Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 119

Thread: Planning decision on Liverpool Waters will be delayed until after Unesco inspection

  1. #76
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    Are you living anywhere near where all those streets are desolate around Anfield football ground Chas?. I would have thought your angst could be better directed towards another private company who are holding up the development of the area due to their will they wont they build a new ground - and LCC pandering to them and extending long expired plans to build on the people's Victorian Parkland.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  2. #77
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    74
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Are you living anywhere near where all those streets are desolate around Anfield football ground Chas?. I would have thought your angst could be better directed towards another private company who are holding up the development of the area due to their will they wont they build a new ground - and LCC pandering to them and extending long expired plans to build on the people's Victorian Parkland.
    I thought this thread was about Planning decision on Liverpools waterfront, are you trying to extend the thread to ...............where?
    What's YOUR point? (to repeat your question)
    Chas

  3. #78
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    Shall I start a new thread then?

    Point proven.

    Thank you.


    Ged.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  4. #79
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    74
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Arrow Off topic

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    Shall I start a new thread then?

    Point proven.

    Thank you.


    Ged.
    I'll gladly express my views on other topics, if you wish, although Liverpool waterfront and Peel are what this thread is about.

    I'll take that as my "point proven".

    Thanks,
    Chas

  5. #80
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  6. #81
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    74
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Angry PEEL appeal funded by Salford council taxpayers, LOOK OUT MERSEYSIDE!

    PEEL HOLDINGS TO APPEAL SALFORD COUNCIL HOUSING REFUSAL
    Salford Star date: 21st July 2011

    SALFORD TAX PAYERS TO PICK UP THE BILL FOR PEEL HOLDINGS BURGESS FARM HOUSING APPEAL…As Council document reveals a further 200 houses on the green field site…
    Peel Holdings is to appeal against the recent refusal by Salford Council's planning panel to grant permission to build 350 houses on the green field Burgess Farm site in Walkden. The £multi-billion company is demanding that Salford tax payers pick up the bill.
    Meanwhile, Salford Council documents show plans for a further 200 houses on the Burgess Farm site.
    Full story here…
    It was only a few weeks ago that, following a shambolic Salford Council planning panel meeting, Peel Holdings was refused outline planning permission to build 350 houses on the green field Burgess Farm site in Walkden/Little Hulton (see here).
    Yesterday, Salford councillors were told that Peel Holdings is not only planning to appeal against the democratic decision of the planning committee but is demanding full costs from the Council (ie Salford tax payers) to pay for that appeal.
    Even Councillor Derek Antrobus, the Lead Member for Planning who was actually in favour of the Peel Holdings development at that planning meeting, hinted at indignation when he tweeted on Twitter yesterday afternoon…
    "Peel appeal against Burgess Farm and demand full costs claiming Council unreasonable. Council to defend refusal. Up to Govt now."
    A more restrained quote by the councillor was issued by Salford Council later in the day…
    "Peel has exercised its legal right to appeal and this will be a matter for the Planning Inspectorate to consider. The council will resist the appeal and defend its decision to refuse the planning application."
    While Salford tax payers pick up Peel's bill for the costs of its appeal, it has come to light that, not only does Peel want to build 350 houses on the Burgess Farm green field site, there are plans for a further 200 houses on the site, making a total of 550 houses.
    Salford Council's Development Plan (Core Strategy) lists all the city's housing needs and the sites that will be built on between 2010-2030. There's currently a draft 66 page `pre-publication' consultation document on the Council's website which residents can comment on until August 1st (click here). Accompanying the Development Plan is another `changes in housing supply' document which lists every site in the city where houses could be built.
    Within this latter document (page 34) (click here) it states quite clearly that the `Site to the south west of Hilton Lane and north of Waverley Road (Burgess Farm)' will have 350 houses on it. And in another section, it states equally clearly `Burgess Farm 2 – land off Hilton Lane' 200 houses.
    That's 550 houses in total in a green field area that has protected great crested newts, where traffic congestion would be horrific, and where Salford Council's own planning report stated that there was no need for housing.
    Campaigners against the proposed Burgess Farm development are urging residents to object to the plans before August 1st by…
    • e-mail plans.consultation@salford.gov.uk
    • by post to: Core Strategy Consultation, Spatial Planning, Salford Civic Centre, Chorley Road, Swinton M27 5BY.

    There should be printed copies of the Development Plan and `housing supply list' in all of the city's libraries.
    The Development Plan can also be viewed by clicking here
    The list of sites for housing can be viewed by clicking here

    * The Salford Star will be covering other housing issues thrown up by the Development Plan over the coming days…


    mary ferrer wrote
    at 12:23:30 PM on Friday, July 22, 2011
    I think if the appeal if found against the council,then the council pay If peel loose the apeal THEN they pay. Don't think that if Mrs Jones appeals against a refusal of her kitchen extention she could ask the council to pay,so why are PEEL any different. Lets just hope the inspector finds in favour of the council and tells peel to sod off.


