Topic: Liverpool confirm decision to redevelop Anfield

[Peter McGurk]

But one can't happen without the other.

If we don't hand over the houses we own then the council wouldn't be able to move ahead with that stage of regen. Like wise if we handed them over and had no use for the land then we wouldn't then be paying them the £300k or whatever a year to lease the land from LCC.

And from the otherside, if the council weren't prepared to start regen of the whole area and thus freeing up the land we need then a redev of Anfield wouldn't be possible.

I'm not saying one can't or shouldn't happen without the other, but I think it's more than a coincidence that they are both suddenly happening now.

Who said anyone was leasing anything? Council can proceed with regeneration of the area as long as they can clear the uneconomic houses. They can't leave them to rot to dust (rats, fires, drug-dealing). Council don't need the stadium or money from the club. They just need those houses gone.

.

[CraigDS]

Who said anyone was leasing anything? Council can proceed with regeneration of the area as long as they can clear the uneconomic houses. They can't leave them to rot to dust (rats, fires, drug-dealing). Council don't need the stadium or money from the club. They just need those houses gone.

.

But we own 8 of those houses, and not going to give them up without some movement on the stadium either way. It's one reason (of many) they have been left for so long anyway.

[Peter McGurk]

But we own 8 of those houses, and not going to give them up without some movement on the stadium either way. It's one reason (of many) they have been left for so long anyway.

Council want the houses gone. They can't do them up and sell them. They can't carry on keeping the rats, fires and drugs out. I imagine the club feel just the same about theirs.

.

[CraigDS]

Council want the houses gone. They can't do them up and sell them. They can't carry on keeping the rats, fires and drugs out. I imagine the club feel just the same about theirs.

.

Yet the council is keeping houses in the same state just a few roads down.

[Peter McGurk]

Yet the council is keeping houses in the same state just a few roads down.

As individual houses and as a group, they're not the same at all. Individually, there are in a worse condition (just looking from the outside - who knows what's going on behind the tin). And one bad house held up between two good ones is not the same as one good house in a row of bad.

.

[CraigDS]

As individual houses and as a group, they're not the same at all. Individually, there are in a worse condition (just looking from the outside - who knows what's going on behind the tin). And one bad house held up between two good ones is not the same as one good house in a row of bad.

.

You would presume (and it as as much a presumption as yours that they are worse) that given a lot of the houses in adjacent streets have been empty and boarded up for just as long as the odds in Lothair that the chances of them being in the same condition are quite likely.

[Peter McGurk]

You would presume (and it as as much a presumption as yours that they are worse) that given a lot of the houses in adjacent streets have been empty and boarded up for just as long as the odds in Lothair that the chances of them being in the same condition are quite likely.

Well, I used to work for a Housing Association assessing the viability of doing up Victorian proprieties like these. I have been down to have a look. I did go to the exhibition of proposals and I did have a chat with the housing association. I had a look at the plans of what they have to deal with and what they're trying to do and I have chatted to a number of residents.

I can see that Alroy Road (for example) has more that are in a better condition (particularly on the evens side) and that the likes of Rockfield Road has smaller houses (less expensive to fix) in better condition. I can see that what council propose to do, pretty much matches the condition of the properties and the streets - keep what's been done, do up what they can fix and clear what they can't. And really - what else can they do?

I just cannot see how you can keep the few (five) lived-in houses on Lothair Road by doing up the 50 or so that are three-storey (plus a basement) and in a shocking state and, hope to put them back on the market at anything like anyone can afford.

On that basis, the other streets, which have fewer bad houses per street (which are smaller and in better condition), have a much better chance. Council can only save what they can save. The rest have to go.

What's that got to do with a stadium? Nothing.

.

[CraigDS]

Well, I used to work for a Housing Association assessing the viability of doing up Victorian proprieties like these. I have been down to have a look. I did go to the exhibition of proposals and I did have a chat with the housing association. I had a look at the plans of what they have to deal with and what they're trying to do and I have chatted to a number of residents.

I can see that Alroy Road (for example) has more that are in a better condition (particularly on the evens side) and that the likes of Rockfield Road has smaller houses (less expensive to fix) in better condition. I can see that what council propose to do, pretty much matches the condition of the properties and the streets - keep what's been done, do up what they can fix and clear what they can't. And really - what else can they do?

I just cannot see how you can keep the few (five) lived-in houses on Lothair Road by doing up the 50 or so that are three-storey (plus a basement) and in a shocking state and, hope to put them back on the market at anything like anyone can afford.

On that basis, the other streets, which have fewer bad houses per street (which are smaller and in better condition), have a much better chance. Council can only save what they can save. The rest have to go.

What's that got to do with a stadium? Nothing.

.

All of which I agree with. And I also agree that at some point in time the LCC was going to have to push on with regen of the area no matter what happened with the stadium issue.

However I can still see a link why it is happening now, and so is the (supposed) redev of Anfield.

