When are we likely to get definitive stadium news?

[Harry Squatter]

Nearest that line goes to Anfield is where it crosses Utting Avenue, near the Clarence pub. Still a good 15 min walk from the ground, probably not that much nearer than Sandhills, which already caters for passengers.

 

Seen this on Skyscraper city forums regarding funding for transport links. This was posted before the announcement so maybe the priorities of this list may alter again.

 

The line itself runs from the docks, past Bootle Town Hall and then under the tunnel next to it, the old stations on the line are Canada Dock, Spellow, Breck Road, Tuebrook, Stanley & Edge Lane before coming out by Wavertree Technology Park and onto mainline services. The expansion of the docks/Liverpool 2 will put more pressure on the roads round Seaforth and the M57.

 

The Government recently created Local Transport Boards as form of extension of the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP's) their intention was LTB's would be run by or influenced by the LEP's. Theyve been given some degree of autonomy in spending the Dft's Regional Funding Allocation (also known as the Local Authority Major Capital Schemes) which is a five year grant to sub-regional transport schemes costing more than £5m.

 

They gave the new LTB's just three months (end of July deadline) to create a priority list ranking of what schemes they envisage pursuing over the next spending round 2015/16-2018/2019 and then from April 2014 they would approve and manage the projects.

 

As part of that process Merseyside has created a long list of 36 projects requiring £327m of funding with a value of £377m of which £120m is rail schemes they would like to see go ahead. They are planning to whittle that down to 22 projects at the next meeting.The actual budget they will have will have to spend will be a lot less and will be carried over from the previous funding allocation which is per capita based based on projected population estimates for 2017. Theyve been told to plan for 30% plus or minus the value (for Merseyside thats £35.5m) though I dont think many people are expecting them to actually boost spending, we may be lucky if we get away with only the 10% average departmental cuts planned for the Spending Review in July.

 

The 36 schemes identified in Merseyside before being whittled down to 22 best business cases/fits in a 65% funding envelope (The actual projects rankings have been anonymised so wont know till next meeting or possibly later)

 

4 Halton

2 Knowsley

8 Liverpool

10 Merseytravel

2 Sefton

5 St Helens

5 Wirral

 

12 public transport, 17 highways, 4 maintenance and 3 connectivity themes.

 

Location/Project/required funding/total cost

 

Halton Silver Jubilee Bridge Major Maintenance (maintence/strengthening) £3.3m, £4.5m

Halton M56 J11A (motorway widening, new east facing sliproad) £19.4m, £21.6m

Halton Daresbury Bridges (access roads to enterprise zone) £5.8m, £6.4m

Halton Widnes Waterfront EDZ Access Improvements (improved access) £1.9, £2.1m

Knowsley A5300 - Access to Opportunity and Employment (M57 Extension A5300) £3.97m, £4.97m

Knowsley Industrial Park Access and Connectivity improvements (improved access to Knowsley Industrial Park) £5.6m, £6.6m

Liverpool North Liverpool Key Corridors (A565 and A5036 improvements) £13.25, £15m

Liverpool International Gateway/Airport Eastern Access Road (new road) £12.6m, £14m

Liverpool International Gateway/Speke Estuary Major Scheme (improved junction at entrance to Speke Estuary Business park) £2.95m, £3.3m

Liverpool North Liverpool Sandhills Lane Link (improvements for freight) £6m, £6.6m

Liverpool Stonebridge MDZ A580 East Lancs Road (access to Mayoral Development Zone) £7.35m, £8.2m

Liverpool City Centre SIF-Strand Corridor Scheme (improve public realm between waterfront and city centre) £5.35m, £6.6m

Liverpool City Centre Connectivity Programme (job creation) £33.3m, £37m

Liverpool City Centre Canning Docks (infrastructure connections to waterfront) £3.6m, £4m

Merseytravel Newton-le-Willows Interchange (bus, P&R, rail interchange) £14.65m, £16.25m

Merseytravel Maghull North (rail station) £6.1m, £6.8m

Merseytravel Carr Mill Station (rail station) £6.2m, £6.9m

Merseytravel St Helen's Link (St Helen's Central to St Helen's Junction rail link) £25m, £28m

Merseytravel Halton Curves (dualling or electrification?) £12.6m, £15.6m

Merseytravel Bootle Branchline (passenger services to Bootle) £46.3m, £51.5mMerseytravel Real Time Passenger Information £2.7m, £3m

Merseytravel Kirby Headbolt Lane (rail extension) £24.2m, £26.9m

Merseytravel Merseytram Line 1 Replacement Scheme (improve transport facilities) £13.9m, £14.25m

