http://www.newstartmag.co.uk/festivals.html

10 November 2004
ground force
Garden festivals prettified Britain’s landscape and promised to bring lasting change. The years haven’t been kind but the sites are gaining a certain maturity, says Rosie Niven

In deepest south Liverpool, there is a garden where no one ever goes. Twenty years ago, it would have been full of people enjoying the views across the Mersey. In one summer alone more than 3.5m people flocked there to see its Japanese pagoda and wildlife gardens. But now it lies abandoned, with shopping trolleys half submerged in fishponds and piles of rubble in the main pavilion.

This isn’t a secret garden - when it opened in 1984 as Britain’s first garden festival, it was hailed as ‘a five month pageant of horticultural excellence and spectacular entertainment’. Even now it is passed every day by thousands of drivers travelling into Liverpool, who can still see many of the festival’s original sculptures and landscape features from the road. Yet few people have ventured inside the site for almost two decades, kept out by a rusting wire fence.

Of course, this is not how it was supposed to be. As one of five national garden festivals held during the 1980s and 1990s, the Liverpool event was supposed to act as a focus for regeneration and provide the setting for quality development in the future.

Based on the Bundesgartenschau, introduced in post-war Germany to bring war-damaged areas back into use, the concept was first mooted as a regeneration tool by former environment secretary Michael Heseltine in 1980. A programme of five festivals was devised, to be held biennially in Stoke-on-Trent, Glasgow, Gateshead, and Ebbw Vale, starting with the Liverpool international garden festival.

Each festival took a derelict piece of land, reclaimed it and turned it into green space for the event. While festivals only lived for one summer, it was hoped they would encourage investment and development long afterwards.

In reality, finding an end use for the five festival sites turned out to be problematic. Both Stoke and Glasgow suffered a series of false starts before development took place. In Gateshead, plans to develop the site for employment uses were abandoned two years ago in favour of a housing development.

But it was the Liverpool site that proved most troublesome. Initially, it was envisaged that a large part of the site would be retained as open space, with additional housing and leisure facilities.

A 600-home development was built on the northern part of the site in 1986, but a report four years later by the then Department of the Environment noted that with the impact of the festival fast fading, ‘there has been little conversion into regeneration’.

In the early 1990s, the south part of the site was leased to a company hoping to open a theme park, which failed to make money, and by the end of the decade the site was empty again.

Hopes were raised in 1998 when Wiggins development consortium acquired the leasehold to the site and submitted a series of planning applications. But the applications were withdrawn last year and the council threatened to serve the consortium with a dilapidations order for failing to maintain the site. Months later, under the threat of further action, the consortium sold up and moved on.

Norman Perry, former chief executive of the Housing Corporation, says it wasn’t just at Liverpool that the garden festival vision failed to achieve its full potential. ‘Heseltine’s intention for garden festivals was a way of reclaiming sites and putting them to good economic use,’ says Mr Perry, who at the time of the 1986 garden festival was a civil servant in the west midlands. ‘There was only one place where that happened properly and that was Stoke.’

While the initial plan for the Stoke site was to develop it for light industrial use, a lack of interest forced a rethink. It was eventually developed as a retail and leisure park, with some of the open space created for the garden festival retained. The development was complete by the mid-1990s and Stoke-on-Trent Council is now in talks about extending it.

The Stoke-on-Trent legacy may prove the most economically successful in the long run, but it has not made a lasting impact on the profile of the Staffordshire town.

By contrast, David Copeland, former executive director of the national garden festival in Gateshead, says the 1990 event was just the start of a series of high profile regeneration initiatives for the Tyneside town.

‘There were hopes for more than just physical change,’ he explains. ‘One of the reasons for holding festivals was to boost an area’s self-confidence. Gateshead then had the Angel of the North, the Baltic and the Sage - but it all started with the garden festival.’

The cost of staging a garden festival was around £40m for the earlier garden festivals, rising to £69m for the Glasgow event. The government’s evaluation of the first three festivals, published in 1990, said the events had yielded a wide range of benefits but added that many individual benefits were ‘quite modest, given total costs’.

However, benefits are now coming on stream, albeit belatedly. The Stoke site in 1995 was estimated to be generating private investment at ten times the level put in by the public sector. Gateshead recently saw the last of its major vacant plots brought forward for development, while Glasgow’s docklands site is filling up fast.

Even the future of the Liverpool site is starting to look more promising. Merseyside developers Langtree and house builder David McLean recently formed a joint venture to develop the 30ha site.

A masterplan currently being drawn up envisages an urban village on the site of the festival hall. Around three-quarters of the site would remain as open space and the Land Restoration Trust is in talks with the developers about taking on its management.

The 1992 national garden festival at Ebbw Vale was the last in the programme. Since then, the government’s regeneration priorities have changed, with costly disasters like the Millennium Dome sounding the death knell for using expensive exhibitions to regenerate areas. Yet elsewhere in the world, festivals remain an important regeneration tool.

‘In Germany, garden festivals have been a massive success - they are still going strong at 53 years old and doing the job they were set up to do,’ says Mr Copeland. ‘There is now demand for festivals worldwide in places like Malaysia and Japan. But whether they could do the job in Britain now, I don’t know.’

Mr Copeland believes there is scope for a 21st century garden festival with a stronger educational or sustainability theme. But he fears the Dome debacle has ended any chance of the concept being revived. Norman Perry agrees that the prospect of a revival looks bleak. ‘I don’t think we ever took them seriously,’ he laments. ‘Maybe the British are just too sceptical.’

