Toxteth District

Right, I think we may have to wrap this up soon Waterways - ok with you?
It can't be fascinating reading for anyone looking for Toxteth info on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

Just because Lodge Lane isn't as dear to your heart as a dock, it happens to be the area I live in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Members of my family lived off it. I am familiar with Lodge lane. And I would not like to live around there these days. You do, I don't.

---

---

You do enjoy trying to qualify your 'views' by rolling out the fact that either yourself and/or members of your family once lived around here.
As exited as you can imagine I was about hearing this ......it doesn't really add to any debate does it.
The long and short of it appears to be 'you don't like it round Lodge Lane way' ... that's fine, wonderful in fact as it limits the chances of me meeting you.
Could I give you some advice ..... maybe you should try a different topic (there's plenty to choose from) ... possibly something involving water?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

FWIW - I like the new Arena.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I thought you would for some reason.

---

---

Excellent point to highlight - I like the ACC, and you don't - thanks for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

'let the market sort it out' comment about the area in which I live wasn't something I appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Why should Lodge Lane be immune from market forces? State aid for the place?

---

---

I'm actually getting to quite like you now Mr Waterways .... you know when you reach that tipping point, whereby something so utterly pointless is said (very much like your comment above) - that you can't help but sit back, smile and wonder why on earth you bothered engaging this person in a debate at all.

[sits back][smiles]

Just a quick reminder of where I came into this thread ..... it would be nice to go back to talking about Toxteth ... (I believe that my final few words below seem more relevant than ever)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

Properties in the Lodge Lane area are being advertised with the tag line of 'being close to Lark Lane', which seems a sad indictment of an area which should be able to advertise itself for it's own merits.
The area is still rich with multiculturalism, as has been the case for a very long time (many years before the riots). However, it's underfunding has kept the scars of the riots there to see over 25 years on (and as a consequence makes it harder to to dispel preconceived ideas of what it's *actually* like to live in the area

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Members of my family lived off it. I am familiar with Lodge lane. And I would not like to live around there these days. You do, I don't.

---

I don't live on Lodge lane either but i'd still like to see it given help.You dislike the new arena, dislike the idea of lodge lane
being helped.Why?

---

Where did you get that from? I like the arena, well sort of. We do need one. The colour is awful and the design is well...erm. It is in the wrong place. by about 800 to 1000 metres an should have been on the land side of the docks.

Lodge Lane should be given help. But not to keep it as some sort of working class enclave. Time moves on, things change. If people with money want to change the area well so be it if it is all for the better.

Quote:

---

For people who believe certain areas can never be "done up" go and take a look at the Falkner state footage then look at that area now.

---

Falkner St, and around there had desirable buildings. Lodge Lane has few if any. The desirable parts are Sefton Pk Rd, Croxteth Rd, parts of Hartington Rd, etc. If these roads are further improved then run down Lodge lane is clearly in the way and ripe for gentrification. Those bought out always gain. This is all if Liverpool get wealthy further and the demand is there. Islington in London is a prime example of private money moving into an area and making the place far smarter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

You do enjoy trying to qualify your 'views' by rolling out the fact that either yourself and/or members of your family once lived around here.

---

I was born and brought up in L8.

Quote:

---

The long and short of it appears to be 'you don't like it round Lodge Lane way' ... that's fine, wonderful in fact as it limits the chances of me meeting you.

---

I doubt we shall meet.

Quote:

---

Could I give you some advice ..... maybe you should try a different topic (there's plenty to choose from) ... possibly something involving water?

---

It appears some home truths have affected you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I don't think houses should be built on that site. The more I look in to it, the more I believe that Liverpool council has never been run by people who care.

---

I agree. The festival site should be for the public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I was born and brought up in L8.

---

How exiting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I doubt we shall meet.

---

Aww

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

It appears some home truths have affected you.

---

Absolutely .... all those valid home truths of yours .... well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I was born and brought up in L8.

---

How exiting

---

It did make many want to exit the area.