    Salford Star wrote
    at 11:11:04 AM on Friday, July 22, 2011
    See Tom's comment...Good point Tom - the councillor's tweet says `demand'.


    Tom wrote
    at 11:08:24 AM on Friday, July 22, 2011
    Star, is it not in fact standard practice that the council incurs costs for planning appeals? Are Peel actively demanding that SCC fund the appeal, or is it just routine procedure? I think it's important that you clarify this point.


    Measured View wrote
    at 4:27:15 PM on Thursday, July 21, 2011
    Hmmm....Multi Millionaire Company takes on City Council and loses, then asks council to fund their appeal...does anybody spot the punchline here? Peel can fund their own appeal, the council should throw it out if Peel can't (or wont) fund it themselves!


    Ronnie Thompson wrote
    at 11:31:08 AM on Thursday, July 21, 2011
    TELL THESE PARASITIC CHUMS OF THE CLOWNCIL TO SOD OFF , AND TAKE THE TRAFFORD CENTRE WITH THEM .


    Bob Flowers wrote
    at 8:06:01 AM on Thursday, July 21, 2011
    The ineptitude , bungling , waste and squander at the swinetown big top just goes on and on .What a circus .Peel will get their way , and the clouncil will pick up the bill . WE TAXPAYERS HAVE ONCE AGAIN BEEN SHAFTED .


    Nachtschlepper wrote
    at 8:05:30 AM on Thursday, July 21, 2011
    It's time these parasites were told where to go. This company is bleeding the City of Salford dry. Our so called leaders will do nothing to stop them so perhaps we need to take matters into ur own hand. Demonstrations at Media City & the Trafford Centre might be a start.




    Chas

  7. #82
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    I hope the council tell Peel to eff off to Liverpool
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  8. #83
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,677

    Default

    I've only just caught up with this thread - been ages reading through it.


    just a few comments to add my two penneth;

    first of all to say, excellent posts from Ged especially pages 2 & 3.
    Well said Ged

    re Everton district - - well, it has merely returned to it's original state of open green spaces. it was a rural area to start with, so it could be said that the miriad of terraced streets were a blot on the landscape -- if people from the old days could time travel they might recognise it more as it is today than how it looked during the 1920's, 30's, etc.

    re building tall on the waterfront skyline;
    where about were those '3 ugly sisters?' - the Clarence dock was it ?
    They were tall were they not ? Industrial too and not smart or beautiful.

    As Ged says, people who are against - do they live in the area ?? - - and yes, how long that waste ground has been there doing nothing! - it's about time the area is rejuvenated and can hold it's head high along with the centre and south.


    ps, but I do like the idea of GD's park with water features - that would be nice.

  9. #84
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    74
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Devilish deals

    I live in Anfield, Lindylou, where are you speaking from?. The Everton area you seem to recognize as a blot on the landscape is not the area I grew up in. I can give you a more in depth view of my life, but the thread is about the planning decision on Liverpool's waterfront.

    Mr John Whittaker
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	jw-dedevil.gif 
Views:	284 
Size:	972.0 KB 
ID:	22797

  10. #85
    Senior Member grekko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Age
    79
    Posts
    181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    I live in Anfield, Lindylou, where are you speaking from?. The Everton area you seem to recognize as a blot on the landscape is not the area I grew up in. I can give you a more in depth view of my life, but the thread is about the planning decision on Liverpool's waterfront.



    Mr John Whittaker
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	jw-dedevil.gif 
Views:	284 
Size:	972.0 KB 
ID:	22797
    Chas , I think Lindylou was referring to the Everton area of the early 19th century when she commented upon the miriad of terraced streets being a blot on the landscape, not of the area or community of the early and mid 20th century. I'm sure she recognises, as do most of us on here, that the Everton area was a vibrant family oriented community who unfortunately, in many respects, had the misfortune to inhabit properties which lacked the standard facilities for healthy living and had seen better days, which was a major contribution to their wholesale demolition/disappearance.
    As for her comments on the waterfront I doubt if her place of residence should preclude her from commenting on her memories or preference of waterfront view.
    I do not go along with the siting of a lot of Skyscrapers etc of Peel's plans but, surely the improvement of that area has been too long coming, how much longer might it take to redevelop the site(s) if the plans are knocked back? We will probably never again build communities such as you and I remember but that shouldn't restrict peoples opportunities to try and build newer and hopefully vibrant living spaces.

