Edge Lane Development

**Howie** · 02-19-2007

Homes demolition halted
Feb 19 2007
Liverpool Echo

BULLDOZERS have been stopped from moving into Liverpool’s Edge Lane for the second time.

Developers were planning to start preparing six boarded-up Victorian houses for demolition today.

But anti-demolition campaigners contacted London’s high court over the weekend and say they have an injunction stopping any work taking place.

They were planning to serve it on contractors at the Kensington site early today.

Senior officials at Liverpool Land Development Company (LLDC) had still not seen a copy of the injunction this morning.

Story continues...

**AK1** · 02-19-2007

This is just rediculous. That area is going to be left to rot even more for years. Welcome to Liverpool everyone!!!!! I give up.

**Howie** · 02-19-2007

Originally Posted by AK1

I give up.

Liz Pascoe hasn't!!!

theninesisters · 02-19-2007

Originally Posted by Howie

Liz Pascoe hasn't!!!

And she's entitled to considering her house is still under threat. We thought that we would have a few months before the next CPO so the website I am working on is currently being madly shuffled together this week. Anyone got any red bull?

**Howie** · 02-20-2007

Edge Lane injunction to cost taxpayer £1.5m
Feb 20 2007
by Deborah James, Liverpool Daily Post

A VITAL £70m scheme to regenerate Liverpool’s Edge Lane corridor was facing a further major delay last night, after a grandmother won a surprise High Court injunction.

Developers last night said an anti-demolition order secured in London by resident Elizabeth Pascoe had caused a second major hold-up to the road-widening scheme.

The 60-year-old handed the order to workers yesterday morning as they were about to start stripping six boarded-up Victorian houses in preparation for bulldozers to move in.

It bans any demolition on Edge Lane West until a Compulsory Purchase Order is issued allowing developers to buy up remaining properties in the area, expected in around 15 months.

Story continues...

**Ged** · 02-20-2007

Is it just delaying the inevitable. Is it more money for her property she is after, given that CPO's are usually derisary amounts. With the money it's costing the taxpayer and the regeneration of the area, would it not just be sensible to give her her wedge instead? It can't be any fun for her living in what has become a run down area due to the others that have moved out though I do agree that some of those houses are huge and could where possible should have been saved. I'm all for people and communities over road schemes.

theninesisters · 02-20-2007

Originally Posted by Ged

Is it just delaying the inevitable. Is it more money for her property she is after, given that CPO's are usually derisary amounts. With the money it's costing the taxpayer and the regeneration of the area, would it not just be sensible to give her her wedge instead? It can't be any fun for her living in what has become a run down area due to the others that have moved out though I do agree that some of those houses are huge and could where possible should have been saved. I'm all for people and communities over road schemes.

The problem is, is that the city council haven't done their homework. They've never had a surveyor around to inspect the houses in detail, which we have. Only 6 houses are structurally unsafe and 'have' to be demolished, the rest can be saved.
Elizabeth isn't after any more money from the house - she doesn't want to move from her home at the age of 60 where she has lived for a long time - would you?

The Council is totally to blame for letting these properties go thus forcing people out of their homes. 99% of people for the demolition have never been inside the grand houses and they are massive - fixed up, they would fetch over a £1mill, such is the style of the house. People assume that because they're boarded up, they are to be demolished, when the survey that we paid out for shows the real extent.

**Ged** · 02-20-2007

It would appear that the council are saying 'This is where the road's going, structurally safe houses or not' hasn't that always been the way though - that someone/somewhere is sacrificed for improvement (if that is what it's going to be) The residents of where I was from were shipped out for the widening of Hunter Street despite a community of 400 families who were basically against it, but as they were flats that were not privately owned what chance did they have when they'd already fought road plans for two previous schemes. The once thriving Christian Street is now cut off from Islington and is pretty isolated. One might say a good thing if they've kids.

**AK1** · 02-20-2007

The houses actually along that section of road must go if the road is to be properly widened and made safer for pedestrians, although I do think the council should give more consideration into preserving some of the houses that are away from the road. It is important to remember that this isn't just a road widening scheme, this is just part of a project which includes new housing, new jobs in the science park, a better environment, more local amenities and new public open space.
I traveled along the almost complete section of edge lane near the rocket recently. The quality of the work is superb and the level of thought behind it is very impressive. For example, instead of just paving the pavements and planting trees along the entire stretch, they have tarmaced sections outside most of the houses for cars to park on, away from the road. This project will improve Liverpool's image to visitors, but more importantly, it will improve the lives of local people in more ways than one.

**snappel** · 02-20-2007

It's a fair point, and you can't keep everyone happy.

Still, I'm not bothered about the £1.5m of taxpayers money - at least it's been consumed by someone being pro-active and doing something (which is for them) worthwhile. Unlike the work-shy layabouts that lived in half the other houses down there.

**marky** · 02-20-2007

Those houses don't seem too bad, to me.

**AK1** · 02-21-2007

Originally Posted by marky

Those houses don't seem too bad, to me.

Some of them aren't too bad, but they have to go so that the road can be widened. The road is already heavily congested because it bottlenecks from four lanes to two, so in a couple of years it will be gridlocked if it isn't widened. Some have said it can be widened without demolishing the houses but this would mean taking the front gardens off the houses so people would be walking out of their front door straight onto a tiny pavement with a dual carriageway next to it, plus alot of the houses are too far gone to repair.
On the other hand, the demolition will mean that all the buildings on the roadside will have a large pavement in front of them with trees and more pedestrian crossings to make it safer and more pleasant. If you look carefully at the plans, you will see that the apartments are on the roadside with all the family houses behind them, well away from the busy road.

Libertarian · 02-22-2007

In general the city is a dug up mess.

The big dig is causing terrible problems in the city centre and has been driving shoppers away for 2 years now. Shops are closing and business is bad. As if this isn't bad enough Church Street and Lord Street have looked like a building site since the summer the resurfacing seems to have taken a very long time for what seems to be a very simple job.Every time you go down there you are lucky if you see anyone working on it. Even worse Whitechapel is now being dug up an the trendy new Met quarter is surrounded by bollards, no wonder trade is down there too. The council have known that the Met quarter has been under construction for 2 years now so why not do some of the work sooner?

Thank God we never got the trams can you imagine the disruption the installation of them would have caused? There is now way it would have been finished by 08, the trams would have caused huge traffic chaos and work would have taken taken years in Liverpool.
Unbelievable.

**AK1** · 02-23-2007

All the work is neccessary to bring Liverpool up to date with most other cities. The work doesn't bother me, and there was a survey a while ago that showed most people don't mind the distruption as Liverpool will be a much better place once it is completed. I actually like going into town and seeing all the construction work. It makes the city vibrant with activity and prosperity.