Anyone have any thoughts about the proposal to build a Wetherspoons on the site of the old Kwik Save? (top of Smithdown Rd)

The jury is out a little for me - whilst I would never encourage that particular chain of pubs - I can't see another supermarket coping there (what with the proximity to the ASDA/ALDI etc), and the building itself is god awful ......
I thought Wetherspoons took nice buildings and ruined them .... I can't see how they could manage to do anything but improve that particular site...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I was born and brought up in L8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

How exiting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

It did make many want to exit the area.

---

---

---

If you read the above from start to finish, we might have established why people wanted to leave L8 ....... you're like the reverse Pied Piper aren't you :-)

It did make me laugh out loud though - so thanks for that

I don't see why houses can't be built on part of the site.
It was always part of the original plan.
In fact, houses have already been built, and it's precisely those tenants who are now saying "Not In My Back Yard".

It should be remembered that we only have Prince's, Sefton and Newsham Parks because the perimeters were sold for housing to raise the cash for the laying out of those parks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Where did you get that from? I like the arena, well sort of. We do need one. The colour is awful and the design is well...erm. It is in the wrong place. by about 800 to 1000 metres an should have been on the land side of the docks.

Lodge Lane should be given help. But not to keep it as some sort of working class enclave. Time moves on, things change. If people with money want to change the area well so be it if it is all for the better.



Falkner St, and around there had desirable buildings. Lodge Lane has few if any. The desirable parts are Sefton Pk Rd, Croxteth Rd, parts of Hartington Rd, etc. If these roads are further improved then run down Lodge lane is clearly in the way and ripe for gentrification. Those bought out always gain. This is all if Liverpool get wealthy further and the demand is there. Islington in London is a prime example of private money moving into an area and making the place far smarter.

---

I was talking about Falkner estate.The amount of demolition that took place proves how run down the area was. I know Islington London and although some houses are 2,3 million, you still have sink estates where people don't want to live. I'd like to know where you live now (apologies if i'm being too nosy) and what do you think should happen to Lodge lane and Toxteth ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilipG

I don't see why houses can't be built on part of the site.
It was always part of the original plan.
In fact, houses have already been built, and it's precisely those tenants who are now saying "Not In My Back Yard".

It should be remembered that we only have Prince's, Sefton and Newsham Parks because the perimeters were sold for housing to raise the cash for the laying out of those parks.

---

I'm fed up with the build new houses obsession and that area has enough people living there. What about all the empty houses over Liverpool? Why can't thay be fixed up instead of being left for photographers to make a collection titled "urban decay"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I'm fed up with the build new houses obsession and that area has enough people living there. What about all the empty houses over Liverpool? Why can't thay be fixed up instead of being left for photographers to make a collection titled "urban decay"?

---

Some houses are not worth saving. They are also very expensive to heat having no insulation. People are forced into fuel poverty. Insulation standards on new houses is very high making new homes cheap to heat. cold damp old houses give rise to medical complaints.

The UK has the oldest housing stock in western Europe and the least insulated. Only houses of note should be saved, and only then being fully renovated to modern standards. Look here for some interesting facts on housing:

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/LandArticle.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Some houses are not worth saving. They are also very expensive to heat having no insulation. People are forced into fuel poverty. Insulation standards on new houses is very high making new homes cheap to heat. cold damp old houses give rise to medical complaints.

The UK has the oldest housing stock in western Europe and the least insulated. Only houses of note should be saved, and only then being fully renovated to modern standards. Look here for some interesting facts on housing:

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity/LandArticle.html

---

I know the problem with old,damp houses but some of your posts sound like you don't wont Lodge lane to even exist. What about people who want to stay in their homes?Not everyone is like you or me-some people will stay in their chosen area no matter what. You must hate Laurence Westgaph's campaign to save Lodge lane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I'd like to know where you live now (apologies if i'm being too nosy) and what do you think should happen to Lodge lane and Toxteth ?

---

I live in Buckinghamshire and London and visit Liverpool a lot. That may change soon.

Lodge Lane? It look awful indeed. You can't displace a whole group of people living there although the council can smarten the place up. Toxteth is too huge to say it should be like this and that.

