Official Liverpool Thread

[Villiers Terrace]

Originally Posted by T0M

Ok, so that's the start of arcaded entrance to L1, which, if the renders are to be believed, will look great.

When are these "Ribbons" set to be installed?

[T0M]

Originally Posted by Villiers Terrace

Ok, so that's the start of arcaded entrance to L1, which, if the renders are to be believed, will look great.

When are these "Ribbons" set to be installed?

According to council sources the ribbons will be installed once all the paving work has been completed, so hopefully not long now. Looking forward to when those benches around the base of the trees are finished too, it's going to look great and help prevent Church Street and Lord Street from looking too out of place and outdated once the Paradise Street project is finished. Could do with something similar for Bold Street now (although only once the other work has finished!)

[Villiers Terrace]

Originally Posted by T0M

According to council sources the ribbons will be installed once all the paving work has been completed, so hopefully not long now. Looking forward to when those benches around the base of the trees are finished too, it's going to look great and help prevent Church Street and Lord Street from looking too out of place and outdated once the Paradise Street project is finished. Could do with something similar for Bold Street now (although only once the other work has finished!)

I'm totally in favour, as long as whatever goes down allows space for a partial de-pedestrianisation.

(Poll about that just posted on the main thread.)

[T0M]

Originally Posted by Villiers Terrace

I'm totally in favour, as long as whatever goes down allows space for a partial de-pedestrianisation.

(Poll about that just posted on the main thread.)

I'd support that, but only outside of shopping hours.

[1878EFC]

i still cant get over that they didnt work on this overnight, anyway it looks great

[Awayo]

I like the sig, EFC. I'd forgotten about www.liverpoolarchitecture.com

I also like this from a recent project of a month on that site:




The interior of architectural practice, Austin-Smith:Lords's new head office in the Port of Liverpool building. This is news to me. Previously they were in Warrington.

A sign of the city's rennaissance I think. Hopefully we'll get more businesses in the city region relocating to where they should be concentrated: right in the middle of the city centre, where all the action is. Or should be.

[woody]

Originally Posted by T0M

I was so impressed I even emailed the council to congratulate them, which shows how stongly I feel about this issue... now there's a first!

Good on you Tom, I wish the city would get on with Derby Sq. thats also due for new paving. Its all about education and enforcment, I would love to see one combined uniformed team say community support police ( but full time ) replace all the different "hi-viz " coated people ( like traffic wardens ). A force that can back up the police and use the many local bye-laws on anti-social behavior , litter,dog fouling ,parking and have the authority to issue on the spot fines. Maybe then the city would stay cleaner and safer.

[westisbest]

Such posers

[Paul D]

WORK will begin on the £6.6m restoration of Sefton Park within the next two months.

The waterside bandstand will be restored and supplied with power so it can host music events once again.

The Heritage Lottery-funded project includes completely rebuilding the Shaftesbury fountain into a working water feature and extending the Aviary café to form a central “hub” to the historic park.

But while the stonework of the Gothic revival fountain at the park’s Aigburth Road entrance is also set for refurbishment, health and safety issues mean it will not be used as a water feature.

The project is being driven by specialist architects Lloyd Evans Pritchard, who were behind much of the restoration of Birkenhead Park and are also due to carry out work at Stanley Park.

Adrian Pearson,“We work in tandem with a landscaping practice. We’re taking forward the restoration of the monuments and buildings, including the Shaftesbury fountain, which is in an awful state.

“The fountain will be completely dismantled and taken off site for restoration. It will go back as a working fountain.”

The original statue of Eros, which stood on top of the fountain, will remain at its current home in Liverpool’s Conservation Centre and a replica will be carved to go on the restored monument.

]The wrought ironwork and stone base of the bandstand will be repaired, with power and light supplies to create a modern performance site.

The Samuel Smith obelisk and William Rathbone memorial are also set for repair work.
Mr Pearson said: “Our aim is to have most of the restoration to the park and monuments complete by August 2008.”

[westisbest]

look how nice this is

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=454498

[Awayo]

Annual Crime Stats are out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...7_07_crime.pdf

It is striking that, yet again, Merseyside's crime stats - both from recorded crime figures and the British Crime Survey - compare very well with other urban areas and, unlike some, they are going down in Merseyside.

Merseyside's has had relatively low crime rates since I first started paying attension to this matter, something like fifteen years ago. Some years, Merseyside is safer than some rural counties: it is always very safe compared with most urban areas.

Doubtless this fact will, yet again, be ignored by the London and Manchester-based media, who will continue to denigrate England's safest big city (about its crime! ) whilst they fester in two of the very worst crime-wracked cities in Britain.

