|
SHOULD a huge chunk of Liverpool's Stanley Park be leased to Liverpool FC for a new 60,000 seater stadium?
Some people view a new home for the club as the star attraction in what will be a £200m regeneration strategy for north Liverpool.
They argue that never again in this lifetime will such an opportunity present itself to transform an area dominated by an ageing football ground, surrounded by hundreds of terraced homes.
The new ground, costing £180m, will spearhead a new-look Anfield, with a futuristic Plaza on the site of the existing ground, coupled with a hotel, home improvements and a safer environment.
Critics argue that one of Britain's great Victorian Parks will be ruined for ever by the arrival of a huge modern stadium and all the ancillaries that go with it - car parks, transport problems, congestion.
They also argue that politicians have vowed never to sell off parkland areas, the so-called 'Crown Jewels'.
The counter argument is that the land earmarked for the stadium is already a concrete area used for match day parking.
The city council's executive board has agreed to the project, though it now faces scrutiny at a council Select Committee later this week.
The critical issue is whether the New Anfield Vision can be delivered without the inclusion of Liverpool FC.
The football ground is, both historically and currently, a critical part of the community.
The next few weeks will determine whether the Anfield dream will be a reality.
The right plan, but in the wrong place
NO SAYS Steve Radford, Leader of Liberal Group, Liverpool Council
EVERYONE in the Save Stanley Park campaign recognises the benefit of a new world-class international stadium for Liverpool Football Club.
We want the proposal to be commercially viable, but it must be in the right location with excellent motorway and rail connections. To be commercially viable, thousands more football fans will need to be able to reach the new stadium without becoming trapped in heavy congestion.
The current plans will add 15,000 extra cars to the most congested and densely populated part of Liverpool. Congested traffic will add to dangerous levels of air pollution.
The promised park and ride/park and walk" scheme is a delusion - already one of the sites, (Craven Park) has become a housing estate.
The The proponents claim the people of Anfield have voted for this scheme.
The council voted to hold a referendum in October 2000. Having done so, senior officers and councillors, terrified at the prospect, set about a phoney consultation whereby residents' opinions were claimed to have been reported, only after the reading of a wish list of promises, set to bias the outcome.
Residents never saw the answers submitted to the council on their behalf, they were not allowed to view the form or sign it proving it to be a correct record.
The council say they consulted 19,000 homes: not true. They only did 4,102 in Kirkdale, Walton, Breckfield, Tuebrook, Kensington, and Anfield. All the other areas have their own local park, and as such will not be affected by building on Stanley Park.
We challenge the council to put the issue to a local referendum.
During the public inquiry against the demolitions the council told the inspector housing renewal was NOT linked to LFC building on Stanley Park, yet every week Lib Dem press releases claim the regeneration of Anfield IS dependent on LFC's proposals.
The present stadium is 27 metres high, the new stadium will be 78.9 metres high, an increase of 225%.
A yes vote will give the council and large financial interests the green light to encroach on local parks.
Walton Hall, Croxteth, Newsham, Sefton, Calderstones and Princes Park, and Otterspool will be under threat.
We are asking you to vote NO, to save all our parks and ensure a new international stadium is built somewhere else with excellent transport links.
We believe the city council has failed miserably to develop alternative, and preferable, sites at Speke, or along the East Lancs corridor. |
