Stadia

[petromax]

I come here for reasoned debate and for information, not insult or hubris, but since you insist, just take one example - that of the outer loop; you say the outer loop is cheap but suggest that lowering the rail bed is, let's say 'relatively simple' (to be kind to your argument).

To put it simply for you, for every metre drop in level, the bed would need to be lowered for 100m or thereabouts in both directions. So for an approximate 5m drop in bed level (and disregarding engineering to the bridges over) that's 1km of re-engineered levels or not quite going on for 10% of the total length of loop of 15.2km. To say it is cheap and to play down the importance of expensive works is 'contradictory'.

Also remember this is just one issue on the current alignment. I see there are sections that have been built on; I believe there are tunnels in a poor state of repair; junctions at either end but particularly the Hunt's Cross end have disappeared. I am not saying the outer loop can't be done or shouldn't be done. I am saying that it is not cheap and that it is a more expensive and hence LESS realistic way of servicing stadia than the alternative which already has a working alignment, tracks and signalling systems for running trains!

You compare the cost of the outer loop with Canada Dock Branch claiming it only needs 'rails and fences' and you ignore the bulk of the cost in engineering, signalling systems and electrification which the CDB either already has or in the case of electrification will shortly have, at no cost to the stadia (the stadia are after all what this thread is about). This is 'inconsistent'.

Championing causes is all very fine but each much stand on its own merits even within the bigger picture of the city's regeneration. You cannot put your hand in someone else's pocket to pay for your pet cause. Objectivity and respect for alternative opinion is a good place from which to make changes for the better.

[Ged]

There is another forum that WW and I go on which is more of a debating platform when it comes to people in the know on such subjects as the rail network, trams, stadia etc. WW's stance on some of what is lauded on here has been pretty much dismissed. For instance sweeping whole housing estates in Speke or industrial units in Kirkdale away is far more complicated than MrWW would have us believe - Lfc with all their clout couldn't even move a couple of old dears from their house in Kemlyn Road for over a decade.

I wouldn't take to heart too much what this old eccentric says

[Waterways]

There is another forum that WW and I go on which is more of a debating platform when it comes to people in the know on such subjects as the rail network, trams, stadia etc. WW's stance on some of what is lauded on here has been pretty much dismissed. For instance sweeping whole housing estates in Speke or industrial units in Kirkdale away is far more complicated than MrWW would have us believe - Lfc with all their clout couldn't even move a couple of old dears from their house in Kemlyn Road for over a decade.

I wouldn't take to heart too much what this old eccentric says

I only go on this forum Ged. Sweeping way Speke? Good idea. Lots of it is like a war zone anyone. An isolated estate, surrounded by industry that stands in the way of airport expansion. A good case for winding the place down for the sake of city progress

What industrial units in Kirkdale? I said that Ged? New to me. I can see a good case for getting rid of many and putting them in proper industrial units elsewhere though.

Ged, unfortunately we can't rebuild garden tenements any more. Life moves on. We move on for the better.

Ged, go to other cities and see how they do it. Get around a bit and look.

[Ged]

I think you might be daring/tempting me to post up your other postings on SSC there WW

You don't go on it now because you were banned so a lot of people must have these 'perceived' insults.

Anyway, You've mentioned the ground being in Speke and the housing estate being sacrificed for it citing that the training ground is now in Halewood (want me to show you it to refresh your memory?) - nothing to do with the airport expansion.

You also said that Sandhills industrial units need to be compulsory purchased and demolished for the new stadium going there - i'm looking at in now on SSC - (want me to post that up too as well as their members reference to you as Bay City and JohnMK being the one and same as WW)

Or are you dismissing those claims as stupid now????

[Ged]

As for the Gardens tennies my mate, I don't want them rebuilding, just recounting nostalgic memories and if there wasn't a call for that, then there wouldn't be close on 200,000 hits on my site.

However, you'll find that plenty do still live in them, they're now called Acorn, or Abbeygate or St. Annes apartments though and they're still scattered throughout the city like Toxteth, Wavertree, Everton, Dingle, Old Swan etc.

And believe it not, there's also still people living in a large area of Canning in lovely majestic houses, loads in big villas on Merton Road, Hawthorne Road - Bootle, in beautiful sandstone houses in Crosby and Woolton too - go out and take a look - none of them have died of being cold either

[Waterways]

As for the Gardens tennies my mate, I don't want them rebuilding, just recounting nostalgic memories and if there wasn't a call for that, then there wouldn't be close on 200,000 hits on my site.

However, you'll find that plenty do still live in them, they're now called Acorn, or Abbeygate or St. Annes apartments though and they're still scattered throughout the city like Toxteth, Wavertree, Everton, Dingle, Old Swan etc.

And believe it not, there's also still people living in a large area of Canning in lovely majestic houses, loads in big villas on Merton Road, Hawthorne Road - Bootle, in beautiful sandstone houses in Crosby and Woolton too - go out and take a look - none of them have died of being cold either

Ged, I am fully aware of the old gardens being updated and that some old houses are still occupied. All of the old gardens have high carbon footprints and they should have been demolished. We have moved on in technology since they were built.

