North Liverpool - the focus of future regeneration.

[buggedboy]

I like the fact the Bluecoat have got invovled in running Parklands. This could be a model for many schools. Give them a 5-10% management fee and cover the costs and it could end up beign a real money spinner for the school that takes over.

[Tom Hughes]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

I have high hopes for the North Liverpool Academy. I'm sure (hope) it will turn lots of lives around. Too many bright people from that part of town are still being wasted. It would be good if it could open during the evening and at weekends to support local adults who want to improve their skills. There was talk about access courses but in these harsh times I wonder how they will fare. Basic literacy/numeracy classes for adults are also important and usually overlooked because 'teachers' want to focus on those who already have basic skills. Short term employment schemes that don't lead anywhere are NOT the answer (unless, of course, you are a provider and creaming off the associated grants).

Unfortunately, as unsocialist as it might sound I don't think the academy schemes offer the same desirability (however unfounded) as the traditional high achieving former colleges/grammar schools, and if these inner city areas are ever going to rival the suburbs currently served by these schools in terms of attracting affluent high achieving families I think they will need a relocation of these schools at some point.

As regards new schools a case in point being Parklands school in Speke....... a brand new school with state of the art facilities that could match anything in the city, yet still one of the poorest performing schools in the whole country. I note recently Bluecoat have become involved and results have changed quite dramatically...... showing a marked disparity in teaching performance perhaps? New Buildings and smart facilities only goes so far.

[Tony Sebo]

the one chance, permenant cut off aspect of the 11+ was the unfair link in the old system, it was not that the whole system was fundamentally flawed

[Babaloo]

Originally Posted by Tom Hughes

Unfortunately, as unsocialist as it might sound I don't think the academy schemes offer the same desirability (however unfounded) as the traditional high achieving former colleges/grammar schools, and if these inner city areas are ever going to rival the suburbs currently served by these schools in terms of attracting affluent high achieving families I think they will need a relocation of these schools at some point.

As regards new schools a case in point being Parklands school in Speke....... a brand new school with state of the art facilities that could match anything in the city, yet still one of the poorest performing schools in the whole country. I note recently Bluecoat have become involved and results have changed quite dramatically...... showing a marked disparity in teaching performance perhaps? New Buildings and smart facilities only goes so far.

The best girl's school in the city (in terms of exam performance and prestige) is an academy. When they are run well and based on sound academic foundations they work really well. It's also in L8.

[Tom Hughes]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

The best girl's school in the city (in terms of exam performance and prestige) is an academy. When they are run well and based on sound academic foundations they work really well. It's also in L8.

Does it practice any form of selection though? Is it a former grammar school, and 'academy' in name only? St Hilda's/Belrive certainly both do? If so, I'm not sure the one in North Liverpool is comparable. How do the 'academies' do compared to the former grammars generally? I don't think those currently sending their kids to St Edwards and Bluecoat will be looking to change anytime soon. We moved to Woolton because of the catchment area thing.... our kids are guaranteed good schools as a consequence, this is one of the major reasons why the area is desirable and house prices are so high. The more talented kids from surrounding areas also get limited places. Personally, I'm against the catchment policy and think selection should be on merit not geography, but that's the system we have and it could be used to increase the status/desirability of an area.

[Tom Hughes]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

the one chance, permenant cut off aspect of the 11+ was the unfair link in the old system, it was not that the whole system was fundamentally flawed

I agree totally! I believe the old system was better and fairer in many ways. There should be a place for academic excellence that allows genuine talent to fulfill potential and to compete for university places/courses with the country's private schools etc. The problem with the 11+ is now readily solved by the far more extensive stats held on every pupil. I luckily managed to pass the 11+ and go to the school of my choice, only to find that most other kids from the more affluent areas had practiced 11+ tests for a whole year before the real thing..... we saw our first one on the day we did it, there was a local secondary modern to fill of after all!

[Tony Sebo]

having some sort of 'rolling' admissions to more academically focused schools would also remove the other main fault in the old system, the psychological one, where the teachers in the grammars thought (and told you) that they had the 'elite', with this being compounded in the secondary moderns being 'the biffs' left behind, so non-educated accordingly.