Yet just a few hundred yards across the river from the Gateshead garden festival site, plans are afoot for a year-long festival designed to act as the focal point for the regeneration of Newcastle’s Scotswood area. Hundreds of new homes would be created under plans for an urban development exhibition showcasing examples of sustainable 21st century living, designed by world famous architects.

Like the garden festivals, this ‘housing expo’ concept was pioneered in Germany and is intended to provide a permanent legacy, in this case homes for sale and rent. Newcastle Council’s new Liberal Democrat administration is behind the idea, which will be formally launched in the new year. So perhaps the idea of using a festival as a tool for regeneration isn’t entirely dead in the water.

where are they now?

Stoke-on-Trent - 1986

After a shaky start, which saw a dearth of commercial interest in plans for a light industrial development, Stoke Council marketed the site as a retailing opportunity. The response to the revised strategy published in late 1986 generated many enquiries and the council selected St Modwen Properties to develop a mixed-use scheme retaining much of the festival’s landscaping. By 1995, the redevelopment of the former mining and ironworks site was almost complete. That same year, a study by former Stoke Council chief executive Stewart Titchener estimated that for every £1m of public money pumped into the site, £10m of private investment was generated.

Glasgow - 1988

Thanks to the hot summer of 1988, the Glasgow garden festival was the biggest draw of the five festivals, attracting 4m visitors. But its location on the south bank of the Clyde initially proved unattractive to developers. However, by the late 1990s momentum was growing on the south bank with the development of a lottery-funded science centre. The prospect of a road and pedestrian bridge linking the site to the city centre paved the way for the Pacific Quay development, soon to be the site of the BBC’s new Scottish headquarters. Once these projects are complete, very little of the festival site will remain vacant.

Gateshead - 1990

Gateshead garden festival site was earmarked for a mix of uses after the event’s close. At the southern end, once the site of the Norwood Cokeworks, a number of show homes were already on site and more were developed after the festival’s close. Land next to the neighbourhood of Dunston was used for social housing, with another site retained as parkland. However, the employment uses envisaged for the site never materialised so in 2003 construction began on Staiths South Bank (right), a 800-home collaboration between George Wimpey City and Hemingwaydesign.

Ebbw Vale - 1992

Part of the former Ebbw Vale steelworks in south Wales was used for the final garden festival in 1992. It is now Victoria Park, Wales’ first urban village, which includes 200 homes built by developer Redrow. Other developments on site includes a designer goods outlet, an owl sanctuary, fitness centre and a school for the visually impaired. Many festival features have been retained, including an ornamental lake, a pavilion and woodland.


What do you think? Send your views to: editorial@newstartmag.co.uk or fax: 020 7401 5451



Let`s bring `Garden Festivals` back!

http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_objectid=15932833%26method=full%26siteid=50061%26headline=woodland%2dpark%2dfor%2dfestival%2dsite-name_page.html

Woodland park for festival site Sep 5 2005

by Andy Kelly, Daily Post

LIVERPOOL'S first new public park for 25 years will be created as part of the redevelopment of the former Garden Festival site at Otterspool.

The city's executive board has approved a deal which will lease Priory Wood in St Michaels to Langtree McLean, the company which is preparing to bring the derelict south Liverpool landmark back into use.

Councillors stressed that there had never been any intention to develop the wood on Riverside Drive and it would be retained as open space, with full public access.

More than 100 letters of objection had been received as the public feared the award of the lease to the developer, technically advertised as "a loss of green space", would mean just that.

But the executive board confirmed there was never any intention to develop on the land which acts as a gateway to the festival gardens from St Michaels railway station.

Priory Wood will now be maintained and managed by the same agents appointed to look after the festival gardens for which Langtree McLean are expected to submit a planning application in the autumn.

It will also become part of a new Coastal Park which is being developed along the Mersey.

Council leader Mike Storey said: "I believe this will be the first new public park in the city for around 25 years, the last one was probably Everton Park in the late 70s.

"This is good news for Priory Wood and for the garden festival site which has been a bit of an eyesore over the years.

"Two thirds of the festival gardens site will be maintained as a park and the Japanese and Chinese gardens will be restored."

A report before the executive board explained that it was felt the wood would be better maintained by becoming part of a single package with land on the festival site.

It said: "There are very strong arguments why the wood should be leased to Langtree McLean. and managed as one package with the rest of the underdeveloped portion of the Garden Festival site.

"Priory Woods needs upgrading and improving to make it safer and more user friendly.

"A managing agent based on the Festival site and working to a management plan which is to be agreed is likely to provide a better standard of maintenance than the council can from its limited resources."

Cllr Peter Millea, Liverpool's executive member for regeneration, said: "There was never any question of us developing this land.

"It will stay as open space."

The lease will only be handed over to Langtree McLean if it obtains planning permission for the proposals for the Garden Festival area.

andykelly@dailypost.co.uk

See also:

http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/Business/Economic_development/Area_or_site_specific_regeneration/Mersey_waterfront_regional_park/index.asp

Had a mooch around the festival gardens on Tuesday. Got absolutely soaked.
Just hope somebody gets their arse in gear and either develops or landscapes it. Currently, it's an embarrassment to Liverpool.:bash:

http://www.**************************/festnov001.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov001a.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov002.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov003.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov004.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov005.jpg

http://www.**************************/festnov006.jpg

It's such a shame to see the site like that. I wasn't quite two years old at the time of the Garden Festival, but can still remember the land train, and the Coca-Cola slide in the main hall, and of course the Yellow Submarine.