The south end docks should be built on properly and the Toxteth and Harrington Docks excavated and the surrounds given over the residential property. Then work back into the hinterland. The refusal of the Brunswick Quay Tower was a major Council screw up.

The Dingle rail station should be brought back into commission (it is still there underground) and made a part of Merseyrail. Ideally the Dingle tunnel should be extended to Lodge Lane and an underground station built there - as originally intended when the Overhead Railway was built. Or extend from Edge Hill into Lodge Lane. Or better still link the Dingle tunnel with Edge Hill and a few stations along the new tunnel. Lodge Lane road could be cut and covered and have a tunnel just under the road. The transport infrastructure will be a catalyst for regeneration and attract private investors. Then Park Rd and Lodge Lane will become dense vibrant centres as is the case in London.

The Wapping rail tunnel from Edge Hill to Queens Dock could also be brought back into commission and have new stations cut into it. Around Bedford St would be a good place for one as it will also regenerate that area and create another vibrant centre.

Look at what the Jubilee Line extension did to areas it ran through in London. It needs public money to kick start it, however taxes could be levied on property that gains in value because of the new rail stations. London regretted not putting a tax on homes that have value increases around the new stations - some by 100%. It would have paid for the new tunnel and stations. Some people made a lot of money through no effort from themselves, from selling houses because of public money investment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I live in Buckinghamshire and London and visit Liverpool a lot. That may change soon.

Lodge Lane? It look awful indeed. You can't displace a whole group of people living there although the council can smarten the place up. Toxteth is too huge to say it should be like this and that.

The south end docks should be built on properly and the Toxteth and Harrington Docks excavated and the surrounds given over the residential property. Then work back into the hinterland. The refusal of the Brunswick Quay Tower was a major Council screw up.

The Dingle rail station should be brought back into commission (it is still there underground) and made a part of Merseyrail. Ideally the Dingle tunnel should be extended to Lodge Lane and an underground station built there - as originally intended when the Overhead Railway was built. Or extend from Edge Hill into Lodge Lane. Or better still link the Dingle tunnel with Edge Hill and a few stations along the new tunnel. Lodge Lane road could be cut and covered and have a tunnel just under the road. The transport infrastructure will be a catalyst for regeneration and attract private investors. Then Park Rd and Lodge Lane will become dense vibrant centres as is the case in London.

The Wapping rail tunnel from Edge Hill to Queens Dock could also be brought back into commission and have new stations cut into it. Around Bedford St would be a good place for one as it will also regenerate that area and create another vibrant centre.

Look at what the Jubilee Line extension did to areas it ran through in London. It needs public money to kick start it, however taxes could be levied on property that gains in value because of the new rail stations. London regretted not putting a tax on homes that have value increases around the new stations - some by 100%. It would have paid for the new tunnel and stations. Some people made a lot of money through no effort from themselves, from selling houses because of public money investment

---

London is different to Liverpool and you forget how many people live in London and use the tube.Liverpool doesn't have enough rail users to justify ripping a whole ancient road apart and what about people who don't need trains? A student would be better off on a bus that would drop them off outside rather than a walk from Edge Hill. Bedford street with a tunnel or rail station?! Ruin a conservation area for no reason? Do you know the amount of money that would be wasted on such a project? And the amount of beautiful buildings lost forever?Madness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

London is different to Liverpool and you forget how many people live in London and use the tube.Liverpool doesn't have enough rail users to justify ripping a whole ancient road apart and what about people who don't need trains? A student would be better off on a bus that would drop them off outside rather than a walk from Edge Hill. Bedford street with a tunnel or rail station?! Ruin a conservation area for no reason? Do you know the amount of money that would be wasted on such a project? And the amount of beautiful buildings lost forever?Madness

---

You don't get the point(s) or understand some of it. Underground rail stations attract regeneration - they can be easily put right into established centres. A tunnel runs right now (the Wapping Tunnel) under Bedford St and only a new underground station need be cut into the tunnel. The Dingle Tunnel, from Herculaneum Dock, can be linked to Edge Hill and mainly run along Ullyet Rd, Sefton Pk Rd, Lodge lane and Tunnel Rd. All by mainly digging out the road and backfilling (cut and cover) - how most of the Paris Metro was built and the section along Marylebone Rd in London.

