool Waters and not have one of them on Merseyrail? That proves they are not in it for the long term. Peel will leave behind tat and walk away with windfalls leaving the city to pick up the pieces. An all too common occurrence.

    You show pictures of cute little canals which are totally out of scale to what we have in Liverpool.
    You have been told that they are pictures displaying what can be done with redundant industrial water spaces. No one has said copy it type for type. On the Continent they value their water spaces and are excavating them after many were filled in. There is a page on that in the link in my sig. Liverpool can do what they are doing and create a waterscaped city very easily.

    We have some very, very large open docks. They are not and never will be an ‘Old’ Amsterdam - unless you start filling in docks. Or unless you mean New Amsterdam, the old docklands, which are incredibly dull and lifeless. Not the Liverpool I know.
    Any close intertwining parts of the docks were filled in, like the Queens and Kings branches to put an ugly arena structure on and chara-banc park. Similar with Central Docks.

    If you were looking for a model to work with, I would offer you Sydney CBD. There’s hardly a stick standing there older than 1920 (QVB, parts of the Intercontinental, the Rocks). Nevertheless, it has kept much and moved on much.
    Melbourne have done half decent job, but could have a lot better. But they kept the water. So bit by bit the world's largest and most impressive interconnected dock system is demolished without many actually noticing - all in the name of progress the developer sharks will have us believe. The whole waterways and waterscape can be a water based city, like Amsterdam and Venice are with an obvious different complexion.

    It would do us good - "Liverpool accepts de-listing to welcome progress."
    The above says it all. Two decades ago Liverpool had the reputation of a slum. Then UNESCO came and made large parts of the city centre and old docks world heritage sites. Then the rest of the UK looked at Liverpool in different eyes. And you want to destroy that to build tat and make quick bucks?

    World Heritage Status tells the world we are different and have something unique worth preserving. We have to keep the likes of you and the developer sharks from destroying that. If they want to join in and be a part of it they are more than welcome, but they have to follow the rules, not throw them away when it suits them and then throw their toys out of the cot when people point and tell them where they never kept to the rules.

    The city has to be stronger and prevent these people getting their destructive way. We have a lot to preserve.

    What has been filled-in in the South Docks:

    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  19. #49
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    Liverpool waters V WHS - F*** WHS off then as Dresden did.

    There are no rules about a rapid transport provision. If the council want to do this then that's up to them.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  20. #50
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Liverpool waters V WHS - F*** WHS off then as Dresden did.

    There are no rules about a rapid transport provision. If the council want to do this then that's up to them.
    Ge, you missed the lot. If Peel wanted to make this large mixed commercial/residential project a sure-fire success they would have incorporated rapid-transit to ensure so. This applies to Wirral Waters as well. The simple fact they never proves they are not in for the long term. The similar Docklands in London needed a new 31 station metro to be a success. The biggest beneficiaries for extending Merseyrail into the project are the landowners - as an aside, water inside the territorial limits in economics is regarded as land, as are its resources. Rapid-transit rail (infrastructure) raises land values - look at all large cities that have comprehensive networks. London being the nearest obvious example. Rapid-transit rail creates economic growth. Economic growth soaks into the land and crystalizes as land values.

    Forget trams. Thank God the expensive fiasco at Edinburgh has put the lid on them for ever, apart from extending say Metrolink in Manchester. Technology in tram-like buses using electric drive recharged from each bus stop is proven in Shanghai. Trams will not be run into Liverpool Waters - which are just electric buses anyhow.

    Liverpool applied to UNESCO for World Heritage Status and comprehensively got it. Immediately the city and private companies like Peel started to ignore it.

    Is World Heritage Status beneficial to the city? YES without doubt. We stand out.

    Do not be sucked in by the likes of Peel who deliberately flouted the rules then blame everyone else. I see little enterprise in that company -primarily being a land company. Peel say the city is being penalized by UNESCO and EH in order to get their way. Peel and wait and wait and the land values just keep rising. The board could comatosed for 10 years, wake up and they are worth even more. You can't do that with an enterprise business.

    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  21. #51
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    So you are involved with Peel.

    And?

    You need to get your facts in order about a whole lot of things.