I think in many ways the Festival Park idea in the early 90's was a good one, just not carried out very well. To enter the dome - £1, to go bowling - £1, play area - £1, roller disco - £1, video games - £1, Japanese Gardens - £1, Science Dome - £1, Outdoor play area - £1 - and I'm sure there were more. Perhaps a wristband pay-one-price scheme would have worked better, as it was far too expensive for an average family of 2.4 children. Anyway, I knew the gardens were in a state of disrepair, but didn't realise they were that bad, I agree Dave, it's an absolute disgrace.

This site is about to be developed By Langtree/Mclean, with the majority of the site being parkland/open space.

See this article here (http://www.residentialreview.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=171)

This site is about to be developed By Langtree/Mclean, with the majority of the site being parkland/open space.

See this article here (http://www.residentialreview.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=171)

Shame about the dome (http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/entertainment/previewsandreviews/tm_objectid=15709185&method=full&siteid=50061&headline=festival-dome-is-doomed-name_page.html)

Shame?

It's a fucking disgrace and that's putting it mildly, a 20th century park, another jewel in the crown, a place people want to live, work and play in, nah, balls to that, let's fence it off, let the vandals have the run and try and forget about it.

just reading that article, i wonder if this will commence in easter as it says?

The application is in folks. Let's hope Ruth Kelly doesn't find out about it!

http://www.festivalgardens.co.uk

^^I guess you've performed some of your renderoidisations. Post'em Macc boy!

The application is in folks. Let's hope Ruth Kelly doesn't find out about it!

http://www.festivalgardens.co.uk

I hope this proposal is subjected to intense scrutiny. Whilst the green aspects/park aspects are to be welcomed, the residential proposals appear sub Norris Green in their ambition. I'm assuming that the brochure is a mock up. The inaccuracies within it about the the local area indicate that information was provided by someone without in-depth knowledge. I'm always suspicious about developers who don't have the wit to get it right. It doesn't bode well.

I hope this proposal is subjected to intense scrutiny. Whilst the green aspects/park aspects are to be welcomed, the residential proposals appear sub Norris Green in their ambition. I'm assuming that the brochure is a mock up. The inaccuracies within it about the the local area indicate that information was provided by someone without in-depth knowledge. I'm always suspicious about developers who don't have the wit to get it right. It doesn't bode well.

You're absolutely right. The scheme is very important, and whilst the area has fallen into nothing short of a shambles it deserves to have the best possible solution.

how the hell has that apartment scheme in the garden festivel site been approved? surely its blocking the views of the two cathedrals from ellesmere port! only joking!

how the hell has that apartment scheme in the garden festivel site been approved? surely its blocking the views of the two cathedrals from ellesmere port! only joking!

...I heard there were some concerns over them obstructing the view of the Mersey from the top deck of a Busabout.

I was in a submarine down there last week and I am positive these veritable behemoths would spoil the view of any submariners visiting the city!

By the way... aren't they shite? More corniceline freakery... they don't give a fuck about the quality as long as they do not rise above some bush someone in LCC has made sacrosanct down there... looks like a cheap 80s' ini campus set of blocks!

The proposal before last was quite classy.... but then this is what WHS cities have to have... doesn't disrupt the victorian melodrama up t'river y'see!

Well put!

25th November 2006

http://static.flickr.com/120/305746108_b85ed73c75.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ijob/305746108/)

I was in a submarine down there last week and I am positive these veritable behemoths would spoil the view of any submariners visiting the city!

By the way... aren't they shite? More corniceline freakery... they don't give a fuck about the quality as long as they do not rise above some bush someone in LCC has made sacrosanct down there... looks like a cheap 80s' ini campus set of blocks!

The proposal before last was quite classy.... but then this is what WHS cities have to have... doesn't disrupt the victorian melodrama up t'river y'see!

Yeah they look awful. and after the brunswick/lime street/central station tower scheme disasters i am running out of hope for Liverpool. :bash:

Is the dome still going then :( I love the whole wintergarden/pavillion thing. The victorians got it right building them in our parks and so on. The eden project proves the idea is still a popular one. Find it hard to believe that would could be a major attraction has been allowed to rot so freely.

25th November 2006

http://static.flickr.com/120/305746108_b85ed73c75.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ijob/305746108/)

Doesn't St Michael's church look good? I hope that view isn't lost (wink)

Doesn't St Michael's church look good? I hope that view isn't lost (wink)

Tis ok, I've put an objection into them building on the old Garston Hotel site as it ruins the views of Garston Village as you drive along Garston Fly-over (winks back)

Did anyone know how long this development would take?

Just found the minutes of a meeting between residents in the area and the city council about Festival Gardens development on this website http://www.riversidegardens.org.uk/

Here's the bit that startled me:

Response. The City Council are well aware of the current situation, discussions have taken place between officers from Traffic Management and Parking Services and further discussions are to be held with officers from Parks and Open Spaces in order to determine a way forward in solving the existing parking problems. Its worth noting that the development at Festival Gardens, if approved, is not likely to complete until 2021 and adequate off-street parking will be provided here for residents as to not inconvenience motorists on surrounding roads.