Both regen in that particular area and a redev have been out of the picture for close on a decade or more, yet suddenly both are going to happen at pretty much the same time - and that is purely coincidence in your eyes?

[Peter McGurk]

All of which I agree with. And I also agree that at some point in time the LCC was going to have to push on with regen of the area no matter what happened with the stadium issue.

However I can still see a link why it is happening now, and so is the (supposed) redev of Anfield.

Both regen in that particular area and a redev have been out of the picture for close on a decade or more, yet suddenly both are going to happen at pretty much the same time - and that is purely coincidence in your eyes?

The residents have been banging the drum in the high profile environment created by the club and the so-called promises from a new stadium (which as it happens were a bit of a myth too).

It would not have been directly improved by a new stadium. The area wasn't even in the previous scheme of things for housing (HMRI/Heartlands/Pathfinder). They've raised their own profile and jumped that particular queue. Meanwhile, properties on the other side of Walton Breck Road...

.

[Z e u s]

Radio City (local Liverpool radio) today said, 'Ian Ayre has told Liverpool supporters not to worry about the stadium as they're not to far away from making an anouncement'.

Anyone heard anything?

[paulrazor]

Radio City (local Liverpool radio) today said, 'Ian Ayre has told Liverpool supporters not to worry about the stadium as they're not to far away from making an anouncement'.

Anyone heard anything?

yes

no offence to you mate but ive heard that before

[Z e u s]

yes

no offence to you mate but ive heard that before

We all have!

[paulrazor]

We all have!

indeed

[CraigDS]

Personally I can't see them announcing anything until the LCC have the houses on Lothair and the club are in a position to move forward with planning.

[Ryan M]

Personally I can't see them announcing anything until the LCC have the houses on Lothair and the club are in a position to move forward with planning.

Hi mate I've been slowly following this thread, seems you and Peter know what you are talking about, but I could be wrong

Any idea when you believe LCC might own the houses?

[CraigDS]

Hi mate I've been slowly following this thread, seems you and Peter know what you are talking about, but I could be wrong

Any idea when you believe LCC might own the houses?

Yeah you are wrong mate - Peter knows fuck all 

to be honest he knows what he is talking about. I just happen to be good at reading a few residents forums and know the area fairly well.

It's going to be tough, as from the looks of it I think at least 1 home owner on the odd side (the one right behind the Main Stand) is kicking up a fuss and not allowing LCC entry to put a value of the house so they can then make an offer. There are also a good few on the even side willing to push the decision to move them out of their houses to appeals, etc.

It does look like it may end up going down the CPO route.

[Ryan M]

Yeah you are wrong mate - Peter knows fuck all 

to be honest he knows what he is talking about. I just happen to be good at reading a few residents forums and know the area fairly well.

It's going to be tough, as from the looks of it I think at least 1 home owner on the odd side (the one right behind the Main Stand) is kicking up a fuss and not allowing LCC entry to put a value of the house so they can then make an offer. There are also a good few on the even side willing to push the decision to move them out of their houses to appeals, etc.

It does look like it may end up going down the CPO route.

Cheers for the reply mate.

I live near the area and the whole of Anfield is desperate for regeneration. I spent a lot of time around the streets there when I was a kid, playing football in the "Reck" behind the bakery, and don't get me wrong if wasn't paradise, but it used to be better than how it's turned out. The sooner the club and the council make a decision the better.

[Z e u s]

There are some talented reds around:







There are more pictures on this site:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=330977&page=305

[The Lord Admiral]

That looks fantastic apart from the corners.

[Original]

I really hope we go for something along the lines of the stadium in those pictures.  I really dislike the generic bowl design that so many clubs go for. 

[paulrazor]

ill have to take a look later on, all them pics were blocked in work

[Peter McGurk]

I really hope we go for something along the lines of the stadium in those pictures.  I really dislike the generic bowl design that so many clubs go for.

Impressive as the renders are, there are a number of problems with those as a realistic proposal (I know, it's just somebody's 'ideal' Anfield). But notably the angles of 42 deg and 37 deg (maximum is 34 degrees ie., it's way too steep to be buildable) and it completely ignores the site constraints.

[Z e u s]

Impressive as the renders are, there are a number of problems with those as a realistic proposal (I know, it's just somebody's 'ideal' Anfield). But notably the angles of 42 deg and 37 deg (maximum is 34 degrees ie., it's way too steep to be buildable) and it completely ignores the site constraints.

What deg angle is the Dortmand stadium?

[Peter McGurk]

What deg angle is the Dortmand stadium?

Lower tiers about 27 deg. Upper 34 degrees. And it's in Germany - different building and safety regulations. Still, steeper than the Kop (about 24 degrees) and they can stand on that too (max for UK standing is 25 degrees - if it were allowed at all).

.

[Original]

Impressive as the renders are, there are a number of problems with those as a realistic proposal (I know, it's just somebody's 'ideal' Anfield). But notably the angles of 42 deg and 37 deg (maximum is 34 degrees ie., it's way too steep to be buildable) and it completely ignores the site constraints.