This new tunnel would create a city centre rail ring loop, from the Central to Dingle, to Edge Hill, down the Waterloo Tunnel, where stations can be cut, to Waterloo Dock and along the Northern Line back to the centre. Like the Circle lines line in London and Glasgow. The new station would attract regeneration and beef up the centre. Imagine a 40 floor block over Dingle Station? Or one over a Lodge Lane station? Or one over a new station at Byrom St.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

The Dingle rail station should be brought back into commission (it is still there underground) and made a part of Merseyrail. Ideally the Dingle tunnel should be extended to Lodge Lane and an underground station built there - as originally intended when the Overhead Railway was built. Or extend from Edge Hill into Lodge Lane. Or better still link the Dingle tunnel with Edge Hill and a few stations along the new tunnel. Lodge Lane road could be cut and covered and have a tunnel just under the road. The transport infrastructure will be a catalyst for regeneration and attract private investors. Then Park Rd and Lodge Lane will become dense vibrant centres as is the case in London.

---

I do like the idea of that.
I'm not sure whether it's in any way likely to happen - partly due to the large sums of money that appear to be required, and bearing in mind the time it takes for the go ahead on more commercially important rail improvements in Liverpool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Look at what the Jubilee Line extension did to areas it ran through in London.

---

Didn't it take a while to get the Jubilee line to get installed (?) .... and bearing in mind this was to serve London's Docklands/Canary Wharf etc - it's a struggle for me to believe that the situation up here is analogous.
Merseytravel (or whoever) I think will struggle cost justifying new stations linking Lodge Lane to the network anytime soon.....

Still, as I said ... it would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

You don't get the point(s) or understand some of it. Underground rail stations attract regeneration - they can be easily put right into established centres. A tunnel runs right now (the Wapping Tunnel) under Bedford St and only a new underground station need be cut into the tunnel. The Dingle Tunnel, from Herculaneum Dock, can be linked to Edge Hill and mainly run along Ullyet Rd, Sefton Pk Rd, Lodge lane and Tunnel Rd. All by mainly digging out the road and backfilling (cut and cover) - how most of the Paris Metro was built and the section along Marylebone Rd in London.

This new tunnel would create a city centre rail ring loop, from the Central to Dingle, to Edge Hill, down the Waterloo Tunnel, where stations can be cut, to Waterloo Dock and along the Northern Line back to the centre. Like the Circle lines line in London and Glasgow. The new station would attract regeneration and beef up the centre. Imagine a 40 floor block over Dingle Station? Or one over a Lodge Lane station? Or one over a new station at Byrom St.

---

It's a silly idea.I was talking about it with someone and they pointed out even more flaws in your idea. I know your heart is in the right place and you probably feel disgusted when you think of how bad Lodge lane is at the moment but there are better ways of regenerating Toxteth. The new development "Catherine Mews"(starting price £229,950) is in Toxteth but I doubt they use the T word in their brochure.It still has negative connotations and always will at this rate

I still think you don't get it. Since when has an underground system been a silly idea? A city centre underground rail loop is created with underground stations in major districts, which will regenerate them.

Fast, comfortable and frequent transportation infrastructure is the key - underground trains - the city has disused underground tunnels that need re-using and needs more. Underground systems serve all the major cities of the world well. They penetrate right into the centre of districts.

I read once of a suggestion I liked to divert the Garston line as it passes through Otterspool, through the park under ground and down Aigburth Rd under the road. At the top of Aigburth Rd a branch into the Dingle underground stn, along the Dingle tunnel and out over the Herculaneum Dock onto the line again. The other branch at the top of Aigburth Rd would go along Ullyet Rd, Sefton Pk Rd, Lodge Lane, Tunnel Rd and into Edge Hill. Most of it would be cheap cut and cover along the roads, with little boring of tunnels.