Was rather hoping to use the park before then! Anyone else got more information on this?

Was rather hoping to use the park before then! Anyone else got more information on this?

ToffeeDave, the situation regarding the gardens is a seperate issue to the actual building of the houses / apartments. Back in December 2006 the developers Langtree/ David Mclean signed an agreement with the Land Restoration Trust for them to look after the 56 acre waterfront gardens after the developers had restored the gardens ( including the Chinese & Japanese gardens) to their former glory. A dowry of £2M pound will be given to the trust to cover future up-keep. The plan is for this 56 acre park to open sometime in 2008

Thank you Woody, my heart sank when I read 2021!!

Although other developments tend to take the limelight, such as Beetham West, I personally think this is just as important and exciting. It is a place that everyone can use and its in a fantastic location. Public area improvements such as this are imperative in bringing people back to Liverpool.

Bring on 2008!

Thank you Woody, my heart sank when I read 2021!!

Although other developments tend to take the limelight, such as Beetham West, I personally think this is just as important and exciting. It is a place that everyone can use and its in a fantastic location. Public area improvements such as this are imperative in bringing people back to Liverpool.

Bring on 2008!

Your welcome, agree this is a fantastic location, it was being discussed over the week end on this forum re; a park north of the city centre adjacent too ( or part of ) Peels Liverpool Waters scheme . If only the Otterspool park could be replicated in LW we really would have a green waterfront.

i cant believe the site is becomeing what it used to its a shame about pleasure island theme park though i used to love that placei think if it opened up as that again but like blackpool it would take off cause there is no other fairs till blackpool now with southport fair gone

All good news for the city with the waterfront location.....:cheers:

http://videos.icnetwork.co.uk/icliverpool/riverlands_park.wmv

Nice video Bammy - did your company make it?

Riverlands Park - I like the name :) `Cool Video` too, well done that man!

Planning Committee to visit Festival site next Tuesday, see Planning Committe agenda on city web site, plenty of plans and details on display...

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/3030/gardenfestivallargemk6.jpg

The developers have packed a fair few apartment blocks at the city end, but that "new" park looks brilliant. Wish I could say the same about those blocks:ohno: David McLean are building four "box`s" in Odsal , Salford, and they look dreadful,and they do look similar to whats proposed for the Festival site.
I hope not, were are CABE when you need them.!!

is it true this site is on a former landfill?

is it true this site is on a former landfill?

Thnk so, isn't this where the earth from the mersey tunnels was dumped?

Thnk so, isn't this where the earth from the mersey tunnels was dumped?

i'm not sure yano richie but my sister was saying that its on a landfill and something about the houses either not having a garden or a little one and they can only grow some types of flowers, something along those lines anyway but looking at those pics theres no houses just apartment types but theres a park and that so i dont know whats true

Thnk so, isn't this where the earth from the mersey tunnels was dumped?

I think the Promenade was built using the waste from the tunnels.

"Landfill" simply means that material has been deposited on the ground; some times on flat ground creating new hills, slopes, etc. Or other times into holes, such as quarries. The material being used can range from building and demolition waste (bits of concrete, brick, etc.), to soil, to domestic waste (although I think that goes to special landfill sites and incinerators these days.)

So landfill isn't necessarily a bad thing, providing it has been properly planned and doesn't consist of bin waste and chemical shit, which can be unstable in various ways.

is it true this site is on a former landfill?

Yes, this was the site of the old " Cast Iron Shore" which ran from the long gone Dingle Oil Jetty up to the bottom of Jericho Lane. The existing Otterspool Promenade was used for the spoil from the first Mersey Tunnel ( Queensway) but the Festival site was used for general household rubbish.
As a lad I used to play down on the "Cazzy" and the first construction was a river wall that enclosed the Cast Iron Shore from the river ,which did have a sandy beach and cliffs running from what is now Priory Wood all the way to Jericho Lane.
The new river wall was some distance from the shore so there was a vast expanse of mud flats that took many years to fill, prior to the Garden Festival a Methane extraction facility was installed as the Garden designers had serious doubts that anything would grow, in fact the "landfill" was capped with several metres of top soil. Not sure how many hectres were reclaimed from the river ,but the landmass of of the city was increased,

Interesting plan. Will this be a socially mixed development? I think given it's size and location, it cannot simply be yet another series of blocks of 1 and 2 bed flats with a few token 3 bed flats put in as "penthouses".

This site needs to see a variety of buiding types and forms, that include family homes as well as flats. They might put maisonnettes with small gardens with flats above, I don't know, but this plan looks like more of the same - although I think I can see a small number of what might be houses. It needs social and affordable housing as well as bought and private rented, and real controls on the number of buy-to-let type owners. The tenures need mixing up - not "social" housing blocks in the least desirable part, and the private and posher flats facing the river. Otherwise it won't be a community.

A community of this size needs facilities. I note that what should be the village square is a traffic roundabout! They need to replan it so it has a focus including a parade of shops, a pub, a cafe, and a nursery. The relationship of the development to the river is poor, and seems to minimise the number of people who get sight of the river.

Where are the wind-turnines and allotments for residents? And tennis courts? Would it hurt the city to allow a bit of the land to be use to allow people to be able to use a bit of the greenery? This developent looks worryingly car-dependent - it would be nice to see the "centre" car free, with residents parking more remotely perhaps. How does it link to public transport? If they put more people in (a few additional higher blocks, if they can be built so close to the airport), would it make a parry people mover or some other linkage economic, or at least a guaranteed shuttle bus?