[Tom Hughes]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

having some sort of 'rolling' admissions to more academically focused schools would also remove the other main fault in the old system, the psychological one, where the teachers in the grammars thought (and told you) that they had the 'elite', with this being compounded in the secondary moderns being 'the biffs' left behind, so non-educated accordingly.

That was true, although I think elitism is a touch too provocative.... The same scenario is possibly illustrated in the Parklands example. Quality teaching was able to improve results, why wasn't this always the case? Low aspirations from teachers and pupils perhaps? It's not the better school's fault if all schools don't offer a good education.

[Tony Sebo]

No, you are certainly right. the cause of the cynicism and disinterest in children was entirely the fault of the secondary teachers.

[Howie_P]

Academies are not the cure-all they are made out to be. See 'Flagship academy schools failing to meet GCSE targets', The Times, 13 January, 2010.

Also seems their sponsors are failing to provide the cash they pledge, see 'Are academies just 'a ludicrously expensive con-trick'?', The Guardian, 1 December 2009.

[Babaloo]

Originally Posted by Tom Hughes

Does it practice any form of selection though? Is it a former grammar school, and 'academy' in name only? St Hilda's/Belrive certainly both do? If so, I'm not sure the one in North Liverpool is comparable. How do the 'academies' do compared to the former grammars generally? I don't think those currently sending their kids to St Edwards and Bluecoat will be looking to change anytime soon. We moved to Woolton because of the catchment area thing.... our kids are guaranteed good schools as a consequence, this is one of the major reasons why the area is desirable and house prices are so high. The more talented kids from surrounding areas also get limited places. Personally, I'm against the catchment policy and think selection should be on merit not geography, but that's the system we have and it could be used to increase the status/desirability of an area.

The school I'm talking about is neither of those - it's the Belvedere School (now the Belvedere Academy). Here's some info about it - apologies for the Wiki link but the school website involves spending more time than you might want to spend on it given that you only have one life.

Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Belvedere_Academy
School: http://www.belvedereacademy.net/Pages/default.aspx

The proof of the pudding will be in the school's ability to maintain a 100% pass rate at grades A - C (GCSE). I suspect it will dip a bit in the short term but hopefully the school's ethos will reassert itself over time.

Middle class areas always have good schools - education is the ticket to ensure continuing (middle class) success after all and the middle classes know every trick in the book when it comes to ensuring that they get what they want - they are particularly adept at speaking on behalf of the 'working class' when it suits their purposes.

I think the idea of good schools turning run down areas into upwardly mobile middle class districts is a bit of an urban myth perpetuated by the Daily Mail. When St Edwards and SFX were located in Everton this affect was not noticeable - to understate it.

Anecdotally, I suspect the problem is that too many teachers have low expectations for working class kids and this impacts negatively on their subsequent achievements. I'm hoping that the North Liverpool Academy can be ambitious for its students, have high expectations re what they can achieve. If it's just more of the same then it will fail.

[Tom Hughes]

The school I'm talking about is neither of those - it's the Belvedere School (now the Belvedere Academy). Here's some info about it - apologies for the Wiki link but the school website involves spending more time than you might want to spend on it given that you only have one life.

Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Belvedere_Academy
School: http://www.belvedereacademy.net/Pages/default.aspx

Actually, I have several friends with kids in Belvidere and a good friend who went there herself..... and they used to pay handsomely for the privelege (don't know about now), but they can afford it as they are all high paid proffessionals. I realise it has recently changed it's admissions criteria in order to gain academy status, was this forced on them?.... think it might be a while yet till the scals come through though , fear it may go the same way as Del la Salle or my old school, although it could be a bit deceptive as there is quite an affluent population still hugging the parks and around nearby Aigburth. They always offered scolarships to a select few, but had a strict selection process and history of achievement which is hardly the same building blocks in North Liverpool.

I think the idea of good schools turning run down areas into upwardly mobile middle class districts is a bit of an urban myth perpetuated by the Daily Mail. When St Edwards and SFX were located in Everton this affect was not noticeable - to understate it.