Merseytravel Prescot Station (improve access between station and town centre) £2.8m, £3.54m

Sefton Southport Eastern Access (access to regeneration area Southport ‘classic resort’ Town Centre) £7.2m, £8m

Sefton M58 J1 Junction Improvements £5.5m, £6.15m

St Helens A 570 Southern Employment Corridor Improvements (highway capacity at three roundabouts) £3.15m, £3.5m

St Helens Road Bridges Package (strengthen weak bridges) £4.6m, £5.1m

St Helens Haydock Access Improvements (access to industrial estate) £3m, £3.3m

St Helens St Helens Interchange (bus/rail interchange improvement) £4m, £4.55m

St Helens Windle Island (junction improvements) £2.9m, £3.3m

Wirral A41 Route Improvements (improve connection between A41 and local areas) £5.2, £5.75m

Wirral Heron Road to West Kirby Improvements (access to development land) £5.85m, £6.5m

Wirral Wirral Dock Bridges (road and dock improvements) £3.73m, £6.7m

Wirral Poulton Bridge (replace redundant swing bridge) £1.2m, £3.3m

Wirral Streetcar (US style streetcars around Peel development) £7.7m, £10.8m

I think £46 million won’t go very far, Roby and Huyton are being upgraded with car parks and a new track being laid for services to Wigan and that is costing £25M. Not sure how they would link it directly to the city centre apart from having to get the train to Wavertree/Broad Green or get on the Northern Line and get off at Oriel Road/The Strand.

Three possible sites for stations, this one by Goodison Park, by the police station:

Disused Stations: WALTON & ANFIELD STATION

Tuebrook

Disused Stations: Tue Brook Station

Clubmoor (Stanley)

Disused Stations: Breck Road Station

[LFC64]

There's still 8 houses that the owners won't sell. Seems inevitable that the council will have to use CPO powers but that could take ages so don't bother saving up for that season ticket just yet.

 

I thought Ayres said a couple of weeks ago that we would be submitting a planning application before the start of the season? Did anyone ask him which fucking season

 

According to Joe Anderson they are all landlords who don't live in the area. 2 are claiming to have lost out on £500,000 in rent due to the club's alleged policy of deliberately buying up properties behind the main stand and leaving them to rot so blighting the area.

The resident groups as far as I can see are upbeat about the plans. These landlords are opportunists, don't give a toss for the community or even their own properties as long as they're getting the rent in.

Hopefully the public consultation can iron out any remaining problems for the genuine residents who want to make it their home and community and the council can get CPO's for the opportunists which they have stated is their intention.

[LFC64]

LFC are responsible for not thinking we'd sell out a 70000 or bigger because we would.

 

If you have a load of cheap tickets for locals, dads and lads, a new boys pen were it'd be like £10 to get in, teamed with expensive seats for those who can pay more and loads of corporate stuff, it'd sell out.

 

This is what I'd love to see and the only way I see of achieving a fair balance between being able to compete financially and making the club accessible to the community.

Suppose it comes down to whether this can be done with 60,000 which seems to be the potential of the redevelopped stands (although we don't know this for sure).

[Xherdan]

I think the occupied houses is part of the reason the club had to go on a joint venture with the City Council. While people may not approve of it, CPOing the houses is a solution.

[Whelan]

According to Joe Anderson they are all landlords who don't live in the area. 2 are claiming to have lost out on £500,000 in rent due to the club's alleged policy of deliberately buying up properties behind the main stand and leaving them to rot so blighting the area.

The resident groups as far as I can see are upbeat about the plans. These landlords are opportunists, don't give a toss for the community or even their own properties as long as they're getting the rent in.

Hopefully the public consultation can iron out any remaining problems for the genuine residents who want to make it their home and community and the council can get CPO's for the opportunists which they have stated is their intention.

 

This is the cheeky cunt!

 

Anfield landlord seeks compensation over Liverpool stadium blight | Football | guardian.co.uk

 

Don't start referencing the 'working class roots' of the area when you are a landlord. When did you buy your house, and how long has it been derelict.

 

And how much did you pay - because I bet you that you paid considerably less than the going rate for those houses because of their location, and I bet you thought 'still get the same rental rate though'.

[LFC64]

This is the cheeky cunt!

 

Anfield landlord seeks compensation over Liverpool stadium blight | Football | guardian.co.uk

 

Don't start referencing the 'working class roots' of the area when you are a landlord. When did you buy your house, and how long has it been derelict.

 

And how much did you pay - because I bet you that you paid considerably less than the going rate for those houses because of their location, and I bet you thought 'still get the same rental rate though'.