Sorry, I often sound negative here, and this isn't a disaster and it's good if the site is used wisely - but this looks a bit mean and old fashioned, not really what you would want for a modern community. It's also a real pity this isn't the residential "village" element of Liverpool bid to host the Commonwealth Games. I always thought this site had potential for something like that.

Poli, the masterplan for this site is shown on the Planning Committee`s agenda for 21st May Planning meeting...www.liverpool.gov.uk.
It shows all the details of the whole development.

The plans do look like some sort of modern spanish holliday village, there is also a lack of cars shown, where are all the cars going to go...! is that central lane a road or a park path. Very strange.

Poli, the masterplan for this site is shown on the Planning Committee`s agenda for 21st May Planning meeting...www.liverpool.gov.uk.
It shows all the details of the whole development.

I can't find the Planning Committee on that site at all. Where is it?

I can't find the Planning Committee on that site at all. Where is it?

www.liverpool,gov.uk
click on ........Council,Govenment and Democracy
click on..........Councillors meetings and agendas
click on.........Meetings and agendas
click on ........Page 6 for Planning Committee meetings
click on.........page 2 for 2007 meetings
click on.........21st May meeting for all items that are on the agenda.
scroll down ...For Festival item

poli, also check out..........www.festivalgardens.co.uk

poli, also check out..........www.festivalgardens.co.uk

Thanks.

1,308 flats, of which 936 are 2 bed, and 372 are 1 bed. Plus 66 houses. It looks like it will be entirely private, which is a pity. If it's a nice place to live, why can't people in social housing live there too?

I imagine that because of previous ground contamination it may not be possbile for people to have allotments, but overall it's still a car-based community that is being created here.

These people know the market - if there is really so little demand for family homes then okay, but it surprises me that the city cannot use this site to create a new neighbourhood that will appeal to families with children.

Cleverly, they promise to restore the park very early on in a 15 year development, which is dangling a nice sweety to the planners I suppose.

Does anyone know, has the city got a sports strategy - and does anyone know if Liverpool looked seriously at its future capacity to host competitions? I know some people said Manchester scooped it all when they got their money for the Commonwealth Games facilities, but I wonder if that is true? I ask because this is probably the only site in the city that has the space for such facilities. Surely one day Liverpool wants to be able to host a major competition, and co-host the Olympics with another city? It might sound mad now but in 10 or 15 years it might seem reasonable, but will there be the space?

So, if this development offers not much that is special, would it be better just to preserve the site for future use? Nature won't do it any harm while we wait.

The site was originally designed to be used for the Commonwealth Games a few years latter. Apparently the then Council Leader (Trevor Jones) had even got an agreement from the government that Liverpool would host the games.

Shortly after, Hatton & Co took over the council. And having dismissed the festival as a "garden centre" they wanted nothing to do with the Garden Festival or Commonwealth Games and weren't even willing to maintain the site as a park.

Hence the Commonwealth Games eventually went to Manchester and the site has remained derelict until now as a monument to their political stupidity.

Gas alert over festival homes

PLUSH new homes at Liverpool’s Garden Festival site will have to be built off the ground to avoid noxious gases.

The event was established on an old refuse tip in Otterspool and more than two decades later rotting material underground still generates carbon dioxide and methane.

City planners say the land is so contaminated that some homes – likely to be among the most desired in Liverpool – cannot be built at ground level for health reasons.

But developer Langtree McLean is still likely to get planning permission for the £250m scheme next week.

Council officials fear it would cost so much to clean up the site that the entire scheme would be in jeopardy.


Instead, they have told the developer to strictly monitor gas emissions every two weeks so it can be carefully dealt with. Planners are confident that this move will let the long-awaited scheme, finally ready 11 years after the site fell derelict, get under way.


They are anxious to make sure the overgrown gardens and displays are transformed into a new park in time for Capital of Culture.


A council report says: “As a result of the level of contamination on the site, it was unviable from a human health point of view to locate the vast majority of dwellings at ground level, where habitable rooms would be.


“The cost of decontaminating the site to achieve this would be overly prohibitive and any scheme would not stack economically to deliver the park.


“The scheme has therefore been specifically designed to take account of these site constraints.”


More than 1,370 new homes, almost all waterfront apartments, are due to be built before 2015.


Opponents of the scheme now believe a full investigation into contamination should be done before anything is built.


Lucy Page, chairwoman of the Save Our Garden Festival Site campaign, said: “No one can be certain exactly what is under that site.


“They say the justification for this scheme is creating a new park but we believe we will lose more than we will gain.”


Councillors will visit the site, off Riverside Drive, on Monday before deciding whether to approve the scheme.

They say the justification for this scheme is creating a new park but we believe we will lose more than we will gain.

With that site, how exactly is that possible? What are we losing exactly?

Cracking little read here -

RIP The Garden Festival Hall

by John Connolly

Driving down Riverside Drive I happened upon a pile of rubble that once housed the mighty Garden Festival Hall. Not unlike a hackneyed sit-com were some character or other reminisce over the loss of a former lover, I found myself getting all misty eyed and nostalgic at what was the centre piece of my youth for three summers. A true marvel of modern architecture, the dome was built in 1984 for the inaugural ‘International Garden Festival’ on my doorstep in dat der Liverpool.