Wouldn't know, I don't read the mail tbh. However, when St Edwards and SFX where in the North end they were predominently scholarship/grammar stream schools in anycase, and not for the kids of the locality only. Most of my family lived in or close to SFX parish only a handfull ever went there in several generations. Certainly, by the time they were ready to relocate the most academic boys came from all over the city as the catholic enclave grew and filtered outwards. Therefore the catchment area attraction wasn't an issue and the locality derived no real benefit from their presence apart from some decent architecture I suppose. The current situation is entirely different!

[Howie_P]

Liverpool city council offers olive branch to Tesco in war over regeneration scheme
Mar 11 2010
by David Bartlett, Liverpool Daily Post



LIVERPOOL Council last night extended an olive branch to supermarket giants Tesco in a bid to resolve a bitter dispute over a key regeneration scheme.

City officials have written to Tesco asking to buy the supermarket’s land in north Liverpool needed for the £150m Project Jennifer regeneration scheme involving rival Sainsbury’s.

It comes after Tesco initially wrote to the city council insisting it was not holding up the city’s planned revamp of the Great Homer Street area of Everton. It can also be revealed today that the West Everton Community Council has written to Tesco chief executive Sir Terry Leahy asking him to personally intervene and end its interest in the area.

It is the latest episode in a bitter row that has previously seen the council accuse Tesco of standing in the way of north Liverpool regeneration.

The city council’s plan includes a 110,000 sq ft Sainsbury’s supermarket, non-food retail stores, a market hall, 481 new homes, a health centre, a new library, and some industrial space.Tesco itself wants to build a 27,000 sq ft superstore and indoor and outdoor markets.

Neither party can proceed with the separate schemes without the other’s land.

Tesco had originally been in talks with developers St Modwen and brought legal action to try to proceed with its own plans in the area.

But, in December, a planning inspector ruled in favour of the city council, which had rejected Tesco’s scheme. Sainsbury’s chief executive Justin King has since been to Liverpool to sign up to Project Jennifer.

But Tesco has launched a legal challenge to the inspector’s decision, saying it was wrong in law.

In a letter to the council, seen by the Daily Post, the supermarket’s lawyers state: “Tesco does not make such challenges lightly.

“It has taken advice from its legal team and in the light of that has concluded that it cannot let such a legally flawed decision go unchallenged.

“We are aware that public statements have been made by various parties suggesting that the legal action being pursued by Tesco is preventing the progress of the regeneration scheme being proposed by the council and its partners.

“We would like to make it clear that this is not the case.”

Continues >>

[Babaloo]

Tesco is susceptible to negative PR as demonstrated by its retreat from Hope Street with its tale between its legs. Maybe people in the affected area could mount a similar campaign?

[Chris B]

From the Daily Post -

Tesco boss Sir Terry Leahy appears to reject Liverpool peace offer

Mar 15 2010 by David Bartlett, Liverpool Daily Post

TESCO’S millionaire chief executive Sir Terry Leahy appeared to reject a peace offer designed to end a bitter dispute over a key Liverpool regeneration scheme.

Last week the Daily Post revealed how Liverpool Council wrote to Tesco asking to buy the supermarket’s land in north Liverpool needed for the £150m Project Jennifer regeneration scheme involving rival Sainsbury’s.

But in an exclusive interview, Sir Terry, who sits on the board of the council’s regeneration agency Liverpool Vision, told the Daily Post the supermarket wants to proceed with its own plans.

He said: “We own the land there and we would like to open a store which we would ensure trades very successfully and we would be happy to work with the city council on that.

Article continues here - http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/...2534-26033033/

[Howie_P]

St Modwen v Tesco bout switched to North West
25 Mar 2010, 12:07
Michael Hunt

A hearing into the plans proposed for the Great Homer Street area, which could affect St Modwen's £150m Project Jennifer scheme, is being moved from London to a North West court.

The move could result in a decision over plans for the area being made within a shorter time frame.

The Project Jennifer scheme has been delayed following the rejection of a rival planning application for a stand-alone Tesco food-store in Great Homer Street by a government planning inspector at the end of last year.

The supermarket operator, which was in talks with St Modwen for four years about being an anchor tenant in the Project Jennifer scheme before they were abandoned, then launched a legal challenge, arguing that the inspector's decision was wrong on a point of law.