 

Exactly it's bullshit - you could say that about Kirkdale, Everton, Kensington, Dingle, L8, Wavertree, Bootle and so on. Landlords with a social conscience ffs!

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

So this Landlord Jones reckons he's lost 500k on 2 houses in Rockfield Rd since the mid 90's.

 

Lets say it's from 93 so 20 years, average it out at £100 per week, per house.

 

That's around 10k a year if hey are occupied for the 2 houses.

 

10k a year x 20 is 200k.

 

They have left them to wreck and ruin so no maintenance for years etc.

 

They have bought them for buttons years ago, rented them to any old shite without a care for the area and are now trying to play the Working Class card.

 

I have family there, know how much the houses cost 20years ago, know the rents and am also renting out my own house in Anfield. ( friends and family only ) Private Landlords are destroying areas as much as anyone. See Tuebrook now since the students left for town.

[Guest San Don]

david conn and the guardian again. Who'd have thunk it, eh?

 

Oh, and no comments allowed on the article to question the writer or the 'working class roots'

[Whelan]

I would love to see Mr Jones working class opinions on setting the rent and dealing with tenants - 'no, lets keep it low - it is a working class area after all and we did get the house cheap to begin with'!

 

Get to fuck you parasite - take your money and fuck off. How his claim for half a million is being taken seriously is pathetic, there is no moral reason for that article.

[xerxes]

There are no moral champions in this, just winners and losers.

 

It is true that the Club has adopted a deliberate and cynical policy of dereliction over a period of almost a quarter of a century with the express intention of driving down values, both rented and capital in order to ease the cost of expansion. They have succeeded.

 

Just as many ordinary folk around the ground have been priced out of visiting the stadium, so they have had to take what they can get as multi millionaire footballers and American businessmen fill their boots.

 

Of course speculators have moved in, some will have made money, few will have lost.

 

The Club continues to make no specific proposals for the ground, preferring instead for the Council to spend public money, and source private money, to regenerate the area, with a larger stadium, with few tangible benefits for the community a by-product. Almost unnoticed is the suggestion that all the Club will have to do is contribute a 106 payment as part of planning permission. What the community and supporters get remains unclear, and unknown.

 

It is grotesque to see some cheering the club do as little as possible and spend as little as possible to facilitate foreign owners make a return. Others cheer that the stadium’s capacity has been deliberately capped to drive obscene ticket prices under the charade of staying in our spiritual home – a footballing temple now turned into a temple to Mammon.

[Guest San Don]

There are no moral champions in this, just winners and losers.

 

It is true that the Club has adopted a deliberate and cynical policy of dereliction over a period of almost a quarter of a century with the express intention of driving down values, both rented and capital in order to ease the cost of expansion. They have succeeded.

 

Just as many ordinary folk around the ground have been priced out of visiting the stadium, so they have had to take what they can get as multi millionaire footballers and American businessmen fill their boots.

 

Of course speculators have moved in, some will have made money, few will have lost.

 

The Club continues to make no specific proposals for the ground, preferring instead for the Council to spend public money, and source private money, to regenerate the area, with a larger stadium, with few tangible benefits for the community a by-product. Almost unnoticed is the suggestion that all the Club will have to do is contribute a 106 payment as part of planning permission. What the community and supporters get remains unclear, and unknown.

 

It is grotesque to see some cheering the club do as little as possible and spend as little as possible to facilitate foreign owners make a return. Others cheer that the stadium’s capacity has been deliberately capped to drive obscene ticket prices under the charade of staying in our spiritual home – a footballing temple now turned into a temple to Mammon.

 

You dont half chat some shit.

[General Dryness]

You dont half chat some shit.

 

Repped.

[xerxes]

You dont half chat some shit.

 

And you are the most gullible on here. The sound I hear is of Ian Ayre toasting you- and laughing.

[ZonkoVille77]

Fuckin hell xerxes.

[LFC64]

There are no moral champions in this, just winners and losers.

 

It is true that the Club has adopted a deliberate and cynical policy of dereliction over a period of almost a quarter of a century with the express intention of driving down values, both rented and capital in order to ease the cost of expansion. They have succeeded.

 

Just as many ordinary folk around the ground have been priced out of visiting the stadium, so they have had to take what they can get as multi millionaire footballers and American businessmen fill their boots.

 

Of course speculators have moved in, some will have made money, few will have lost.

 

The Club continues to make no specific proposals for the ground, preferring instead for the Council to spend public money, and source private money, to regenerate the area, with a larger stadium, with few tangible benefits for the community a by-product. Almost unnoticed is the suggestion that all the Club will have to do is contribute a 106 payment as part of planning permission. What the community and supporters get remains unclear, and unknown.