The Garden Festival was the brainchild of Minister for Merseyside Tarzan Heseltine and one of the first major projects undertaken by the Merseyside Development Corporation; a body set up to in the wake of the Toxteth riots to regenerate Liverpool in the early 1980's. The legacy of the Festival was meant to be unique riverside parkland gifted to the city and "available for all to share". Hezza’s heart was in the right place but if he thought spunking a load of cash on a fancy garden was going brush the cities recent social and economical woes under the carpet, he was wrong. Infact, the Garden Festival was the ultimate paradox. Here was Liverpool, 3 years on from riots that were tantamount to civil war and the streets of Toxteth still resembled a WW2 bombsite, we had 50 million unemployed and Degsy Stalin and his comrades held the seat of power at City Hall. Slap bang in the middle of the war torn neglected city was a multi national, corporate sponsored showpiece. The site created a lot of jobs for the city but the main contracts were handed out to firms from outside the city limits. A disappointment but not a surprise for Liverpool, after all, when Parliament Street was raised to the ground in 81’ – Heseltine decided to plant trees next to the smouldering remains. Does a Liverpool gardening firm do the job? Does it shite, landscapers from Manchester are called info the job!

None of this mattered to me, a fantastic playground was about to be built on my doorstep. To begin with, we didn’t believe it would happen. A keen egger, I often spent my spring/early summers trawling the Cast Iron shore (immortalised in the fabs ‘Glass Onion’ fact fans) for all manner of bird eggs. I watched with curiosity and splendour as the former dump (not a term of endearment, the majority of the site was a former landfill site) was moulded into the International Garden Festival.

The Festival Hall itself was true wonder. I can remember gazing in wonderment when the Jolly pub was built on Leo’s car park. A circular building! I thought nothing could top that until the first steel arches for the Festival Hall were erected. This hall was designed to house the festival's main exhibitions. With a single surface area of 7500 square metres, when the Festival was over, the Hall was to be divisible into three sections, fitted out for a sports complex including a swimming pool, a sports arena and a club. Here’s the science bit: It had the shape of an elongated dome made out of a light steel structure to which are affixed 16-mm thick polycarbonate panels providing interior lighting similar to that found in a glasshouse. The structure was designed to support solar panels to heat water for the building's future intended use. I can imagine the townsfolk of Manhattan getting a similar giddy feeling when the Chrysler building was thrown up. Even today, the design hasn’t aged at all. The problem was there were so many companies with their finger in the pie, that whenever anything constructive was to be done with the building, and indeed the site itself, 100’s of cash driven shysters stuck their oars in and hands out.

At the time, I didn’t care. For three glorious summers, this was my playground. The Queen opened proceedings on Wednesday May 2nd 1984 and from the off it was clear this was going to be success for the local youth. Rival gangs put petty differences aside to share their bunking in knowledge (behind the Greek Garden within earshot of Aigburth Cricket Club was our gateway). I admit, I paid in on the first day – a concession price because it was after 16:00 and Liz and her heavy mob had fugged off taking the majority of the out of the tourist crowd with them. Plus I kept the ticket and used it as proof of entry for months before the security cottoned on and started stamping tickets. Months before the site opened, locals were given a pre-opening invite and to be honest it looked a very shabby. Apart from the ace mini railway the site looked a million miles from an International tourist trap. But when it was finished, it looked superb. Basked in the glow of scorching May afternoon, we couldn’t believe our luck that this place was on our doorstep, perhaps forever!

We set about marking our territory, sussing easy touches for what promised to be a bumper summer. First easy thing we noticed were the abundance of ice cream stalls that were left unmanned 30 minutes before the place closed. Not only were these left unmanned but so were the international sponsored tents. The Dutch garden (windmills, tulips, fist fucking) was sponsored by Oranjeboom, come closing time we’d sneak in with empty lemonade bottles and fill them with this watered down excuse for a beer. Beggars can’t be choosers though and I certainly didn’t quibble as we scoffed gratis cornetoes a plenty washed down with lashings of Arie Haan’s urine.

The Garden Festival was such a success that it re-opened the following year, albeit on smaller scale. The sponsors or owners decided they could coin it in by turning the gaff into a kid friendly zone. This year the Festival Hall was turned into a giant garden. Giant mushroom, flower pots, forks, spades and so on were stroon around a mock garden. Better still were the new inflatables, made to look like plants and flowers were stuck in (not sure what sort of plant the disco bounce was), as well as a ball pool. They had a laser dome plus they threatened to start using the venue for big concerts.

The first and subsequently only real big gig held there was none other than Chris De Burgh! For some reason, the Argy Spud folk-warbler had become a semi scally cult figure, no really, he was! This was pre ‘Lady in Red’, post ‘High on Emotion’, and not only was it to be held on my doorstep, but it was to be televised live on BBC2. Again, I’m not ashamed to admit this but I paid in. Yes, it was my backyard etc. but the kid’s tickets were only £2 and this meant we could get in early, get to the front and get on telly. Others decided to chance their hand using the well documented bunking in specs, some said they hid in the Blue Peter ship, though if everyone who said they were there actually were there, the ship would have resembled the Zong on route to the Caribbean. There was a mini riot outside as around 50 lads rushed the gates but for £2 was it worth it? Was it shiote. Anyway, I got on telly by jumping on my mates shoulders, if anyone’s still got the concert on tape (come on Swinesters, own up) you’ll see me with a Head jacket on and mop of hair like Chad from ‘Wait Till You Father Gets Home’ pretending to laugh when really I’m thinking ‘which ones Chris De Burgh?’