    Take your line on UNESCO... back in the day, the search was on for an event to put the city back on the map (a World Expo was considered amongst others). The city decided to prepare a very thorough survey and management plan of its heritage assets and an application to UNESCO for listing.

    UNESCO graciously accepted the city’s invitation to review same and to visit and to put us on their list. They did little else.

    Far from throw that ‘rule book’ away, there is nothing in it which would prohibit the kind of development that Peel now envisage.

    Nor was there any absolute prohibition on filling in docks and in any event this has not happened, nor will it.

    Listing was done for a purpose. Maybe that purpose is over and done.

    We are none of us stupid, we can see for ourselves what water there is and what water there is not. We don't need pictures of unrepresentative fragments of docks.

    ***

    In any event, our heritage is not in bricks and mortar and whether there’s water in between or not. It is the bold and enterprising nature of our city. The buildings we keep serve to remind us of that and to help to keep it alive.

    We must make decisions about what we keep and what we don’t. You may not want, and we do not need, wholesale conservation of absolutely everything. But we also do not need to close our minds to anything but one particular cause or course because we think it would be nice, however impractical or undeliverable that might be.

    Peel haven’t. They have listened. You need only look at what they started with and what they propose now. But it is none the less do-able for all that. It’s not uneconomic, doomed-to-failure noddy boxes and barges.

    ***

    And what benefit would a ‘New Amsterdam’ bring? There is empty land aplenty in Walton, Kirkdale and Everton for development of that kind of modest scale.

    The population of the Liverpool side of the Atlantic Gateway Strategic Investment Area, the former heart of Walton and Kirkdale and all that is scouse (800 hectares also known as ‘Northshore’ - of which Central Docks is only one-fifth) is... precisely, zero.

    We’d do rather better to attend to that than shackle the growth of the city centre.

    ***

    Peel bought the land, along with the MDHC. It wasn’t free, even when the port was on its arse and no one else was interested. They’ve been holding it since. Expensive - money to buy companies, with or without land, does not come free either.

    Assuming 60 Hectares of Central Docks’ one-fifth is actually land, it has to go some to recover those costs and to perform at least as economically well as the 130 Hectares it actually occupies. Small wonder the buildings are tall and there's pressure on the water.

    Economic pressures matter. Money matters.

    ***

    I was reading today that 1 in 3 houses in Liverpool have no employment. Some people survive on £20 a week net of ‘fixed costs’.

    There are people, some in positions of influence, some in non-elected and unrepresentative organisations like UNESCO, who have actively and expressly preferred a ‘do-nothing’ policy for the sake of ‘heritage’.

    We should not accept anything for anything’s sake - ever, but economic pressures seem to matter rather more to the 1 in 3 than it does to the likes of ‘keep-it-all’ conservationists.

    ***

    I’m not above getting sentimental over past glories. We can all see value in desirable buildings to keep and we can envisage a water-based expansion in Liverpool but without fundamental reason to be, none of it will happen.

    So ‘wouldn’t it be nice’ will not do. There must be sound economic drivers to make it work or else it will stay as it. Dark tanks and desolation, bound in aspic, stuck in the 1950s (or rather the 1970s). An excuse for failure.

    Perhaps this allows you to prefer the exploitation of the working man for personal profit of the very few that the Duke’s Dock Warehouses represent (the clue is in the name) rather than the economic and social benefits of the Echo Arena, ugly as it might or might not be.

    Only you can say. But there was no other use for them as economically beneficial anywhere on the horizon, or ever.

    ***

    It is a great shame that many of the more enterprising have left the city and will not be coming back. Or at least not while it continues to look back. The city's population is half what it was in 1938. Half. And still flat-lining. The birth rate goes on but people are still leaving.

    But one thing to thank Peel for is, they’re still here. They’re still here, they’re still looking forward and they’re still investing. Peel have spent millions and not a brick laid. No windfall profits to be had there. Only hard work, money, risk and enterprise.

    ***

    No, I’m not involved with Peel. Much that it matters. Peel know their own mind (as do I). They’ve no need of my support (or would be bothered by my criticism).




    ---------- Post added at 01:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:32 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Liverpool waters V WHS - F*** WHS off then as Dresden did.

