SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Liverpool Population

Tags
population
131K views 985 replies 128 participants last post by  AUTOTHRILL 
#1 ·
The population of Liverpool has fallen to 435,000 (Mid 2007) down from 442,000 (Mid 2001).

Seftons population also fallen to 276,000, from 283,000.

The Wirral also showing a decrease, down from 315,000 in 2001 to 310,000 in 2007.

Not good!

Information found here:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/popest0808.pdf
 
#571 ·
Read the report now, makes sense but not wholly. The housing needs would probably target Maghull to Aughton/Ormskirk from a West Lancs point of view given the Merseyrail and Skem given the M58.

This is good stuff but the city needs to be thinking Frodsham, Helsby and Chester too given the pending rail link. Also links between the south of the city and Widnes need to be narrowed with a mixture of transport, logistics, industrial and residential developments. it's easy how to see Liverpool growth and how it can be accommodated, the city could be far larger with far less negative impacts of similar sized metropolitan areas.
 
#573 ·
We - should - have a huge advantage in the vast amount of empty and underutilised land within a gnat's crotchet of the city centre. Start there and building on the greenbelt can be minimised.

I agree that Skem should be a major development area. As only half its intended population ever moved to it, there must be a huge amount of space for new housing. Also makes better use of the M58 and increases demand for a rail link.

Come to think of it, could Runcorn and Winsford also accommodate a fair amount of new housing ? Like all new towns, those two and Skem feature a lot of pointless open space which has minimal.amenity value but decreases population density and pushes everyone towards driving everywhere.
 
#579 ·
If Liverpool ever really revived its inner city would also and become more upmarket. It is easy to imagine a district like Kensington Fields being a highly desirable area if the city's economy were stronger. Places very like it in London and other cities with better downtown job markets than Liverpool's have become so even after having gone downhill for decades previously.
 
#583 · (Edited)
There is a definite 'middle class'. Earnings, education and the rest, distinguishes it from the working class.
EARNINGS denotes you have traded something, usually muscle power, or some other type of labour which would indicate a need to sell something to live. That, by anyone's definition is, working class.

I play golf with a guy who is an assistant language (English) professor at a local university. He not only has an education, he also educates others. He is, according to him, a member of the working class. So there can't be a middle-class. If anyone who has a job, profession, vocation and EARNS a wage/salary, no matter how lucrative (footballers pay for example) they are working class. The may have a very comfortable lifestyle but, sans footballing skill, would be doing something less rewarding.
How about 'people with enough money to support a functioning economy'?
Then if they do not require a job to sustain themselves they are ruling class. Think about it, if you have enough money that you can sustain a nation then you don't have to work. You are ruling class.

Lets do this again. No matter how you get your wealth/money, if you are getting that wage/salary by selling something (skill/labour/knowledge etc.,) you are working class. The lifestyle you have is immaterial. A stockbroker earning $20 million a year in commissions is no less working class than a sceptic tank emptier earning $25. per hour. They are both selling something in order to maintain themselves and families. Lifestyle does not denote class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul D
#588 · (Edited)
Bramley Moore Dock is a fully functioning dock. It is not derelict as many think. Two quays are for sand dredgers and another is the home of the Swedish tug company. One of the original 1848 transit sheds is still in use.

The dock is too small. Once built a stadium cannot be expanded. A stadium will not enhance such a waterscape at all. It would be a disincentive for top quality developments. A stadium will bring down the tone of the docks. No 5 star developments were clambering to be around the Arena. All it did was attract a large ugly shed called an exhibition centre.

Liverpool needs quality developments to attract high earners and high paying jobs. Building a stadium in a quality World Heritage Site is not the way.

The loop site is far from perfect with no direct rail, and again small. But better than the dock. There again the dock site needs a 4 to 6 platform station on the Northern Line, which will not be right on the stadium and a walk away.
 