The following year the owners went all out in an effort to turn the site into Disneyland. Fairground rides were all over he place. My mates brother was in charge of the Mexican Hat and got sacked for making it go backwards. A non-stop Muppet Show played twice a day (people dressed up in costumes, not the puppets), which was very funny and for the Summer Bank Holiday, they had local pop extravaganza. Acts included The Farm, who still had a brass section and stoner scall covermiesters Ground Pig who were massive. Though not as big as Half Man Half Biscuit. They were to support China Crisis on the closing night and a load of us got to the front for the mighty biscuits. From the opening ‘Jesus Christ, COME ON DOWN!’ they shook the roof off the Festival Hall. Unfortunately, when they finished we couldn’t get away from the front. We had to stay there and endure China Crisis. Now they did have some half decent songs but they weren’t punk enough for us. During some slow self indulgent drivel, we decided to blow their cool by pogoing in a mosh pit stylee and chanting CHINA CHINA CHINA. This was enough for the security to lob us out, thank god.

Anyway, I’m rambling, now, the site will no doubt have ‘luxury’ flats all over it quicker than you can say ‘the listed building façade will have to stay, unless we burn it to the ground like’. The Hall has gone but the memories, like talking about CND, the U.S. in El Salvador and Carry On Screaming to Jon Pertwee while he was in full Worzel Gummedge gear, ask Terry Wogan where he got his pink kecks from while he was making the worlds biggest pot of scouse, chasing Debbie Greenwood and Amanda Burton around the car park for a kiss though secretly want them to star in a remake of Beloius Some’s Imagination video with me, will last forever…

Copyright © 2006 Swine Magazine. All rights reserved.

swinemagazine.co.uk (http://www.swinemagazine.co.uk)

I for one hope the planning committee reject this application, the density and design of the residential element is so wrong.

We have a site here if done right could be amazing, we need a mini Millennium Village; a sustainable village with a mix of family and social housing.

I would never trust David Mcleans to come up with anything decent.

even more hard to imagine. dat der Chris de Burgh is a Liverpool season ticket holder! never knew he was an argentine though! always thought he was irish. other notable season tickets holders on the Main Stand, i was amazed to find out, were Nigel Mansell and Roy Cropper off Corry! And no hes not a Manc but from Leicestershire!

The site was originally designed to be used for the Commonwealth Games a few years latter. Apparently the then Council Leader (Trevor Jones) had even got an agreement from the government that Liverpool would host the games.

Shortly after, Hatton & Co took over the council. And having dismissed the festival as a "garden centre" they wanted nothing to do with the Garden Festival or Commonwealth Games and weren't even willing to maintain the site as a park.

Hence the Commonwealth Games eventually went to Manchester and the site has remained derelict until now as a monument to their political stupidity.

Bloody hell I never heard that before. Well, okay, even if true, it just goes to show that it's a good idea! Protect the site, and let's get the Commonwealth Games or a joint Olympic bid with some other cities going. I'd like to see a joint bid with Manchester, I think a "Liverpool - Manchester Olympic Bid" sounds good.

I was once on the receiving end of a long speech on the subject from Sir Trevor Jones, who was also local councillor for the festival site, so I assume he is in a good position to know the details. I vaguely recall reading something similar in the 80's.

It would be great if we could have the commonwealth games now, particularly as a follow on to capital of culture

My worry would be that the UK tends to get to host the games every 15-20 years, and Manchester have just had it. Would be left with the site semi-derelict until 2018, and in the meantime who will pay for the restoration of the gardens?

It will be interesting to see what the planning committee decide next week, the restored parkland looks impressive, but I am equally unimpressed with the housing element.

I was once on the receiving end of a long speech on the subject from Sir Trevor Jones, who was also local councillor for the festival site, so I assume he is in a good position to know the details. I vaguely recall reading something similar in the 80's.

It would be great if we could have the commonwealth games now, particularly as a follow on to capital of culture

My worry would be that the UK tends to get to host the games every 15-20 years, and Manchester have just had it. Would be left with the site semi-derelict until 2018, and in the meantime who will pay for the restoration of the gardens?

It will be interesting to see what the planning committee decide next week, the restored parkland looks impressive, but I am equally unimpressed with the housing element.

I think Glasgow are next in the queue to be UK candidate to host the Commonwealth Games, so Liverpool may be even further down the list for an even more distant Games - and because of the London Games it's going to be a long long time until a British bid to host the Olympics will be remotely credible. I am serious however that a joint Liverpool - Manchester bid be considered: it would provide a practical and concrete way of playing to the strenghts of the two cities, and be a good test of the resolve of both cities to genuinely work together. I believe the 2000 Olympic Bid that Government gave to Manchester would have been far stronger, and may have had stronger prospects of succeeding, had it been a Liverpool - Manchester twin-cities bid. By holding a joint-bid, we could capitalise on the facilities already gifted to Manchester by the national taxpayer, and only need more modest new investment in facilities in Liverpool (as events could be shared between the two cities, and indeed North Wales, Chester, etc).

The question I would ask is this. Does the city have any aspiration whatsoever to host a major sporting competition in the future, and if so where would it place the facilities? That is why I asked about whether there is a sports strategy, as presumably that will say whether or not such an aspiration exists in a formal sense. If there are alternative sites, then this one is not needed. But if this is the only feasible site, and the city has such aspirations, then the site should be protected.