    There are no rules about a rapid transport provision. If the council want to do this then that's up to them.
    Indeed, it is not Peel's responsibility to provide external infrastructure but having said that they envisage a new overhead with potential for connections to the airport. I understand there are four stations on the Wirral Waters Scheme and the city have a new station in mind on its own merits at Vauxhall on the Northern Line (Merseyrail).

    Because of the geography of the city and the way the population is spread, there will be significant increased demand for cross-river traffic, which (if all was built to its greatest potential) could only be met by a new rail tunnel. A long time in the future and certainly not Peel's to fund.

  22. #52
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    To appease WW and any other, slowly decreasing luddites (if whom were around in the early 1900s would have opposed the Royal Liver Buildings which they're all clammering not to overshadow now) here is the latest render of the much scaled back Liverpool Waters and what do I see there, is that docks and waterways currently out of reach being brought back into use for the general public to enjoy?......never!!!!




    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  23. #53
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    Take your line on UNESCO... back in the day, the search was on for an event to put the city back on the map (a World Expo was considered amongst others). The city decided to prepare a very thorough survey and management plan of its heritage assets and an application to UNESCO for listing.

    UNESCO graciously accepted the city’s invitation to review same and to visit and to put us on their list. They did little else.
    The city approached UNESCO and they came and saw and said yes. What else are they supposed to do? Provide bricklayers?

    Far from throw that ‘rule book’ away, there is nothing in it which would prohibit the kind of development that Peel now envisage.

    Nor was there any absolute prohibition on filling in docks and in any event this has not happened, nor will it. We are none of us stupid, we can see for ourselves what water there is and what water there is not.
    This is lies. Peel propose to fill in most of West Waterloo Dock. Peel have not taken into account anything of heritage of the old docks - NOTHING. Just cheap and nasty tat on renders is all we saw. The sort that will look tired and forlorn in the harsh, windy, salty river air.

    In any event, our heritage is not in bricks, mortar and whether there’s water in between or not. It is the bold and enterprising nature of our city. The buildings we keep serve to remind us of that and to help to keep it alive.
    But want it dead for ever.

    Peel haven’t. They have listened. You need only look at what they started with and what they propose now. But it is none the less do-able for all that. It’s not uneconomic, doomed-to-failure noddy boxes and barges
    Lacklustre is an understatement for what was offered. Peel have done a good PR job, but listened? Nah! They could not even read the rules of UNESCO. Peel preserve heritage? One thing UNESCO pointed out was that Liverpool had historic docks but no historic ships. I do not see Peel excavating docks from canal boat depths to accommodate historic ships near he city centre. They treat unique Liverpool like a mill town - shallow canals and barges. That is all they understand.

    And what benefit would a ‘New Amsterdam’ bring? There is empty land a plenty in Walton, Kirkdale and Everton for development of that kind of modest scale.
    Waterways in Walton? New to me. You appear to have lost the plot. The benefits of a waterscaped city like Venice and Amsterdam is all too clear to see. They are world-renowned. They kept their heritage and expanded sympathetically.

    The population of the Liverpool side of the Atlantic Gateway Strategic Investment Area, the former heart of Walton and Kirkdale and all that is scouse (800 hectares also known as ‘Northshore’ - of which Central Docks is only one-fifth) is... precisely, zero.

    We’d do rather better to attend to that than shackle the growth of the city centre.
    Well as Peel own it they would try to tackle that. The population is zero now, but the aim is a waterscaped city on the brilliant water legacy which other cities in the world would drool over. Then they see how bad Liverpool handle such a gift from the past.

    Peel bought the land, along with the MDHC. It wasn’t free, even when the port was on its arse and no one else was interested. They’ve been holding it since. Expensive - money to buy companies, with or without land, does not come free either.
    The land (and that is also water in economic terms) has increased in value with Peel doing sweet nothing. Peel also land bank near Switch Island. Peel are quite prepared to wait decades to take their windfalls in which they did nothing but leave the land. The WHS of Central Docks mean Peel can split the docks from the main commercial north sector and sell off parts Central Docks, which was difficult to do previously.

