Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

New Everton Stadium

jinkyali said:
You seem to be clued up.

Forgive me but why couldn't putting a stadium etc in on the site actually enhance the status of the heritage site rather than automatically mean it is withdrawn?
Click to expand...

The actual docks themselves are part of the world heritage site so filling one in is a problem to them. Next door did it but they did it in a way that it could always be returned to being a dock again, it's all bullshit but that's how these people justify their jobs.
 
RobSpurs said:
From 2011



Guess what? Bugger all happened. And imho having good modern architecture near old enhances both. London and Liverpool are living cities, not museums. It's weird how UNESCO get their knickers in a twist over high quality larger developments, but say nothing about dank, low-quality low-rises which do much more damage to an area.
Click to expand...
Agree with this sentiment totally. I spend a lot of time working in the city of Rotterdam where they have a beautiful mix of old and new architecture mixed together. Would love something similar on Liverpool Docks
 

davek said:
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.
Click to expand...

I never stated that it wouldn't cause the loss of some money, bug I know that you are familiar with net gains and losses. We could for example, not build a stadium and keep WHS, to gain approx, no idea of the numbers, so say £20m pa, probably wrong, or, we could build a stadium, have the LCC make £7m pa off the loan, and get a further £50m pa from increased trade, business rent, investment. All leads to a net gain. We should be worrying about whats best for the city, not whats best for the WHS.

On your other point, the deal that Everton are doing with the city is very similar to how they funded the construction of the dock sytems. that never did us any good did it.......

In years to come, Everton could be the centre of a new WHS application, as one of the oldest professional football clubs in the world placed on the banks of the Royal Blue Mersey, adding to the culture of t ecity and the shape of the skyline. Who knows. The only thing I can be sure of, is that its difficult to move forward at pace, when constantly your looking over your shoulder, a quick glance is fine.
 

RobSpurs said:
From 2011



Guess what? Bugger all happened. And imho having good modern architecture near old enhances both. London and Liverpool are living cities, not museums. It's weird how UNESCO get their knickers in a twist over high quality larger developments, but say nothing about dank, low-quality low-rises which do much more damage to an area.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The key is for the modern architecture to be good. It may mean they will be fussy over over our planning permission which hopefully will be a good thing and prevent any kind of cheapo shack.

If I'm honest I'm not sure about that Shard although the bar is pretty cool and serves nice cocktails.
 
davek said:
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.
Click to expand...

The only way losing world heritage status would affect the city negatively is if that also meant they retroactively changed the origin story of the Beatles to say they came from Manchester, and moved the Albert Dock, Cathedrals, Liver building and any of the other famous landmarks with them. I can't think of anyone who would base their travels on what UNESCO think.

They seem to believe their own hype more than anyone else. They are not the reason people visit Liverpool, and nor will they ever be. It'd be like Sportspesa threatening Everton to not leave Goodison Park or they will refuse to continue to sponsor us. The whole scenario is ludicrous.
 
jinkyali said:
You seem to be clued up.

Forgive me but why couldn't putting a stadium etc in on the site actually enhance the status of the heritage site rather than automatically mean it is withdrawn?
Click to expand...

The WHS for Liverpool has a basis in its usage. The fact that a stadium being built in one of the docks will no longer allow it to be used in its original usage would impact negatively. It's also the view. Currently the area around there is relatively low rise, with the tobbaco warehouse being a dominating feature, if something was to block or alter that visual dynamic from the Wirral side, that would also have a negative effect. That s another reason that the original Peel masterplan had relatively low rise private acommodation there as opposed to the high rise office blocks more centrally, as well as allowing the individual dock systems to be maintained.

Theres nothing stopping it becoming a WHS again though, under different criteria.
 
RobSpurs said:
From 2011



Guess what? Bugger all happened. And imho having good modern architecture near old enhances both. London and Liverpool are living cities, not museums. It's weird how UNESCO get their knickers in a twist over high quality larger developments, but say nothing about dank, low-quality low-rises which do much more damage to an area.
Click to expand...
Go 'ed Rob la.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top