A bit like the nonsense of the Mann Island site, we have this frenzy to get stuff done for 2008, 2009 and 2010, even if it means getting something inferior. It would be nice to see some of the parkland revived and opened up again, but if the cost of doing it is to permanently rule Liverpool out as a host for major sporting competitions, then I think that is too high a price to pay.

I once remember reading that the Olympic bid cannot be a joint city bid. It has to be just the one city. I also read that the city has to have a huge number of hotel beds to even be considered. Therefore Liverpool's infrastructure alone is way behind even considering a bid of such status and a joint bid is also out of the question.

However, this may have changed so I might be wrong.

I once remember reading that the Olympic bid cannot be a joint city bid. It has to be just the one city. I also read that the city has to have a huge number of hotel beds to even be considered. Therefore Liverpool's infrastructure alone is way behind even considering a bid of such status and a joint bid is also out of the question.

However, this may have changed so I might be wrong.


http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=474921

I've started a thread on the topic - hopefully it won't attract city bashers, as I think it's a very interesting question whether the IOC will be forced by national Governments to adapt its "one city" approach in light of modern economics, transport and politics. "One City" in the 1930s might have made sense, but if you can have high speed rail lines joining cities 30 miles apart, that is a totally different environment.

Incidentally, I think national governments will sooner than later tell the IOC to get lost with its absurdly expensive requirements for hosting the games, so hopefully the costs of hosting will fall as the "gold triple plating" extravagence of the IOC is stripped away. So that will hopefully make a regional UK bid more affordable politically.

Garden Festival flythrough. Ref (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/videos-pictures/videos/videos-news/)

It's probably been shown before, but I've tweaked the DP's puny vid player to play it at twice the size. Quality's not as good, but the flythrough effect is more pleasing.

click on below
http://liverpolitan.co.uk/videos-news.htm

Gas alert over festival homes
PLUSH new homes at Liverpool’s Garden Festival site will have to be built off the ground to avoid noxious gases.
...
The event was established on an old refuse tip in Otterspool and more than two decades later rotting material underground still generates carbon dioxide and methane.
...
“The scheme has therefore been specifically designed to take account of these site constraints.” More than 1,370 new homes, almost all waterfront apartments, are due to be built before 2015.
...
“They say the justification for this scheme is creating a new park but we believe we will lose more than we will gain.”
If living space is built only about 12 feet or more above grade level that will be a blessing because parking space will be built underneath the dwelling areas instead of to the side (thus leaving more open space).

A park in that location is not desperately needed and risks being underfunded to maintain well, the promenade is sufficient.

It would be better to restrict the proposed park area to for-profit leisure development (cinema, bowling alley, ice rink, pub, cabaret, coffee shops, street artists, gym, sporting goods shops, travel agencies, funfair, circus, Segway rental, whatever makes a profit and is strictly leisure industry - no residences or motels). Allowed to be "for-profit" is a fair exchange for "leisure-industry-only", and it assures continued vitality. Whatever people will pay money for, it creates employment too.

All unused land in this area should be dedicated to flat open low maintenance public lawns pending redevelopment so it isn't misused and can be rented out for events pending development.

As the sweetener the developer should be required to fund an environmentally sound transit infrastructure (ie not diesel buses). For example a trolleybus service serving the new development and the Promenade to St. Michael's Merseyrail - it should not cost too much it's only a mile or less of trolley wires. But it gets transit off on the right foot. The world's oil is running out, it's nearly $100/bbl already with no end in sight. Hey they might even pay for wheelchair access to St. Michael's station - it's to their benefit.

WIBNI - Wouldn't it be nice if - Merseyrail operated the trolleybuses?
and btw - Skoda makes trolleybuses and ships them all over the world, it's not like its a risky technology.

Garden Festival flythrough. Ref (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/videos-pictures/videos/videos-news/)

It's probably been shown before, but I've tweaked the DP's puny vid player to play it at twice the size. Quality's not as good, but the flythrough effect is more pleasing.

click on below
http://liverpolitan.co.uk/videos-news.htm

splendid :)

splendid :)The video certainly looks pretty. Very pretty. Unreal.

The police will hate that layout, all those earth-banks, footbridges and so on will be expensive to keep up and even more expensive to patrol and will provide all manner of spots for criminals to lie in wait for victims. The layout depicted isn't even well-suited to video monitoring.

On the other hand for-profit non-residential leisure development would largely be policed by the businesses themselves. I mean really, how often does Liverpool get weather that makes the kind of space depicted useless to anyone except perhaps the neighbors with a need to walk the dog?

Except of course for the public promenade, that must be preserved as open space along the entire length. A few causal vendors with barrows selling overpriced ice-cream, pop and tea in the Summer might be OK.

On the other hand, pubs, with a good view of the Prom and River and accessible by public transit - they would be popular and taken care of all year round. And far enough from housing to play music (not TOO loud) if that is what the patrons want.

Pubs,m *lol* i thought they were trying to cut down on pubs! look at the drink problems they cause. Parks on the other hand do impact upon our health and well being, wasnt their a study recently published about open spaces and parks to do with work force productivity?
I personally feel the balance of the proposals are about right.
lets hope its not going to be long drawn out and ends up being too costly to do anything about, *sadly* like the proposals for the origional Lime Street development!
kat:)