Michelle Taylor, regional director at St Modwen, said: "It's great news that the decision will now be made by a court based in the North West. The London courts tend to be the busiest and it would have taken a long time for the Project Jennifer case to be heard.

"Along with the court move, we have formally requested that the High Court brings the ruling as far forward as it can so that the community does not have to wait in limbo.

"It is a frustrating time for all involved. The community has always maintained widespread support for Project Jennifer. It wants a comprehensive scheme which will deliver real change in north Liverpool, benefiting the area for many years to come, something which our development will achieve."

Cllr Peter Millea, executive member for assets and development at Liverpool City Council, added: "We want this matter to be resolved as quickly as possible for the sake of the local community who have clearly shown they want a comprehensive regeneration scheme for the area.

"While there are still legal challenges, Project Jennifer is suffering further delays and the community and local businesses face uncertainty over their future.

"We are asking the Court to deal with this challenge as soon as possible. After that I hope we will be able to carry on with the programme which will bring new homes, jobs, shops and health and community facilities to an area which badly needs them."

St Modwen had planned to start its land assembly process, via a compulsory purchase order, by spring 2010. The developer said it is ready to press ahead with the scheme as soon as the legal challenge is dispatched.

Tesco proposed a foodstore development consisting of more than 80,000 sq ft, with associated petrol station, car parking and landscaping, an indoor market and outdoor market area in Great Homer Street.

However, following a public inquiry early last year, Tesco's application was rejected by planning inspector Phillip Ware.

Liverpool City Council and development partner St Modwen argued that this development would prejudice a comprehensive redevelopment which aims to deliver a district centre with a greater choice of comparison shopping to local people than a free standing foodstore.

In June last year, St Modwen signed Sainsbury's as anchor tenant at its Project Jennifer development a year after talks ended between Tesco and the developer.

Source: Place North West

[woody]

following my first visit yesterday for many a year, this part of Great Homer Street looked very sad and neglected.................









OK, it was early on a Sunday morning so I don`t know how many shops in this area would be open on a Monday , but with all those shuttered fronts, it looked far from inviting...............
But not to far down the road I discover`d this development...........

[djdando]

That looks good.

Yeah that precinct is pretty depressing isn't it! I was there mid week a few months ago and to be fair a lot of those shops are open, but bearing in mind i was doing a survery from 7am - 7pm in the area I barely saw any shoppers.

[woody]

Yes it was depressing, but a varied collection of homes can be found in the area.............








nice development ruined by that dreadful timber cladding.

[westernfront]

Originally Posted by Babaloo

Sadly it boils down to perception. You can dress mutton up as lamb all you like but you can't get away from that fact that north Liverpool doesn't currently hang together in the way that south Liverpool does. Rightly or wrongly south Liverpool is seen as leafy, full of trendy bars and restaurants and a desirable place to live. Of course, we know that this is far from accurate but that's the problem with perception - accuracy is just one factor in the mix, and whilst this picture of south Liverpool is not true for at least half of it, it does hold some semblance of truth for quite a bit of the other half.

What are north Liverpool's assets? There are plenty - parts of Kensington, Newsham Park, Stoneycroft, Walton, Old Swan etc are ripe for gentrification (if this is the way to go) but other parts almost need to start from scratch - much of Everton, Kirkdale, Vauxhall. These places also have the occasional gem (a church here, a derelict library there and so on).

On the other hand, thinking about this a bit more, going beyond the glibness of a 'this is the solution to north Liverpool's problems approach', you only have to look at some of the websites in the city (Scouse House, Yo! Liverpool) to discern class based resentments developing. My guess is that once again, LCC has alighted on this as the solution without consulting people across north Liverpool about the way to go. Are people there asking for more semi-detached and detached dwellings to encourage greater social diversity? Is there a dialogue taking place?

What are people who live in north Liverpool asking for to sustain and grow their communities? Maybe this is covered in the 80 page document? Anyone read it?

Everton/Scotland Road and Vauxhall, probably through to Kirkdale should really be benefiting from a ripple effect from the city centre. Maybe it'll happen. They would seem the most natural areas to benefit from private sector investment. If the football plans eventually go ahead then you're also redeveloping from the other end.

You're likely going to have to pour ****loads of public money into Kensington and Walton to kick anything off there.