[Paul D]

Originally Posted by Awayo

Annual Crime Stats are out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...7_07_crime.pdf

It is striking that, yet again, Merseyside's crime stats - both from recorded crime figures and the British Crime Survey - compare very well with other urban areas and, unlike some, they are going down in Merseyside.

Merseyside's has had relatively low crime rates since I first started paying attension to this matter, something like fifteen years ago. Some years, Merseyside is safer than some rural counties: it is always very safe compared with most urban areas.

Doubtless this fact will, yet again, be ignored by the London and Manchester-based media, who will continue to denigrate England's safest big city (about its crime! ) whilst they fester in two of the very worst crime-wracked cities in Britain.

It's rather ironic isn't it? crime infested shitholes all over the UK give us shit about crime when we constantly out perform them.

[liverpolitan]

I have seen an email sent to the new "north west" NHS to ask why the Head Office was located in Manchester, and what consideration was given of Liverpool. This is the reply that was received:

"The decision on where to base the new organisation was taken after careful
consideration into a number of deciding factors. Manchester was chosen
after a lengthy process and the benefits as to why Manchester was
chosen are listed below.

* Is sufficiently sized to accommodate the new SHA
* Is flexible to meet future changes in functionality, staff
numbers or other agencies
* Is available for the commencement of the NW SHA in July 2006
* Has excellent networked rail links to and from across the north
west, Leeds and London
* Has sufficient access to parking for staff and visitors
* Is affordable and from 2007 substantial savings will be realised
* Provides an excellent environment within the building e.g. gym,
restaurant, and also in the locality eg. shops, banks
* Has least travelling time for the maximum number of staff
employed by the current SHAs
* Is in close proximity to the Government Office North West and is
convenient and accessible for visits by its main stakeholders
* Has a lease until February 2010
* Provides excellent value for money

Further information can be found by clicking the following link to the
July 06 Board Paper
http://www.northwest.nhs.uk/document...rangements.pdf.

[Awayo]

In short, because it is in Manchester. Every question that was picked was chosen to fit an answer that was "Manchester".

The third from bottom reason is the key one, of course.

The "North West" is a fucking disgrace.

[Awayo]

Holy hell, check out this sophistry. In it, they attempt to justify moving not moving to Warrington, which is more central to this ill-begotten "region", but to Manchester, at it's bottom right hand corner.

However, the highest density of current staff live within the Greater Manchester boundary which therefore suggests that although the majority of staff could travel to either Warrington or Gateway, a higher percentage would have a shorter travel time to Gateway compared to Warrington.

This completely ignores the hundreds of staff, who live West of Warrington who now have a longer or impossible journey.

What they are saying is that moving the headquarters to Manchester makes it easier for people in Manchester to get there in the morning. Although only a minority of staff working for the RHA live in Manchester, we are going to ignore the whole of the rest because, apparrently (because of GM''s generous boundaries), it happens to be that more staff live in GM than any other county, as if that means anything.

Moving the HQ to Manchester from Warrington means that the majority of staff are now further away from the HQ than they were previously. And for the blessed Mancunians, they now will have a shorter commute, but much of the rest of the staff will have an impossible one.

Bastards. Now every single person who lives in Liverpool, NE Wales, West Cheshire, Formby and Southport will have to either move to Manchester, leave or face an horrendous commute. Ever tried commuting to central Manchester from Formby by car? Don't.

My father used to work for the now defunct Mersey Regional Health Authority and worked at various sites around Liverpool. This allowed for a Liverpool man to lead a bourgeois life and bring his kids up in his own city region. Speaking with Liverpool(ish) accents, supporting LFC, having (as you've noticed) a permanent loyality to the city and its hinterland.

Now, because of this, it won't be possible, not for someone working in management for the biggest employer in the UK.

[Awayo]

And wait to the consequence of this shit comes out.

Positioning the RHA as far away from Liverpool as they can means that gradually the number of Liverpool and Merseyside staff in the RDA will fall way.

The regionalist twats have gotten what they want, in a way a lot more serious than any other regionalist shit that has harmed Liverpool in the past.

Liverpool's very health will be in the hands of Liverpool-hating regionalists. Wait now until decisions about hospital closures are made by this shower, about critical funding decisions for the purchase of defribulators, for cancer treatment facilities and childrens' wards. Somehow there will always be a reason to spend the money on "centres of excellence" in Manchester. There will be reasons why service must be rationalised, that will always seem to involve closing facilities in Liverpool and extending those in Manchester. Liverpool people will die because of this. That's why I'm angry.

This is the most terrifying regionalist crime yet.

[the golden vision]

Originally Posted by Awayo

Holy hell, check out this sophistry. In it, they attempt to justify moving not moving to Warrington, which is more central to this ill-begotten "region", but to Manchester, at it's bottom right hand corner.

