Liverpool council approves Anfield stadium CPO powers

Mayor Joe Anderson says they will be last resort for development

Liverpool Council bosses approved plans to give themselves the power to force the sale of houses needed for the regeneration of Anfield.

But they said compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) would only be used to buy the remaining 30 properties needed for the £260m project as a last resort.

At the cabinet meeting, Mayor Joe Anderson said negotiations were ongoing with the home owners and deals should be struck without having to use legal powers.

Mayor Anderson said: “CPOs are the final stage of the process. There are lots of negotiations and discussions to go through but we use them as the final trigger to get action one way or another.”

Some of the properties are in Rockfield Road, and are likely to be needed in order to allow for the expansion of Anfield stadium.

Two of the eight in Rockfield Road that are needed have now been secured after deals were reached with the owners.

Some of the remaining 30 dotted around Anfield are derelict or substandard, and in some cases the owners cannot be traced at all.

Cabinet member for housing Cllr Ann O’Byrne said the homes were needed in order that new life could be breathed into the area.

She added: “We are convinced that the majority of this can be achieved the way it’s been achieved with the 300 others, by one-to-one negotiation.”

As well as a new football stadium, 700 new homes and 10,000 square feet of retail space including a ‘food hub’ in Stanley Park, the project is also expected to create up to 700 new jobs.

Cabinet member for employment, enterprise and skills Cllr Nick Small said: “We will shortly be setting up an employment group dedicated to this project, bringing together all the groups to make sure there’s a real impact in terms of jobs.”

CPO use should be extended
Opposition leaders said they believed compulsory purchase orders needed to be used more in other areas besides Anfield to deal with the blight of empty homes.

Liberal group leader Cllr Steve Radford, whose Tuebrook ward borders Anfield, said: “We’ve said to officers we should use CPOs to force the owners of some of the derelicts in Tuebrook to do something, but they won’t even use the threat of it.

“It seems like a double standard and is holding up the progress on the council’s housing policy.

“And of course they’re running out of time to spend the funding and house prices are rising.”

But cabinet member for housing Cllr Ann O’Byrne said the council was doing all it could in wards like Tuebrook.

However, she said, the prices that some owners were asking for properties, compared to the funds available to the housing associations who want to buy them and refurbish them, made some projects unviable.

She added: “It’s about targeting the resources in the best way possible.

“We’ve brought more than 1,000 properties in the city back into use. Some we have taken off people, but in the majority of cases we’ve talked to landlords to get them to do it.”

 

so what does that actually mean? why get it if you won't use it until it's a last resort?

 

i dunno but its all baout negotiation. you are sort of saying... you can't sit on your hands forever for the best price here guys.... like ok we have 5 unreasonable peopel left. bang there you go CPO... i would say they want to ge tthe number for 30 to less than 10 really.

 

So basically, nothing has changed. We're still doing lengthy negotiations with the same few stubborn people who won't sell their house for money far beyond it's true value.

It'll keep dragging on, CPO or not.

 

I'm surprised at the attitude of wanting to force people out of their homes when they do not want to be. Maybe its been a home that a family has had for generations or that they are used to living in the community.

I'm sure the tune would have been changed if it wasn't in the name of Liverpool FC and the redevelopment of a stadium. If the conservatives tried this to build a nice brand spanking new shopping centre i'd bet their would be outrage

 

Been to the area lately?

 

I'm there a lot and I know the area's grim....thanks mainly to the council and our club. Bobby D has a point. Despite the club/council propaganda bear in mind some people have been born and raised in these houses AND have spent the last two decades trying to get LFC to do something positive rather than negative.

Don't blame those people for standing up for themselves, blame the previous owners of our club for being ham fisted ****ing spivs who went to war with the locals rather bothering to consult people who had every right to be consulted.

 

Yeah, we were to blame. Rather, our previous two owners were. But our current ones seemingly have a great proposal for the wider area which is something Anfield badly needs.

If they're happy living in a half deserted, depressed, deprivated and derelict environment rather than take a huge paycheck far beyond what they've (likely) had before and far in excess of what their house is worth, it's surely a good option.

The current owners ARE trying to do something positive. And it's about time. But being stubborn isn't helping the problem either. You can't regenerate an area around people...it's simply not possible.

The setup at Liverpool is completely different from the twats of twenty and ten years ago. Whole new agenda and whole new development scheme. They need to subdue their bitterness towards the previous regime and look at what the current guys are offering.

 

They are bitter exactly because the areas been left to rot to **** by the very people who are now promising all sorts (bear in mind our beloved council has a fabulous record of promising the earth and delivering ****ing ****e all).

I'm actually in full agreement that this is the best deal that has been put on the table for the property owners and the area thus far (although it's still a bit half arsed for my liking) and I've always been 100% for us staying at Anfield and developing it (and the area between the two grounds) as much as humanly possible

It's all too easy to tell people to "subdue their bitterness" but try walking a mile in their shoes first....

 

But it's not the very same people at the club all. Not even close. The council aren't great, but this is being pushed by the club and not them.

They are bitter towards the club in it's current management because of their bitterness towards the previous regimes. They might as well go around hating Germans because of what they did during WWII if that's the case! Companies move on, owners move on, regimes change and people need to look at each new setup from a clear perspective.

Their choices were very simple; an average offer or a life a **** hole. They chose the **** hole because they didn't like how that bunch of clowns treated them. Fine, I get that. Then it was a choice between a valuable offer or life in a **** hole from new owners with new promises and a real vision for the Anfield area. They chose the **** hole because of how the previous bunch of clowns treated them. Not so smart an idea. Now it's a choice between a valuable offer and a forced relocation at a lower fee, all from a setup who will spend double what was necessary for the stadium purely to develop the area. It is bitterness which has got to this stage (and I use bitterness as it was meant to be used, not as a negative, but as an emotion - because they have every right to feel bitter towards the last few owners) but now they need to sit and listen to the new guys and take heed of what is a good offer. People need to move on because Anfield won't otherwise.