200,000? Terrific. Nostalgia Ged. Few want to return to the Liverpool of their childhoods.

[petromax]

...All of the old gardens have high carbon footprints and they should have been demolished...

The single largest contributor (including energy in life time useage) to carbon footprint is the energy used in the creation of the building materials and in the building operations themselves. It is thus very signficantly greener to recycle old buildings for new use rather than to demolish them, deal with waste and rebuild.

and before you say it WW, I haven't made this up. I do know what I am talking about and I have no vested interest. It's what you might call a fact.

[Ged]

So in saying you want buildings of high carbon footprint demolishing WW, I take that also to mean the whole of the Canning area - is that correct

I too want to progress and a perfectly good site such as the tunnel loop which is overgrown with weeds in an area that needs regeneration is so easily discounted by you as not big enough when a leading world stadium construction company says it is - who should we believe WW

[petromax]

...not big enough when a leading world stadium construction company says it is - who should we believe WW

Yeh, Wimbledon, Wembley, O2 Arena; what do HOK know!!!

[Waterways]

So in saying you want buildings of high carbon footprint demolishing WW, I take that also to mean the whole of the Canning area - is that correct

They are buildings of historic importance, the garden were not. They can have the insulation values uprated far more easily than brick block with landing protruding acts as heat sinks.

I too want to progress and a perfectly good site such as the tunnel loop which is overgrown with weeds in an area that needs regeneration is so easily discounted by you as not big enough when a leading world stadium construction company says it is - who should we believe WW

The stadium company would say that. The Loop site is totally crap. A stadium needs a rapid transit rail station incorporated. Guess what, Liverpool has a one and people ignore it. The Loop site cannot incorporate rapid-transit rail. If any is run in it will be footy traffic only, so EFC would have to foot the biog bill. WHP can have all and funded out of public fund and all benefit.

The Loop is another ill-thought out idea, as is the Stanley Park stadium. A stadium without rapid-transit. LFC must be daft to design a stadium without rapid-transit as they have all to gain by having it. The city is mad to allow such nuisance creators at footy stadia not have use it. London look at Liverpool and think the city is daft. EFC and LFC need rethinks on where to their stadia. EFC, hopefully not in Kirkby.

[petromax]

They are buildings of historic importance, the garden were not. They can have the insulation values uprated far more easily than brick block with landing protruding acts as heat sinks.

Both are historically important for their own reasons and if you think 9" or 13.5" solid brickwork is easy to upgrade thermally without disruption of historic interiors and at reasonable cost, then you know rather less about it than you think you do.

The stadium company would say that.

HOK were paid for an independent assessment and they gave it. They have no other interest other than not getting sued for bad advice

The Loop site is totally crap. A stadium needs a rapid transit rail station incorporated.

It does not. There are plenty without.

WHP can have all and funded out of public fund and all benefit.

Get Real!! Just exactly where will the money come from?

EFC and LFC need rethinks on where to their stadia. EFC, hopefully not in Kirkby.

Maybe they do and maybe it shouldn't, but who can afford hundreds of millions more than is feasible. Even if the city had the power to insist on new rail loops and extraordinary third party benefits, which it does not, absolutely NOTHING would get built on this basis.

Make a plan that works, is feasible and will get built or talk about it for the next decade or so instead.

[Waterways]

Both are historically important for their own reasons and if you think 9" or 13.5" solid brickwork is easy to upgrade thermally without disruption of historic interiors and at reasonable cost, then you know rather less about it than you think you do.

More insults. I know "exactly" what I am on about. I said the Georgian quarter is of historical importance. The Gardens are not.

HOK were paid for an independent assessment and they gave it. They have no other interest other than not getting sued for bad advice

Their advice is bad. They never took into account rapid-transit rail.

Get Real!! Just exactly where will the money come from?

The same place that the trams money came from and the London Crossrail came from as well.

You haven't much a clue. Don't take that as an insult, it is just the way it is.

[petromax]

More insults. I know "exactly" what I am on about. I said the Georgian quarter is of historical importance. The Gardens are not.

Their advice is bad. They never took into account rapid-transit rail.

The same place that the trams money came from and the London Crossrail came from as well.

You haven't much a clue. Don't take that as an insult, it is just the way it is.

Saying it's so, don't make it so! An insult is an insult. I think calling someone clueless is pretty insulting and you compound it with arrogance.

Without bothering to track back and in this post alone, you think yourself a better judge of architecture and its historical importance than anyone here; you believe yourself better qualified to assess the suitability of a site for a stadium than an organisation with immeasurable specialised experience and you blythely disregard the fact that there was no money for trams from any source actually and that Crossrail is funded on an entirely different basis of established demand.

That my friend, is just the way you are. If you like, you can take that as an insult.

[pablo42]

Fighting talk were I come from. Good job I moved.

[petromax]

Fighting talk were I come from. Good job I moved.