However, the highest density of current staff live within the Greater Manchester boundary which therefore suggests that although the majority of staff could travel to either Warrington or Gateway, a higher percentage would have a shorter travel time to Gateway compared to Warrington.

This completely ignores the hundreds of staff, who live West of Warrington who now have a longer or impossible journey.

What they are saying is that moving the headquarters to Manchester makes it easier for people in Manchester to get there in the morning. Although only a minority of staff working for the RHA live in Manchester, we are going to ignore the whole of the rest because, apparrently (because of GM''s generous boundaries), it happens to be that more staff live in GM than any other county, as if that means anything.

Moving the HQ to Manchester from Warrington means that the majority of staff are now further away from the HQ than they were previously. And for the blessed Mancunians, they now will have a shorter commute, but much of the rest of the staff will have an impossible one.

Filthy bastards. Now every single person who lives in Liverpool, NE Wales, West Cheshire, Formby and Southport will have to either move to Manchester, leave or face an horrendous commute. Ever tried commuting to central Manchester from Formby by car? Don't.

My father used to work for the now defunct Mersey Regional Health Authority and worked at various sites around Liverpool. This allowed for a Liverpool man to lead a bourgeois life and bring his kids up in his own city region. Speaking with Liverpool(ish) accents, supporting LFC, having (as you've noticed) a permanent loyality to the city and its hinterland.

Now, because of this, it won't be possible, not for someone working in management for the biggest employer in the UK.

The real question here is why the Cheshire&Merseyside office was based in Warrington in the first place,meaning Liverpool wasn't even considered.Mind you,that won't bother Warren Bradley in the slightest,he's not interested in Public sector jobs,only part time low paid ones,the ones that keep Liverpool in the poverty trap.

[Awayo]

You misunderstood Bradley's reply to his email. And, partly because he's not the most articulate (as you've noted), he didn't put his case across too well.

Bradley is right that Liverpool needs to rely more on private sector jobs and that the proportion of public sector jobs is too high in Liverpool.

However, you are right that, as far a public sector jobs go, the more high-paying and decision making positions are based in Liverpool the better. Liverpool has suffered from this shit regionlism for long enough (you make a point about the previous hq being in Warrington - why? - Manchester's was in Manchester, not Wigan) but there is now an acceleration of the process of stripping any decision-making functions out of Liverpool and shoving them into Manchester. Now that health is involved, it concerns the health of our parents, and children. It's too serious to be tolerated.

We know these inbreeds hate Liverpool. We can't let them do this. They'll kill us if they are allowed to.

[the golden vision]

Originally Posted by Awayo

You misunderstood Bradley's reply to his email. And, partly because he's not the most articulate (as you've noted), he didn't put his case across too well.

Bradley is right that Liverpool needs to rely more on private sector jobs and that the proportion of public sector jobs is too high in Liverpool.

However, you are right that, as far a public sector jobs go, the more high-paying and decision making positions are based in Liverpool the better. Liverpool has suffered from this shit regionlism for long enough (you make a point about the previous hq being in Warrington - why? - Manchester's was in Manchester, not Wigan) but there is now an acceleration of the process of stripping any decision-making functions out of Liverpool and shoving them into Manchester. Now that health is involved, it concerns the health of our parents, and children. It's too serious to be tolerated.

We know these inbreeds hate Liverpool. We can't let them do this. They'll kill us if they are allowed to.

Didn't misinterpret it at all. I kow full well the point he was making about the public sector in Liverpool,but that should not in any way deter the people who represnt this city to fight for any jobs that might be available.The reality of the situation is that public sector jobs in Media and Health will be alot better paid than cinema and shop job. Warren Bradley does not want to step on any toes by upsetting the regional Bandwagon.

[liverpolitan]

Their criteria are shambolic and disregard Government regional and regeneration policy. Their analysis of staff journey times is flawed and wrong - you cannot assume that because someone lives in, say, Wigan, that Piccaddilly is closer for them to commute to than Warrington, or for that matter central Liverpool.

This exercise was a catalogue of error and a brazen attempt to generate "evidence" for a particular conclusion.

I don't think this is acceptable, indeed I think this is a scandal.

What should we do about it?

We can critique the analysis in some detail, and I am happy to participate in that.

But what should we do?

This is a Head Office function with 200 jobs in it, that Liverpool was not even considered for. Not even considered.

The argument of proximity for GONW is poison, in many ways, and potentially political poison also. We cannot leave that to stand.

What should we do?

Any ideas?

In the meanwhile, I have requested clarification from them, and more detail on their data, methods and analysis. I will use a FoI request if they do not co-operate.