 

It is grotesque to see some cheering the club do as little as possible and spend as little as possible to facilitate foreign owners make a return. Others cheer that the stadium’s capacity has been deliberately capped to drive obscene ticket prices under the charade of staying in our spiritual home – a footballing temple now turned into a temple to Mammon.

 

We can lay the blame for the failiure to deliver a new or redevelopped stadium the door of the previous owners but the regeneration of an already run down area and community suffering from the same economic and social symptoms as other parts of the city is not the sole responsibility of the club.

Shelved plans beset by practical and legal obstacles that never came to fruition, a lack of foresight, indecision and in the case of G+H deceit are all accusations that can be levelled at the club but I'm not sure the 'deliberate and cynical policy' to manipulate the property market is one of them.

A saga of ineptitude yes but a deliberate policy i don't think so.

I don't have an issue with anyone who is relieved to see positive action being taken to put life back into the area at last for the decent residents who want to contribute to the community.

 

As for the stadium itself well I agree it's still anyone's guess.

[Xherdan]

I think that Xerxes could be that young lad Welsh Lad off this season of The Apprentice. I.E. Trying to sound serious but looking like a cunt while doing so.

[Guest San Don]

I think that Xerxes could be that young Welsh Lad off this season of The Apprentice. I.E. Trying to sound serious but being a cunt while doing so.

 

Fixed that for you ;)

[xerxes]

We can lay the blame for the failiure to deliver a new or redevelopped stadium the door of the previous owners but the regeneration of an already run down area and community suffering from the same economic and social symptoms as other parts of the city is not the sole responsibility of the club.

Shelved plans beset by practical and legal obstacles that never came to fruition, a lack of foresight, indecision and in the case of G+H deceit are all accusations that can be levelled at the club but I'm not sure the 'deliberate and cynical policy' to manipulate the property market is one of them.

A saga of ineptitude yes but a deliberate policy i don't think so.

I don't have an issue with anyone who is relieved to see positive action being taken to put life back into the area at last for the decent residents who want to contribute to the community.

 

As for the stadium itself well I agree it's still anyone's guess.

 

I agree that urban regeneration is the job of the Council, not of the Club. The current proposals appear to involve LFC, as a private company, expanding the ground and paying a 106 Contribution for the privilege. Quite right too. But this is no largesse on the part of the club, it is what has to be done.

 

Driving down value by dereliction, I accept, has not been overt policy to secure redevelopment, but it has been a useful by-product for the club. It has suited the owners commercially.

 

It saddens me to see some sectors of our support happy for an inadequate stadium to be manipulated to drive matchday prices up, and for local people, owners, investors and speculators to be turned over by Boston businessmen.

 

I still cling, maybe forlornly, to the blief that LFC still has some vestiges of Anfield, Liverpool, Scouse about it and is more than a number on a balance sheet three thousand miles away. Quite a few of us rallied around that cause when G&H were in town, how quickly some forget

[xerxes]

I think that Xerxes could be that young lad Welsh Lad off this season of The Apprentice. I.E. Trying to sound serious but looking like a cunt while doing so.

 

When you and San Don don't understand- you have only to ask.

 

When you don't agree- make your case.

 

The Boardroom side of things has been of little interest to a significant sector of our support, for many years, with only G&H partially changing that. There is a case for simply concentrating on the football.

 

But there comes a point when you ask "Why are we no longer playing European football?", "Why are we not even in the top twenty of European Clubs by average home attendance and in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe if we are one of the worlds biggest clubs?"

 

The answers are to be found off the field, not on it.

[Guest San Don]

When you and San Don don't understand- you have only to ask.

 

When you don't agree- make your case.

 

The Boardroom side of things has been of little interest to a significant sector of our support, for many years, with only G&H partially changing that. There is a case for simply concentrating on the football.

 

But there comes a point when you ask "Why are we no longer playing European football?", "Why are we not even in the top twenty of European Clubs by average home attendance and in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe if we are one of the worlds biggest clubs?"

 

The answers are to be found off the field, not on it.

 

 

We are not in Europe this year. You make it sound like we havent played in europe for years. No doubt your retort will be to change your argument (again) that you meant not in the Champions League.

 

We arent in Europe this year because the owners seriously fucked up in the transfer market before last season. We also had a new manager who probably didnt prioritise eithe rof the cups. But, at the end of the day, the team wasnt good enough.

 

You ask and I quote ""Why are we not even in the top twenty of European Clubs by average home attendance and in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe if we are one of the worlds biggest clubs?"

 

Give us proof that in the period from 1965 to 2005 (the last time we were European Champions) that we were in the top 20 European clubs by average home attendance?