Underground stations would be at: Aigburth Vale, Lark Lane, Sefton Pk Rd, the existing station at Dingle, Lodge Lane and Tunnel Rd (maybe). St Michaels Stn would be done away with - it is out on limb anyway. It would serve 4 major districts, right into the heart of them and no rail lines to be seen. It would also form a part of a city centre loop, which I explained previously using the Waterloo tunnel from Edge Hill to Waterloo Dock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I still think you don't get it. Since when has an underground system been a silly idea? A city centre underground rail loop is created with underground stations in major districts, which will regenerate them.

Fast, comfortable and frequent transportation infrastructure is the key - underground trains - the city has disused underground tunnels that need re-using and needs more. Underground systems serve all the major cities of the world well. They penetrate right into the centre of districts.

I read once of a suggestion I liked to divert the Garston line as it passes through Otterspool, through the park under ground and down Aigburth Rd under the road. At the top of Aigburth Rd a branch into the Dingle underground stn, along the Dingle tunnel and out over the Herculaneum Dock onto the line again. The other branch at the top of Aigburth Rd would go along Ullyet Rd, Sefton Pk Rd, Lodge Lane, Tunnel Rd and into Edge Hill. Most of it would be cheap cut and cover along the roads, with little boring of tunnels.

Underground stations would be at: Aigburth Vale, Lark Lane, Sefton Pk Rd, the existing station at Dingle, Lodge Lane and Tunnel Rd (maybe). St Michaels Stn would be done away with - it is out on limb anyway. It would serve 4 major districts, right into the heart of them and no rail lines to be seen. It would also form a part of a city centre loop, which I explained previously using the Waterloo tunnel from Edge Hill to Waterloo Dock.

---

I understand the point you are making but you don't understand the difference between London and Liverpool. No one seems to know the exact figures but about 500,000 people live in Liverpool.London has so many boroughs and commuters that a train/tube system is needed. It wouldn't be Economically Sustainable in Liverpool. That is my point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

Anyone have any thoughts about the proposal to build a Wetherspoons on the site of the old Kwik Save? (top of Smithdown Rd)

The jury is out a little for me - whilst I would never encourage that particular chain of pubs - I can't see another supermarket coping there (what with the proximity to the ASDA/ALDI etc), and the building itself is god awful ......
I thought Wetherspoons took nice buildings and ruined them .... I can't see how they could manage to do anything but improve that particular site...

---

I don't know what type of place a Wetherspoons is but think the last thing that part of Smithdown Road needs is a pub. A cinema would be much better! I'm always being told about an old cinema that used to be in upper parliament street Think it was called the Rialto Cinema

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I understand the point you are making but you don't understand the difference between London and Liverpool.

---

I understand the difference very well having lived in both.

Quote:

---

No one seems to know the exact figures but about 500,000 people live in Liverpool. London has so many boroughs and commuters that a train/tube system is needed. It wouldn't be Economically Sustainable in Liverpool. That is my point

---

You clearly do not understand. The aim is to regenerate the city of Liverpool and get its population back. Make it dense again. Providing top class transport infrastructure is one of the major keys to regeneration.

It is best to spend public money on schemes that will promote regeneration. Otherwise it will be another round of public money to tart up an area which will decline again and more money to do it again and the circle continues. Money wasted.

Public money needs to be spent once and only once on meaningful projects and the private sector then makes it sustainable, create wealth and attract people back again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I don't know what type of place a Wetherspoons is but think the last thing that part of Smithdown Road needs is a pub. A cinema would be much better! I'm always being told about an old cinema that used to be in upper parliament street Think it was called the Rialto Cinema

---

That site on the corner of Smithdown and Yanwath St. used to be a cinema. The Picture Playhouse it was called. The Rialto was a cinema and a ballroom that was at the corner of Berkley St. and Upper Parliament St. It later was used as a used furniture warehouse by Swainbanks and was burned out in the riots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

I understand the difference very well having lived in both.



You clearly do not understand. The aim is to regenerate the city of Liverpool and get its population back. Make it dense again. Providing top class transport infrastructure is one of the major keys to regeneration.

