New Everton Stadium

[Ebbo]

wow. how many tourists come to Liverpool to look at the docks? seriously?
you don't think a modern redeveloped waterfront with restaurants, stadium and bars etc would attract more people?

 

[davek]

For crying out aloud Dave, the status brings sod all to Liverpool in jobs and investment and the city has still got a huge area of derelict dockland that, that status has failed to address. With the stadium and the rest of Peel's development promises one hell of a lot more than that status has ever given.

That's fair enough if you wish to view things through that prism. But my point is that you cant simply dismiss as nothing the loss of the WHS for Liverpool's iconic water front. You'd have to be a complete philistine to not acknowledge that.

 

[davek]

wow. how many tourists come to Liverpool to look at the docks? seriously?
you don't think a modern redeveloped waterfront with restaurants, stadium and bars etc would attract more people?

6.3 million in 2016.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Loss of World Heritage Status would also lose money for the city too. Only Dresden has ever been stripped of it and they experienced a fall in tourist numbers.

It's loss couldn't be sold as anything other than a huge international embarrassment for the city. And Everton would be positioned as the noisy family who came into the neighbourhood and destroyed the good name of the area.

That's a bit harsh Dave. I think the position of the council (well at least JA) has been it's great having it but if it stops us redeveloping run down areas then screw the status.

As people have said it will not compensate for the loss of income on having the area renewed. Liverpool will always be an attraction due to the pier head/the beatles and the 2 clubs it does not really need a certificate to help boost tourism. You have seen what has happened around Kings/Albert docks and the positives that brings, you have seen Manchester turn bloody Salford into a productive area with the new quay development, does anyone want to see Liverpool mothballed until everyone leaves to work/live in places that befit the modern world?

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

@davek, a new year, and still making people wet the bed, love it.

 

[Ebbo]

6.3 million in 2016.

source? or just made up?
and they came "purely" to look at the docks? or just visitors to the city in general?

 

[Brennan]

The docks are a big empty wasteland.

Delusion to think it matters whether we lose the 'status' or not. A stadium hosting huge concerts and football matches on a weekly basis would attract far more investment and interest than a 'status'.

 

[Toffeelover]

6.3 million in 2016.

But Dave they did not come to view BMD, Nelson or Trafalgar but to hang around Albert. In fact no tourist would be permitted to enter the derelict dock area.

 

[Onwards Evertonians]

It all depends on what you want for the City Dave. If you want the City to continue as it is, then fine, keep the WHS and all the restrictions that brings. However, there is little that can be done to the waterfront and also maintain the the WHS, which is why on the original masterplan it was purely housing, flats/apartments etc. placed around the dock structures. That also led to the belief that it would take 20-30 years to complete the development, because it would be very difficult to sell housing in that area in the docklands current state. It would only be realistic to expect house purchases to hit their expected values once the LW development had been completed up to Nelson and BMD, or at least 90% done.

I am very much of the view that the City of Liverpool deserves better and will benefit from the investment that will be created by an expedited LW development. If the building of Evertons ground does, as is expected, cut the time for development completion down by a third then it will be a huge boost for the area in what is proving to be very tough times for the city, once again under Tory rule and their austerity cuts. This isn't just something that Everton needs, but something that the City needs. The expected £900m economy boost from the stadium alone is much more that we can expect from WHS in the same period, or even longer. The numbers make sense for whats happening. Also, we're in a much better position to be making these decisions now, as the Tory Govt is keen to give local regions the freedom to make their own decisions with RE fundraising, especially if it doesn't come from their own purse. That's why I feel it is even less likely to be called in.

The communities secretary, Eric Pickles, wrote to the council on Monday to say he would not "call in" the project for a public inquiry as it was a decision best taken by Liverpool's councillors – effectively giving a green light for bulldozers to move in on the north bank of the Mersey, formerly known as Central Docks.

The whole project with outline consent (including cultural buildings) was decided not to be called in years ago.

 

[davek]

That's a bit harsh Dave. I think the position of the council (well at least JA) has been it's great having it but if it stops us redeveloping run down areas then screw the status.

As people have said it will not compensate for the loss of income on having the area renewed. Liverpool will always be an attraction due to the pier head/the beatles and the 2 clubs it does not really need a certificate to help boost tourism. You have seen what has happened around Kings/Albert docks and the positives that brings, you have seen Manchester turn bloody Salford into a productive area with the new quay development, does anyone want to see Liverpool mothballed until everyone leaves to work/live in places that befit the modern world?

I recognise ALL of what you say and what others have said. Believe me, I have an open mind on this issue because it is swings and roundabouts. However, I'm just bridling against the way anything and everything is seen as so much collateral damage and portrayed as 'not meaning much' when it patently does mean something to lose WHS. And the initial point I made is valid that if you take away the prestige of the location then you destroy one of the reasons you wanted to be there in the first place.

 

[davek]

source? or just made up?
and they came "purely" to look at the docks? or just visitors to the city in general?

Just google it.

 

[davek]

But Dave they did not come to view BMD, Nelson or Trafalgar but to hang around Albert. In fact no tourist would be permitted to enter the derelict dock area.

That figure was the traffic just visiting the Albert Dock in one year: 2016.

 

[Toffeelover]

That figure was the traffic just visiting the Albert Dock in one year: 2016.

Fine Dave, that area will always be a big attraction, a new cruise liner terminal, a new stadium and further development of the Peel project will really enhance the area and ultimately benefit Liverpool greatly.

Heck folk might even begin to like Bootle and wave to Chico!

 

[People75]

When i went to Liverpool, i went to the waterfront, and the docks. To be honest, it's practicaly the identety of the city.
The history of Liverpool is conected to the docks, and i for one found the area interesting and beautiful.

I like what they done, in the area around the Beatles museum, where the have preserved the authentic buildings.

However, it would be a shame, to demolish the docks, and turn it in to a copy of Dubai. There is to much of that, already, everywhere.

 

[Mogwai]

Can we have a 'Feed the DaveK' only thread and leave this thread alone for the sane? Mods?