    No one, apart from EH, has problem with tall buildings - it is where they are put. However they may form a wall if too close to the river, like what occurred on London's South Bank. Talls can go predominately on he land side of the Dock Rd, but Peel do not own that.

    Economic pressures matter. Money matters, but if you have form business case that is well thought out they become less of a matter.

    I was reading today that 1 in 3 houses in Liverpool have no employment. Some people survive on £20 a week net of ‘fixed costs’. There are people, some in positions of influence, some in non-elected and unrepresentative organisations like UNESCO, who have actively and expressly preferred a ‘do-nothing’ policy for the sake of ‘heritage’.
    For God's sake!! He is blaming UNESCO! They were called in and set the status. They never appeared unannounced. Having developments conform to "heritage" is a big thing - it would make any development attractive and salable. That appears to go over the heads of Peel. Their mindset is geared another way. UNESCO approved of the Mann Island wedges. Saying UNESCO are some sort of Luddites is quite plainly asinine. UNESCO have made the world look at Liverpool in different eyes.

    There must be sound economic drivers to make it work or else it will stay as it. Dark tanks and desolation, bound in aspic, stuck in the 1950s (or rather the 1970s). An excuse for failure.
    There are sound economic drivers.

    Perhaps this allows you to prefer the exploitation of the working man for personal profit of the very few that the Duke’s Dock Warehouses represent (the clue is in the name) rather than the economic and social benefits of the Echo Arena, ugly as it might or might not be. Only you can say. But there was no other use for them as economically beneficial anywhere on the horizon, or ever.
    They said there was no other use for the Albert Dock either. The city needs the Echo Arena. but not in that location. See:
    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/KingsDock.html

    The arena should have gone here...


    The picture above is Queens Dock with Kings Dock to the right. On the land side of Queens Dock on the waters edge, where the tower is proposed, would have been an ideal location for the arena with a water facing aspect. The area within the red lines. The marked area is full of ramshackle industrial buildings awaiting clearance. Top right of the picture is where the arena was built. Where land tapers into the water is where the branch docks were filled in. Note that to the right of the Customs House built over the graving dock, one of the branch docks has been filled in to create a car park. The disused Wapping rail tunnel emerges to the bottom right just off picture, which is easily brought back into service serving the complex and surrounding districts.

    Architects would have gone wild designing around the intertwining waters and quays of Queens and Kings Docks, giving a far superior waterscape than that ugly IKEA looking Arena. We could have had both. But got the worse deal.

    It is a great shame that many of the more enterprising have left the city and will not be coming back. Or at least not while it continues to look back. The city's population is half what it was in 1938. Half. And still flat lining. People are still leaving.
    The population moved to just outside the city. Merseyside is 1.5 million. You need to known more about economics and likes and that Thatcher/Reagan were responsible for much of the inner-city decline in the USA and UK by outsourcing to China. Witness the masses of ugly scrap piles at Liverpool docks giving an appalling impression, to be shipped to Spain and Taiwan because the steel industry was decimated in the UK.

    But one thing to thank Peel for is, they’re still here. They’re still here, they’re still looking forward and they’re still investing. Peel have spent millions and not a brick laid. No windfall profits to be had there. Only hard work, money, risk and enterprise.
    What tripe! The land they own has risen in value for doing NOTHING much at all. If a factory buys new machinery and leaves it, they lose money as the machines do not make money by operating, the land sharks make money by doing NOTHING.

    Peel have come up with renders over the years of various projects. None have materialised:

    1. Post-panamax container terminal at Seaforth
    2. Freight terminal at the airport,
    3. Wirral Waters,
    4. Liverpool Waters,
    5. Shanghai Tower.
    6. Port Salford


    Many of the proposals entail filling in water spaces to create valuable land. An attractive waterscape is being transformed into a bland landscape.

    We need people to maintain the heritage aspect of the docks and increase the water aspect even further. Land is everywhere. Land around attractive waterspaces is not.

    Peel are very 'longterm', as speculative land-banking companies are. They will watch the waterscape rot and rub their hands. We will probably be dead by the time Wirral Waters or Liverpool Waters is actually started. Still, they've got 5,000,000,000 years until the Sun destroys the Earth.