It is best to spend public money on schemes that will promote regeneration. Otherwise it will be another round of public money to tart up an area which will decline again and more money to do it again and the circle continues. Money wasted.

Public money needs to be spent once and only once on meaningful projects and the private sector then makes it sustainable, create wealth and attract people back again.

---

If you think recommisioning rail tunnels would attract enough people and jobs to justify the afore mentioned plans to Liverpool-fine.Send a proposal to Liverpool council.They love wasting money,ruining beautiful architecture and selling off prime land for a pittance. Lets agree to disagree because we are going around in circles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shytalk

That site on the corner of Smithdown and Yanwath St. used to be a cinema. The Picture Playhouse it was called. The Rialto was a cinema and a ballroom that was at the corner of Berkley St. and Upper Parliament St. It later was used as a used furniture warehouse by Swainbanks and was burned out in the riots.

---

Thank you for that info! Would love to see some pictures of The Rialto. The riots ruined Toxteth in the long run, or people's attitude towards Toxteth and its residents

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I don't know what type of place a Wetherspoons is but think the last thing that part of Smithdown Road needs is a pub. A cinema would be much better! I'm always being told about an old cinema that used to be in upper parliament street Think it was called the Rialto Cinema

---

I'm not a fan of Wetherspoon pubs - and would certainly be keen on a proposal such as a cinema.
The reason I say that the jury is out in my mind about the proposal is the fact that in the 12 or so years I've known it, it has been an awful building with little prospects for being turned into anything of any note.

Wetherspoons - as a large corporate with a brand image to maintain, and enough cash to do that - would be an improvement in my mind.
I don't see anyone else joining the queue to take on this building.

It may be due to the long term lack of action in other key sites in this area, that I am less hopeful of the better alternatives turning up.

One thing that I would not welcome is another boarded up sh!th0le for the area to have to cope with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I'm fed up with the build new houses obsession and that area has enough people living there. What about all the empty houses over Liverpool? Why can't thay be fixed up instead of being left for photographers to make a collection titled "urban decay"?

---

The point I was making was that some parks weren't built, and will not be built, without the income generated from using part of the site for housing.
Yes, I know there are plenty of empty houses, but they aren't overlooking a river and a park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

Send a proposal to Liverpool council.They love wasting money,ruining beautiful architecture

---

Underground rail systems are er, er, er...underground. So no buildings get touched. You need to understand how cities work and how the most successful cities work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Underground rail systems are er, er, er...underground. So no buildings get touched. You need to understand how cities work and how the most successful cities work.

---

Of course buildings would be touched. Expecting 100's of companies to move to liverpool just because we would have a city wide rail system is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

Of course buildings would be touched. Expecting 100's of companies to move to liverpool just because we would have a city wide rail system is ridiculous.

---

The only buildings touched would need to be touched. Good quality buildings will remain.

Fast, efficient, clean and comfortable transport infrastructure is an important consideration when locating. The Munich underground system built for the 1972 Olympics projected the city to world status from being a mere provincial city. The bavarians never looked back.

Also, the underground system means vibrant urban centres can flourish attracting people from the Greater Liverpool area and beyond. This means the city becomes more attractive generally and the regenerated, vibrant centres attract people and improve the quality of life of the people. A win, win all around for the locals and attracting outsiders.

Companies will not build around Lodge Lane, they will setup in the centre or the industrial estates. The attractive urban environment is what will attract them to the city, amongst others.

One thing is clear. Leaving these eyesore districts, or doing the usual quick tart up, will only do harm all around in the long run.

The centres and its immediate surrounds needs to be top quality and re-populated with people with high expendable incomes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

The only buildings touched would need to be touched. Good quality buildings will remain.

Fast, efficient, clean and comfortable transport infrastructure is an important consideration when locating. The Munich underground system built for the 1972 Olympics projected the city to world status from being a mere provincial city. The bavarians never looked back.

Also, the underground system means vibrant urban centres can flourish attracting people from the Greater Liverpool area and beyond. This means the city becomes more attractive generally and the regenerated, vibrant centres attract people and improve the quality of life of the people. A win, win all around for the locals and attracting outsiders.