#591 ·
Jane, correct. Building a stadium in Bramley Moore Dock benefits no one, including Everton FC. That historic waterscape deserves to be renovated with its history embroiled in the design. A design that is world renowned, that will attract people to visit and live there.

For those who never got it, Bramley Moore is a fully functioning commercial dock. It employs people. A stadium can be built at superior sites for road and rail access elsewhere. Direct rail access in mass transit is essential. Liverpool has a metro which should be ultised at every opportunity. Not designing a stadium with direct mass transit access, which takes fans to all parts of the city region, is downright incompetence.
 
#601 ·
Yeah, but you said it was economically active. I'm trying to get a sense of HOW active. I thought you would most probably know as you've obviously looked into it.

Whether a historic structure should be saved is a separate point. I'm just trying not to conflate the argument here. One at a time. How economically active is the dock?
 
#605 · (Edited)
Tom Hughes, I never campaigned for any stadium. The dock is USED. It is NOT derelict. Football is best suited to sites which are better suited for large crowds.
There has been two large football stadiums in Anfield/Walton for 126 years and they have done sweet nothing for those districts, leaving Anfield one of the most deprived districts in the UK. Get this football has to dominate nonsense at all costs out of your head.
 
#607 ·
Tom Hughes, I neber campaigned for any stadium. The dock is USED. It is NOT derelict. Football is best suited to sites which are better suited for large crowds.
There has been two large football stadiums in Anfield/Walton for 126 years and they have done sweet nothing for those districts, leaving Anfield one of the most deprived districts in the UK. Get this football has to dominate nonsense at all costs out of your head.
Inner city Liverpool used to be made up of several districts supporting large Victorian High streets.... strangely the only ones remaining of any scale or substance are in Walton and Anfield. Have you been to Scotty, Greaty, Netherfield Rd, Islington, Kensington, Granby, Park Rd etc lately? Or were EFC and L FC responsible for their decline or practical disappearance too?

Come back when you know what or where you're talking about.
 
#606 ·
Ironically, Hatherley is speaking of the pre-2010 building boom when the city with some decent metropolitan-scale developments like Liverpool ONE, the Unity towers and the ACC was showing a bit of ambition for the first time in a while. Today's situation, with dodgy developers being able to get away with non-approved extensions to historic buildings, almost nothing but low quality student blocks being built in the city centre and the wider city littered by a series of abandoned developments because the council has handed over several key regeneration sites to an organised crime gang, that's desperation.
 
#613 ·
Zanderdad, if the dock was not viable vessels would not be there. In a city with a high unemployment level eliminating jobs is not a good idea. The viable dock is best left alone and to continue what it has been doing for around 170 years. It was there before Everton FC was even thought of. I think it is quite a wonderful looking place.
 
#616 · (Edited)
Zanderdad, if the dock was not viable vessels would not be there. In a city with a high unemployment level eliminating jobs is not a good idea. The viable dock is best left alone and to continue what it has been doing for around 170 years. It was there before Everton FC was even thought of. I think it is quite a wonderful looking place.
It seems to me, we aren't getting very far with this one. You've asserted the dock is viable. I'm asking how viable? And you're just saying, 'viable' again. That's not going to help us determine if there's an economic case for keeping it.

By all means, use other arguments like ... conservation. If that's what's driving you. That's valid. But so far the economic argument is looking a bit weak, unless you can flesh it out a bit.
 