    Don't hold your breath.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  24. #54
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    To appease WW and any other, slowly decreasing luddites
    Ged, if you think anything remotely resembling that render will emerge you are very naive. Beware of fools gold.

    I am so much of a Luddite I wrote this page on the Brunswick Quay Tower:

    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity...wickQuays.html
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  25. #55
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    I was reading today that 1 in 3 houses in Liverpool have no employment. Some people survive on £20 a week net of ‘fixed costs’.


    This bit surprises me.... having just returned from 4 weeks in Liverpool, it certainly did not look that depressed to me. The pubs were doing well, the resturants seemed to be OK, even with meal prices quite higher than the US, and lots of fancy phones and electronics everywhere. The places that looked bad a few years ago were now getting fixed up - as an example Princes Rd. looked better than before - less boarded up houses.

    The 33% unemployed must be getting a fair amount from the govt. or the famous Liverpool underground (unreported, untaxed) economy is much larger than I thought...

  26. #56
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by az_gila View Post

    The 33% unemployed must be getting a fair amount from the govt. or the famous Liverpool underground (unreported, untaxed) economy is much larger than I thought...
    A tremendous amount has been achieved in the centre. The good has got to get out a bit further now.

    The grey economy has always been there and highly visible but over-reported is my guess.

    Taking a walk around Everton Valley is an eye-opener (or the other side of what's left of Scottie Road) - plenty of plush four by fours rushing through to get to the other side before bandits strike. Bit like parts of Arizona, I imagine...

  27. #57
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    And what's wrong with Scottie Road?

    There's actually a few living on or off Scottie that are driving those types of cars

    WW - if that doesn't get built do we blame Peel, UNESCO, EH or the council for all the compromises?
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  28. #58
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    And what's wrong with Scottie Road?
    Seriously, quite a bit. As we all know, it used to be an 'urban village' - one of the best and just as infamous. Now it's an urban highway, one of the worst.

    It cuts people in Everton off from the city centre and isolates it from the neighbouring communities of Vauxhall and Kirkdale.

    But that bit of the 'LIM' wot got built is not going away. A series of crossings from Marybone to Boundary street might help.

  29. #59
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    WW - if that doesn't get built do we blame Peel, UNESCO, EH or the council for all the compromises?
    NO compromises. The rule book was known from the start. They know the framework they should work in.

    If we hand Land Valuation Taxation, Peel would be paying tax on unused land, then that would spark them into life and get something done except dragging their feet - and making money for doing sweet nothing.

    If it doesn't get built blame Peel and only Peel. The render was a joke. Skyscrapers on the river wall? Yerrr
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  30. #60
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    A tremendous amount has been achieved in the centre. The good has got to get out a bit further now.

    The grey economy has always been there and highly visible but over-reported is my guess.

    Taking a walk around Everton Valley is an eye-opener (or the other side of what's left of Scottie Road) - plenty of plush four by fours rushing through to get to the other side before bandits strike. Bit like parts of Arizona, I imagine...
    I can see the uncertainty on the grey economy bit, bit do you think that the 33% unemployed part is correct - it certainly didn't look like it wandering around Liverpool...

    PS in Arizona we need big wheels for the local dirt roads, but pick-up are favored - heck our house has a 500 ft gravel driveway... But my cars are all 2WD...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Shanghai Tower
    By Kev in forum Liverpool Developments Chat
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 09:49 PM
  2. Bootle tannery Clean-up plan
    By Kev in forum Liverpool North
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2009, 03:56 PM
  3. shanghai tower
    By jayboy in forum Liverpool Developments Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-04-2008, 07:23 PM
  4. £70m plan for Wirral seafront gets go-ahead
    By Kev in forum Greater Liverpool
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 06:23 PM
  5. Plan for luxury flats in one of the Graces
    By Kev in forum Liverpool City Center - Inner Zones
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-06-2005, 12:21 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

For daily updates, to support us further or to join in the conversation: Follow us on Twitter @YOLiverpool / Like our Facebook Page: @yoliverpoolpics / Join the Facebook Group: YO! Liverpool Pictures

× Thanks for coming to the web site. Support our future by turning off your Ad-Blocker or consider a donation via PayPal or Credit Card!