Companies will not build around Lodge Lane, they will setup in the centre or the industrial estates. The attractive urban environment is what will attract them to the city, amongst others.

One thing is clear. Leaving these eyesore districts, or doing the usual quick tart up, will only do harm all around in the long run.

The centres and its immediate surrounds needs to be top quality and re-populated with people with high expendable incomes.

---

What I want to know is not the merits of a city wide rail system, but the cost justification for it, and whether it's a realistic plan, taking into accounts the size and population of Liverpool and the viable alternatives.
(I should mention at this stage, I am referring to your suggestions regarding the links to Lodge Lane etc ... in case you wander off on some general tangent)
Reading through some of your responses (many of them starting 'you don't understand....') they seem very naive.

I've highlighted in bold above a cost justification for Munich - if that's a comparison you want to draw. Where's the one for here?
Or is the cost justification in your mind 'well, this would attract those with fat wallets, eventually' - in which case, as AngelCake suggests, put your proposal to the Council .... I'll not hold my breath.

As I have previously mentioned - I don't dislike the idea, I just cannot see it heading anyone's list for infrastructure improvements for the next 10 years..

Unless you really think it a valid proposal - then it's about as much use as suggesting a monorail for Lodge Lane ......

I'm not an authority on local railways, but the loop-line in the city centre was only built (or should that be "dug") in the 1970s, which was hardly one of Liverpool's most prosperous periods.
Hardly any buildings were affected, except that the original Cavern was lost.
At the same time the Central/Garston line was reopened after being closed for years.

BTW. The point that we have unused tunnels keeps being missed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

The only buildings touched would need to be touched. Good quality buildings will remain.

Fast, efficient, clean and comfortable transport infrastructure is an important consideration when locating. The Munich underground system built for the 1972 Olympics projected the city to world status from being a mere provincial city. The bavarians never looked back.

Also, the underground system means vibrant urban centres can flourish attracting people from the Greater Liverpool area and beyond. This means the city becomes more attractive generally and the regenerated, vibrant centres attract people and improve the quality of life of the people. A win, win all around for the locals and attracting outsiders.

Companies will not build around Lodge Lane, they will setup in the centre or the industrial estates. The attractive urban environment is what will attract them to the city, amongst others.

One thing is clear. Leaving these eyesore districts, or doing the usual quick tart up, will only do harm all around in the long run.

The centres and its immediate surrounds needs to be top quality and re-populated with people with high expendable incomes.

---

Munich's population (2 million plus) is bigger than Liverpool's (500,000)and having an underground system doesn't always make urban areas flourish.London (8 million)) has many areas that people avoid tube system or not, same as New york (18 million).Mancester has become a vibrant ,attractive, regenerated city without the aid of a tube system. People with large incomes who live in the centre or surrounding areas are already happy to live in the Docks or Sefton park . I just don't agree that a tube system would transform the city as much as you think it would and bring in millions of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

Munich's population (2 million plus) is bigger than Liverpool's (500,000)and having an underground system doesn't always make urban areas flourish.

---

Munich was not 2 milion in the late 1960s when the underground was conceived. Merseyside has a population of 1.5 million.

Quote:

---

London (8 million)) has many areas that people avoid tube system or not, same as New york (18 million).Mancester has become a vibrant ,attractive, regenerated city without the aid of a tube system.

---

So underground systems do not work in your logic. How odd. London and NY are successful because of the underground rapid transport systems...and other major cities like Tokyo, etc.

Quote:

---

People with large incomes who live in the centre or surrounding areas are already happy to live in the Docks or Sefton park . I just don't agree that a tube system would transform the city as much as you think it would and bring in millions of people.

