Sefton Park Meadows land sale underway
The first adverts have been published in national press as part of the controversial move by Liverpool City Council to dispose of several acres of open space next to the grade 1-listed Sefton Park in Mossley Hill.
The council voted earlier this year to sell the 6.79 acres at Park Avenue which it says are surplus to requirement. Strong and sustained campaigns against the sale followed the council's decision and continue today. An estimated value of £10m was described in the council's first report into the plan in March. Around 1,300 people objected formally to subsequent public notices about loss of open space published by the council. A petition with 7,500 signatures from people opposed to the disposal was handed to the council's Cabinet in June when the sale was approved by the local authority.
The council is now offering the leasehold interest in the site for "exemplar residential development".
Opponents, who call the site Sefton Park Meadows, say they will object to planning applications for homes on the site.
The closing date for expressions of interest is 31 January 2014.
I knew this would happen – although it shouldnt! This is a disgrace – will they sell the park next?
By Mary Smiley
If this is only "next to" the park, rather than part of it, then what is the problem? The beauty of Sefton Park is its central location in an otherwise built-up area. Surely, then, it shouldn’t be an issue if the surrounding area becomes a little more built-up? I think its a good thing that more residents of Liverpool will have the park on their doorstep. Don’t see how this harms the park?
By mancboi
Mancboi – where do you stop? Its always been assumed to be part of the park. Do you work for those selling it? Could the problem not be destruction of a meadow (bit of a clue in the name) – the habitat value that is there etc?
By Bob Dawson
ha, so you agree with the Council approach and you are accused of being on the payroll. The park is protected, this land will not detract from the wonderful amenity tat so any residents already enjoy. b Build homes for people!
By part time
On payroll? Not sure what your on about? and Tat? Habitat is lost thats the problem! They dont need to build there is another problem. Homes for people? I imagine they will be quite expensive homes given the location – so rich people?
By Bob Dawson
A grab for land by the Mayor … there is enough brownfield land in and around Liverpool to keep the development community busy for decades … I suggest that the Council looks to build more homes in and around North Liverpool and repopulate this part of the City rather than go for another easy land sale in the South of the City …
By Norman Davies
Pure and simple land values.
By LJA
Where do you stop? You stop at the park! The park is a conservation area, so the boundary of this would be a reasonable one to use. There is plenty of brownfield land, but most of it isn’t desirable. I don’t think there’s a huge problem in developing some more land in a highly sought after location – but purely because the park-proper is there for enjoyment. I wouldn’t be saying the same thing if they were proposing building on the actual park! As for north Liverpool, this is an area I know quite well. You can’t say developing in south Liverpool is wrong just because there are problems in north Liverpool – its a different issue. There’s a lot to be done, but that’s more a case of dealing with problem areas and families, which is only partly a land/planning issue. That said, if you look at the Croxteth Park estate, you could see that as a reasonably successful attempt to deliver a desirable private estate next to a park, to balance out some local undesirable areas (Croxteth and Norris Green).
By mancboi
Unfortunate sale of green space when only 5 minutes away lies vast parts of the City still reeling from the mis-managed, uninspired and ill fated Housing Market Renewal developments. If the meadows site is sold then the redevelopment must be exemplar – a design approach which reflects the park context, with the existing trees protected – no standard boring house building – this is a special place and the Mayor, along with the council’s asset and regeneration teams must now ensure that whatever development happens on the site it continues to reflect the special character of the park setting and must ensure that they do not deliver planning a problem and hope it fudges it to a finale.
By J.Gibbons
An interesting argument put forward by mancboi and land value … The decline of North Liverpool stems from depopulation and you are correct that building houses there will not solve some of the deep rooted social and economic problems, but neither will selling off the family silver … no problem with selling land but you only get to sell it once and then what happens … the next piece of the park becomes more valuable and is sold off, hypothetically. North Liverpool has land which is of a lower value than the Meadows, but with proper planning, enabling the market to do what it does best and working with the local communities, then North Liverpool might become a balanced and sustainable neighbourhood. It is not good enough to look for quick fixes, land sales or other panaceas, it has taken decades for North Liverpool to decline this far and it will take decades to rebuild it, that process starts with an idea, a grand plan, discussion and dialogue with the local community, NOT selling off assets, in my opinion. The money raised through land sales might make a difference, if used properly, but I caution against the selling of prized assets …
By Norman Davies
The style of homes built on the meadows will more or less resemble the executive style private apartments built to the south of Sefton Park off Mossley Hill Drive I imagine?
By LJA