.

Not knowing the ins and outs of design specifications mate, if we do stay at anfield, would the ground resemble something like those pictures or would the final stadium be a bit more generic, if you know what I mean?

[Peter McGurk]

.

Not knowing the ins and outs of design specifications mate, if we do stay at anfield, would the ground resemble something like those pictures or would the final stadium be a bit more generic, if you know what I mean?

No, mate, I don't know what you mean.

I know it's just a bit of a lark but it's nothing to get excited about (pie in the sky, couldn't be built, just a day dream...)

It's looks simple, straightforward, which is good but it offers false promises, which is bad.

.

[Coady]

Radio City (local Liverpool radio) today said, 'Ian Ayre has told Liverpool supporters not to worry about the stadium as they're not to far away from making an anouncement'.

Anyone heard anything?

I'm guessing Ian Ayre said the above at the supporters committee meeting recently?

[paulrazor]

I'm guessing Ian Ayre said the above at the supporters committee meeting recently?

Weve been hearing it a while, id take Peter's word over him.

If Peter told me work was starting tomorrow id believe him, if Ayre said it id wanted footage of the builders at work.

Im probably being harsh on Ayre but seriously he has said that on more than one occasion.

[LiverBirdKop]

In that third picture, the giant screen seems to be blocking the view of the opposing goal as well. Plenty of space in those corners for it or them.

[owens_2k]

Weren't plans for a big screen at Anfield shown on here recently?

[paulrazor]

Weren't plans for a big screen at Anfield shown on here recently?

i recall hearing that

any sign of that marquee?

[CraigDS]

No screens no marquee as yet.

Also, is there room on Anfield Rd for both the marquee, the 200 parking spaces and the current food court that all seem to have/going for planning!?

[CraigDS]

Looking at the submitted applications it seems...

Parking is 47-59 Anfield Rd, Marquee is 61-71 Anfield Rd. Not sure what area the food court sits on though.


Also whilst looking, I found application 09F/1286 which was submitted 25th June 2009, which was also for 240 car parking spaces on 47-59 Anfield Rd. Haven't looked in detail why another application is needed now as that 2009 one was approved.

[satmann]

These are the best images I have seen. Brilliant. Hope Henry comes across these too.

There are some talented reds around:







There are more pictures on this site:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=330977&page=305

[CraigDS]

These are the best images I have seen. Brilliant. Hope Henry comes across these too.

Hope he comes across something that is impossible to build?

[Alan_X]

I'm certainly not expecting FSG to finance the stadium, but we are an asset and would they in the current climate saddle us with debt?

Using finance to improve the stadium is not 'saddling us with debt'. It's what any developer does - borrow to increase the value of an asset and in this case, to increase revenue streams.

[Alan_X]

I really hope we go for something along the lines of the stadium in those pictures.  I really dislike the generic bowl design that so many clubs go for. 

You'd rather have a generic ground that looks like a a bigger version of the Britannia?

Did you actually read the thread - he only made it square because he's just started and doesn't know how to do curves. I don't know why people wank themselves silly over SketchUp models on Skyscaper City. Most are completely unrealistic and would never work in practice. The top of his Kop is 42º which is too steep according to the modeller it only holds 10,000.

And as the lad says he was banned from here for bleating on about FSG being Hicks and Gillette with better PR I doubt if Henry would be that interested. 

And finally... this is a thread about redeveloping Anfield not new build.

[Original]

You'd rather have a generic ground that looks like a a bigger version of the Britannia?

Did you actually read the thread - he only made it square because he's just started and doesn't know how to do curves. I don't know why people wank themselves silly over SketchUp models on Skyscaper City. Most are completely unrealistic and would never work in practice. The top of his Kop is 42º which is too steep according to the modeller it only holds 10,000.

And as the lad says he was banned from here for bleating on about FSG being Hicks and Gillette with better PR I doubt if Henry would be that interested. 

And finally... this is a thread about redeveloping Anfield not new build.

I'm really sorry for my completely out of order comment, it won't happen again.

[hitman89762000]

LIVERPOOL supporters have waited many years and been through two changes of ownership since the club first made clear the desperate need for a significant increase in capacity for home games. Following the takeover by FSG in 2010 the club began to look at the possibility of a redevelopment of Anfield alongside the various plans to move to a new stadium in Stanley Park.
The Anfield Wrap understands that an announcement will be made on Monday confirming that Liverpool intend to redevelop Anfield.
The announcement, it is understood, will be made by Liverpool City Council and relates to the commencement of Compulsory Purchase Order consultations as part of plans for improvements to the Anfield area. Those improvements include work to redevelop Liverpool Football Club’s Anfield stadium.
The intention, following satisfactory progress in the consultations which continue into next year, is for the stadium redevelopment to commence in 2014.

www.theanfieldwrap.com/2012/10/announcement-on-anfield-redevelopment-expected-monday/

Yes!!!

[TepidT2O]

Double yes