---

You need to understand what needs to be in place to project a city. It is clear you are quite satisfied with deprivation around you. Look at things logically and in a positive light. It will be much better then. You have the Liverpool disease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

Munich's population (2 million plus) is bigger than Liverpool's (500,000)and having an underground system doesn't always make urban areas flourish.London (8 million)) has many areas that people avoid tube system or not, same as New york (18 million).Mancester has become a vibrant ,attractive, regenerated city without the aid of a tube system. People with large incomes who live in the centre or surrounding areas are already happy to live in the Docks or Sefton park . I just don't agree that a tube system would transform the city as much as you think it would and bring in millions of people.

---

Bilbao in Spain has of course recently ( 1995) installed a new underground system. This has helped the city immensely along with the new Guggenheim museum. It has a population of about 350,000 with greater Bilbao about 1 million. Bilbao also has a new tramway system. Surely Liverpool would benefit from improved mass transport systems

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taffy

Bilbao in Spain has of course recently ( 1995) installed a new underground system. This has helped the city immensely along with the new Guggenheim museum. It has a population of about 350,000 with greater Bilbao about 1 million. Bilbao also has a new tramway system. Surely Liverpool would benefit from improved mass transport systems

---

The infrastructure is in place, tunnels, etc, to extend the existing Liverpool underground system.

It is essential to re-populate the city. The tramway is a white elephant, money should be spent on the underground system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterways

Munich was not 2 milion in the late 1960s when the underground was conceived. Merseyside has a population of 1.5 million.



So underground systems do not work in your logic. How odd. London and NY are successful because of the underground rapid transport systems...and other major cities like Tokyo, etc.



You need to understand what needs to be in place to project a city. It is clear you are quite satisfied with deprivation around you. Look at things logically and in a positive light. It will be much better then. You have the Liverpool disease.

---

I've no idea what Liverpool disease is but it sounds like you have the typical "I don't live in Liverpool and it's an awful place to reside".On previous posts I talked with Ben about how Lodge Lane and Toxteth needs improving so saying i'm quite satisfied with deprivation is offensive ,silly and misquotation.Why you are resorting to such low posts i'll never know.It's pointless trying to discuss important issues with someone who has an agenda. I'm interested in Toxteth becoming a nice area (regardless of where I live). I'm fine with people disagreeing with me but i'm not happy when a stranger tells me i'm happy seeing my birthplace deprived.You've crossed the line of reasonable debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngelCake

I've no idea what Liverpool disease is

---

unprogressive, negative. The rejection of the Brunswick Quay Tower is indicative of this attitude. Liverpool is view from the outside as an argumentative do nothing city. Look at what Manchester has done in such a short space of time. They had a plan and knew what was important what was not....and went for it. I am impressed with that city. A have friends who live there and the council is superb.

Quote:

---

It's pointless trying to discuss important issues with someone who has an agenda.

---

I agree. Find out what makes highly successful cities tick and projects them forward. You will find that top class infrastructure is at the top. Ken Livingstone is always on about London's infrastructure not being good enough and the likes of Paris, which is superb, will take business and wealth away from London. ...and Liverpool doesn't have infrastructure compared to London.

Pouring money to tart up run down areas is pouring money into a bottomless pit. The money has to be used to project the areas/city forward. A bit like Thatcher who squandered North Sea Oil revenues. She used it to pay unemployment benefit, not invest in the future. Wasted. Public money when spent has to matter and be a base on which people can progress and build on.

I feel as it I am saying the same thing over and over to you as you can't get something so fundamentally simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

I'm not a fan of Wetherspoon pubs - and would certainly be keen on a proposal such as a cinema.
The reason I say that the jury is out in my mind about the proposal is the fact that in the 12 or so years I've known it, it has been an awful building with little prospects for being turned into anything of any note.

Wetherspoons - as a large corporate with a brand image to maintain, and enough cash to do that - would be an improvement in my mind.
I don't see anyone else joining the queue to take on this building.

It may be due to the long term lack of action in other key sites in this area, that I am less hopeful of the better alternatives turning up.

One thing that I would not welcome is another boarded up sh!th0le for the area to have to cope with.

---

If Wetherspoons are the only company interested then I suppose they will get the site at a knock down price unless a last minute bid is made

I do think Manchester was helped along a little with the aid of a bomb though. Even their own commentators admit that.