 

Give us proof in the period from 1965 to 2005 that we were in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe?

[JermainePennant]

On them landlords taking the piss, I remember Liverpool fans putting pressure on certain Americans to get rid and am sure those with the right skills could come up with some shit to put them landlords in a uncomfortable position.

 

I'm looking at it simply but find it ridiculous to think just buying those houses around the stadium could have sorted the problems we have had with stadium for years.

 

Considering you could buy a house for less then a players weeks wages the figures showing we bought about ten houses over a few years I found staggering, this should have been done years ago and reflects very badly on the people we have had high up.

[MajesticSuarez]

The only way Liverpool could stay at Anfield is to purchase those properties. The last piece of speculatiion I've read is that Liverpool have purchased 52 of the 80 properties. They apparently can get the other 28 through a purchase order.

Liverpool City Council plan to provide £110 million as part of the £260 million to redevelop the area. Liverpool FC providing the othert £150 million of course.

 

With regards to the nay sayers. What's the alternative? Move to a brand new spanking new stadium that is called the Standard Chartered Stadium. We would be restricted in transfer spending like Arsenal have been for the last 8 years.

 

The people who lived in those houses are being looked after, the area is being regenerated and we're getting our stadium redeveloped. We're staying in our spiritual home, and it's keeping it's name.

 

45,500, Liverpool fans make a hell of a lot of noise. 60,500 Liverpool fans will be frightening.

[The Acolyte]

On them landlords taking the piss, I remember Liverpool fans putting pressure on certain Americans to get rid and am sure those with the right skills could come up with some shit to put them landlords in a uncomfortable position.

 

I'm looking at it simply but find it ridiculous to think just buying those houses around the stadium could have sorted the problems we have had with stadium for years.

 

Considering you could buy a house for less then a players weeks wages the figures showing we bought about ten houses over a few years I found staggering, this should have been done years ago and reflects very badly on the people we have had high up.

 

Both the Moores and C&A regimes favoured a move from Anfield as it would draw more revenue (their logic) so the purchasing of homes was never pushed. Until now. I favoured a new stadium. The current footprint is too small for any rebuild to be rendered either restricted or needing a revamp in under 10 years. Wherever they make an improvement in one area something else will suffer. The only way I think it could work is if the whole museum facilities was moved to a purpose built structure. That may give some more internal wiggle room.

[Guest San Don]

Both the Moores and C&A regimes favoured a move from Anfield as it would draw more revenue (their logic) so the purchasing of homes was never pushed. Until now. I favoured a new stadium. The current footprint is too small for any rebuild to be rendered either restricted or needing a revamp in under 10 years. Wherever they make an improvement in one area something else will suffer. The only way I think it could work is if the whole museum facilities was moved to a purpose built structure. That may give some more internal wiggle room.

 

If designed properly, the ARE could be rebuilt as a massive 3 tier stand. I think it currently holds about 9500. Built over the current road or even if the road is diverted, it would be easy to build a stand with over 15000 seats.

 

The new Main Stand then 'only' needs another 10000 seats to bring the capacity over 60k.

[xerxes]

We are not in Europe this year. You make it sound like we havent played in europe for years. No doubt your retort will be to change your argument (again) that you meant not in the Champions League.

 

We arent in Europe this year because the owners seriously fucked up in the transfer market before last season. We also had a new manager who probably didnt prioritise eithe rof the cups. But, at the end of the day, the team wasnt good enough.

 

You ask and I quote ""Why are we not even in the top twenty of European Clubs by average home attendance and in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe if we are one of the worlds biggest clubs?"

 

Give us proof that in the period from 1965 to 2005 (the last time we were European Champions) that we were in the top 20 European clubs by average home attendance?

 

Give us proof in the period from 1965 to 2005 that we were in the top 60 largest grounds in Europe?

 

The question “ Why are we no longer playing European football? “ means just that.

 

I agree with your immediate answer to the question, you too will acknowledge that the root causes run far deeper.

 

LFC are the second best supported club by English football in the history of the English game, our European Cup triumphs amongst an elite three. If you feel that our current capacity and resultant artificially stunted average attendance reflects that, fine. I don’t. Both shame the fine traditions and potential of our club. The erosion of the capacity and standard of Anfield as a World cup ground in 1966 till now, when we are no longer a top rated UEFA ground, is an embarrassment.

 

If you feel in the period from 1965 to 2005 (the last time we were European Champions) that we were ( or were not) in the top 20 European clubs by average home attendance, make your case. If you feel that our current capacity and ground status is acceptable for a club of our stature- good for you.