  11. #86
    Senior Member chasevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    anfield
    Age
    74
    Posts
    248
    Blog Entries
    2

    Talking Lightning strikes as thread unwinds

    Quote Originally Posted by grekko View Post
    Chas , I think Lindylou was referring to the Everton area of the early 19th century when she commented upon the miriad of terraced streets being a blot on the landscape, not of the area or community of the early and mid 20th century. I'm sure she recognises, as do most of us on here, that the Everton area was a vibrant family oriented community who unfortunately, in many respects, had the misfortune to inhabit properties which lacked the standard facilities for healthy living and had seen better days, which was a major contribution to their wholesale demolition/disappearance.
    As for her comments on the waterfront I doubt if her place of residence should preclude her from commenting on her memories or preference of waterfront view.
    I do not go along with the siting of a lot of Skyscrapers etc of Peel's plans but, surely the improvement of that area has been too long coming, how much longer might it take to redevelop the site(s) if the plans are knocked back? We will probably never again build communities such as you and I remember but that shouldn't restrict peoples opportunities to try and build newer and hopefully vibrant living spaces.
    Thanks for YOUR opinion, Grekko. I've often stated my views on the Everton area and it's demolition and they don't coincide with a lot of people. That won't stop me from holding my views. I'm English working class, C of E, I now live up the road from Everton in Anfield, not here, there and anywhere, it would be revealing to know where the pro Peel activists live or where they came from.
    It was Lindylou who brought the Everton area into this thread, it's difficult enough to stay on thread, so before I go any further:-
    PEEL ARE A THREAT TO MERSEYSIDE
    Their sole motivation is profit, but as Colonel Gedaffi and his followers say, it's a rich man's world.
    Sociably,
    Chas

  12. #87
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    Chas, you brought the Everton area into this thread on post 19.

    ---------- Post added at 09:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 PM ----------

    Grosvenor's motivation was profit, so what if the means to the ends results in a better place to be. Every single developer that ever developed an area did it for profit, not for the love of the place. LFC likewise when if ever they get around to sticking to their end of the deal with Anfield. Peel took an ailing airport and have turned it round. Peel took acres of derelict land that nobody wanted and now it's the Trafford Centre. Are you up to speed on what they have actually achieved rather than the scaremongering of what they might do?

    ps. Writing in bold/capitals/different colours/larger text doesn't make your point any more valid.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  13. #88
    Senior Member John Doh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chasevans View Post
    Thanks for YOUR opinion, Grekko. I've often stated my views on the Everton area and it's demolition and they don't coincide with a lot of people. That won't stop me from holding my views. I'm English working class, C of E, I now live up the road from Everton in Anfield, not here, there and anywhere, it would be revealing to know where the pro Peel activists live or where they came from.
    It was Lindylou who brought the Everton area into this thread, it's difficult enough to stay on thread, so before I go any further:-
    PEEL ARE A THREAT TO MERSEYSIDE
    Their sole motivation is profit, but as Colonel Gedaffi and his followers say, it's a rich man's world.
    Sociably,
    Chas
    Spot on, Chas! - It never ceases to amaze me how gullible people are in allowing the likes of Peel to have carte blanche to reek havoc on the grounds that they are bringing much-needed investment to the city. They are traditional capitalists whose motive is making a profit based on land prices and property speculation; they are NOT a philanthropic institution!

  14. #89
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197

    Default

    'allowing' ? They have to present plans like anybody else - like they did at Cammell Laird which they saved.

    'carte blanche' ? Look the meaning up. Where have they been given carte blanche over anything when their plans are under scrutiny rsulting in them not being passed as yet - quite the opposite of carte blanche.

    'reek havoc' ? Where in Liverpool have they done this. Look at the Baltic triangle development that has been left as an eyesore due to a company going bust part way through it. Is that wreaking havoc?

    Are they not bringing much needed investment into the city then, explain why not?

    Name any modern day developers that are philanthropic institutions. Would you prefer it if they built it for no profit or lost on it. Why doesn't anybody else buy up this unwated derelict land then?
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  15. #90
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    ....
    Name any modern day developers that are philanthropic institutions. Would you prefer it if they built it for no profit or lost on it. Why doesn't anybody else buy up this unwated derelict land then?
    Go a bit further...

    Name the Liverpool developers in it's heyday that weren't driven by profit - there were a few, but perhaps some of them were offspring feeling a bit guilty about their family money made off the slave trade.

    Liverpool developed in the 1800's into the city it is now on the profit motive, why knock it....

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Wirral Waters Planning Approved
    By Waterways in forum Liverpool Developments Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-15-2010, 04:00 PM
  2. Liverpool Waters
    By Waterways in forum Liverpool Developments Chat
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 02-02-2010, 03:46 PM
  3. ?100m Liverpool St John?s Market revamp delayed for three years!
    By Kev in forum Liverpool City Center - Inner Zones
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-16-2009, 04:07 PM

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
  •