#617 ·
"After the decline in coal-fired steamships, the dock continued to export coal. Following the demise of coal mining in South Lancashire, and most of the UK, the export market for coal dissolved with the dock ceasing coal exports in 1988. The dock is still commercially active with one of the original 1848 transit sheds still in use. Two other quays are used for unloading aggregates. The port's Svitzer tugs are based, with their home berths, in the dock. "

When in attendance at 'Sound City' - there did seem to be quite a bit of tug boat activity:



 
#618 ·
"After the decline in coal-fired steamships, the dock continued to export coal. Following the demise of coal mining in South Lancashire, and most of the UK, the export market for coal dissolved with the dock ceasing coal exports in 1988. The dock is still commercially active with one of the original 1848 transit sheds still in use. Two other quays are used for unloading aggregates. The port's Svitzer tugs are based, with their home berths, in the dock. "

When in attendance at 'Sound City' - there did seem to be quite a bit of tug boat activity:




Tug boats are not really commercial traffic. I've had reason to go in there and some of the other docks several times over the past few years and they've always been deserted. Put it this way, if they thought they had some genuine commercial use there is no way they would've been considered for selling off.
 
#624 ·
Tom Hughes, you are prattling tripe. I worked for a ship's engineering comlany and subsequently have been all over Liverpool, Birkenhead and other Mersey Docks.

Bramley Moore is used on three sides with the other a temporary berthng quay. It is used and viable. it employs people. Even the 1848 transit shed is used. How Many times do I have to repeat this before it sinks in? Football has no place in those docks. Many things are far more important than football.
 
#630 ·
John,
If Peel were considering using these docks commercially you might have an argument, but they're not. I wish they were too.... but their earmarked for other things. Some elements of the site will be preserved and some will go.
A couple of tugs and a few mounds of sand does not a dock fill.... my mate's family own the Bramley Moore pub...he says the number of people who work the dock couldn't fill one table in his pub (he's met them all over the years), and that has been the case for decades. Where are the cranes, the cargo handling gear, all the other warehouses and dock offices? Look at old photos of the dock and at recent ones and you'll see a massive decline practically no activity nowadays.... there is no comparison. You know, Peel knows it and the whole bloody world knows it.
 
#628 ·
John is becoming a stand in for any posts that seem similar to another forum member.

The article I had in the Echo about a Mersey Bridge a few months ago has loads of the usual trolling but amongst the abuse there are several comments suggesting I have multiple profiles on here of which one it was suggested is OpenlyJane lol.

Crackers. Is it possible to have multiple profiles?
 
#635 · (Edited)
Tom Hughes, you are prattling garbage as usual. AGAIN.....Bramley Moore is commercially used on THREE sides. Four really as The 4th quay is a temporary berthing quay. The sand employs people to move it. Trucks continually move in and out. Cranes and bulldozers move the sand. The tugs have admin and maintenance as do the sand dredgers. It is a busy dock. The transit shed stores goods.

Football has no history on the dock estate. It must be put in suitable locations served by mass transit rail.
 
#636 ·
Tom Hughes, you are prattling garbage as usual. AGAIN.....Bramley Moore is commercially used on THREE sides. The sand employs people to move it. Trucks continually move in and out. Cranes and bulldozers move the sand. The tugs have admin and maintenance as do the sand dredgers. It is a busy dock. The transit shed stores goods.

Football has no history on the dock estate. It must be put in suitable locations served by mass transit rail.
How much nonsense can you fit in each post? The shops, museums and hotels at the Albert dock had no history there too... the 3 Graces had no history on their docks neither, should they all be forced out too? What kind of argument is that?

The docks have a small sand supplier and a tug operator that can readily be relocated in any number of other docks.... many are very under utilised. Most berths are never used and haven't been for decades. I have seen those docks filled completely... even double berths. That is wjat you call busy. The average corner shop has a bigger commercial turnover now hence the reason why it has been sold off.
 
#639 · (Edited)
Liverpool is in an increasingly dark place however for other reasons.
No more than Cleveland, Green Bay, Buffalo, Louisville, Eire, Flint, Charlotte, Albuquerque, Medford, Mobile, El Paso, Galveston, et al, ad nauseoum, however, for other reasons!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Feckin drama queen.

Do you know that Chicago, Il., one city, has more murders (762) than the whole of Canada (604) in 2016? But Liverpool is in a dark place, because the people chose to elect a fat man that you hate.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top