For the record, I lived out in Tuebrook for a while and still have friends there. I work just on the edge of Anfield in a school. I'm familar with that area and it's really not a pleasant place to live any more. It needs the change but eventually someone will come to the table with a stadium sponsor and we'll move elsewhere. Maybe 5-10 years, but these things come around and more and more investors and looking at the PL. It's a damn good offer and opportunity, they need to take it.

 

I totally agree with you that it's by far and away the best offer they've had or probably that they'll get and I totally agree it isn't as pleasant a place to live as it was once (not that it was ever the Garden of Eden ) but what Anfield has needed for years isn't just change it's the right change if you know what I mean. Yes this plan is for the betterment of the area and it will be a good thing but also let's not pretend it's a brilliant plan because it simply isn't. It's good not great. There are gaping holes in this one as there have been in every other, the total lack of any forward thinking transport planning for one.

On the whole I agree that this is best for the area and I hope the way it is handled this time is the best for all concerned because if it is then the club and area will become a vibrant part of the city again and we can get back to knocking them turds up the East Lancs off "our" perch

 

I thought they had to rethink the transportation because of laws surrounding an events stadium and certain capacities? Definitely remember reading somewhere that they'd be redoing the major roads into the area and looking at alternatives to getting there

 

Right Billy, now put the shoe on the other foot. The Council decide to build a major development on the City boundaries in a rural sparsely populated area. But 6 old codgers who have lived in their cottages all their life won't sell. Wonder if you'd have the same level of sympathy for them? How about all those people who's homes were CPO'd to build the M62?

What's happened in the past is not a basis for supporting the people who still own property in Rockfield Road. Note we are talking about owners here. I wonder just how many of them are actually residents.

 

We've had the debate about owners/landlords/proper residents before Dave and that's hardly an issue. Landlords/absent owners get the compensation for the value/rental value etc and residents "should" be properly compensated not just with money/new home (or whatever suits them best) but also compensated with the knowledge that they really ARE doing it for the greater good, not just for the club but more so for their friends and neighbours.

For the record this isn't an urban, suburban or a rural thing. I don't agree that ANYBODY should be kicked out of their home unless it genuinely is for the best for a whole area. If it's just in the interests of one company or business or even worse in the interests of one business and to the detriment of said area then I would support anyone fighting against that. This isn't the case with this plan but it HAS been with every plan we've produced since the early 90's.

I heard the same arguments you make now Dave when Moores and his cronies were trying to bully people out, I heard the same arguments when the cowboys were trying to get the park on the cheap with no concessions to improve the area at all in the plan. "You can't stand in the way of progress" etc but what if it isn't progress? What if the plans are ****ing terrible? We just blindly support it anyway? Well the last plans were awful so they had every right to fight them, this one is much better thankfully but can you blame some if they're still in fighting mood? These are good Liverpool folk Dave and you of all people know that when in a fight we tend not to know when to call it a day

What's happened in the past is at least enough reason to listen to any "genuine" concerns residents have now, the club has made a better fist of that this time so credit to them...if they have none then we're all happy, if their concerns are addressed then again we're all happy. Fingers crossed they keep communicating and get it sorted as soon as possible.

 

Yeah but the plan at the moment only relates to the area directly around the ground but that's not exactly forward thinking that's just lip service to the planners.

In fairness this is more a council/government issue rather than a club one but it is something the club should be pushing them for. There are solutions if people bothered to open their eyes and invest (Liverpool used to have an inner loop line of which Breck Road was a station just as one example).

 

It means the club will have to do everything within their power (legally) to negotiate with the owners and the CPO will only be used should the owner refuse to negotiate in return.

However, it also puts the club in a stronger position. Both they are the house owners know that the CPO's are now granted for a last resort so its no longer in the clubs financial interest to negotiate a price. The owner will know that if they don't negotiate, they could end up getting a **** deal so will feel they have to.

 

I always thought that as long as the capacity of either a redeveloped Anfield or a new stadium didn't exceed 60,000 then no new road/rail infrastructure would be needed.

If the original plan for the 80,000 stadium had ever been given the go ahead (yeah right spade in the ground )then the whole of the route back to the motorway would have to be upgraded.

 

Maybe that's what I remember then, those glorious 80k stadium plans from H&G. If the new proposals don't include transportation changes, that's a serious oversight as it's not really suitable now. I park down by the Asda on the drive and walk up. As smart as they are, they surely can't have avoided changes to the transportation links whilst redeveloping the Anfield area?

 

Billy we live on a very little over-crowded island. Whatever you do is going to advantage somebody and disadvantage another; appeal to their community spirit or their bottom line pocket; tickle their aesthetic taste-buds or be considered a carbuncle. But I'm asking for a little realism. The only true reason why these properties have not been sold is money. All of the "I've lived here man and boy" tripe is mere window dressing. Now the bluff has been called nothing more and nothing less.

From this distance I do not know the ins and outs of the Council Area Plan but from what I have heard it is at least an attempt to regenerate an area that has been sadly neglected since the 1960's. There does come a point when a dog in the manger attitude needs to be faced down. There's bigger and better issues to save our doggedness for mate.

 

Shifting 45 thou in clogs up anywhere past the rocket junction enough as it is....an extra 15 thou on top will be murder....and have you tried getting a bus after the match recently (I haven't but they still look ****ing murder...just like they've always been ).

In fairness the transport links could do with improving massively. Plus don't forget it's a much higher proportion coming from outside these days than it ever was.