Nick Kavanagh and Elliot Lawless Arrested on Bribery and Corruption Charges.

Both were released after questioning on conditional bail.

Police arrested Mr Lawless, aged 32, at his city centre flat. 

That he has spent one million pounds, yes a Million pounds restoring from its ex council office style 1960's building into his new swanky pad.

This pad overlooks Joe Anderson's offices at Cunard Buildings.

SHOULD THE POLICE CHECK ALL THE DELIVERY NOTES TO THE ADDRESS OF HIS APARTMENT and is THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT SOME OF THE MATERIALS MAY HAVE BEEN BOOKED ELSEWHERE??????? 

THEY, and the HMRC REALLY SHOULD CHECK AS HE HAS SOME PUBLIC FUNDED CONTRACTS. 

Why was he given the contract to restore publicly owned properties?

 Is there where the alleged misapropriation has taken place?

Mr Kavanagh, aged 50, was arrested in his office. He was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and misconduct in a public office.

Mr Lawless was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud, bribery and corruption.

Mr Kavanagh was appointed director for regeneration at the city council in 2011 and is in charge of the city’s major regeneration schemes.A Merseyside Police statement said: “A 32-year-old man from Liverpool city centre has been arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud, bribery and corruption.

Police said “Whilst a 50-year-old man, employed by Liverpool City Council, has been arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and misconduct in public office.”

Mr Lawless said: “This is a frustrating turn of events as we are extremely busy delivering major schemes across the north.

“I’m helping the police fully with their enquiries and am more than happy to do so. It is important that I clear my good name quickly and that we move on from this.

“The allegations are completely baseless but due process needs to be followed and whilst the police do their work I’ll not comment further on the issue.

“In the meantime, it’s business as usual. I have seven live schemes in Liverpool to deliver and am back at my desk doing just that.”

YES HE WOULD SAY THAT OR IS IT WORDS CONJURED UP BY HIS PR COMPANY. 

Which may or may not be run by Jon Egan and co who also PR personally for Joe Anderson and the council and several publicaly funded bodies.
Mr Lawless, a former plumber, who drives a Bentley is the founder of the Elliot Group which is working on major schemes in Liverpool and Salford.

Schemes include the £170m redevelopment of Heap’s Rice Mill, the £100m redevelopment of Wolstenholme Square, the £100m Aura student scheme and a scheme including 1,000 apartments on Leeds Street in Liverpool.
https://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2016/08/heaps-rice-mill-letter-to-joe-anderson.html
Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson said: “We will co-operate with the police unequivocally and will assist them in any way that we can."

Yes he would say that wouldn't he.

He was recently questioned by Police.

https://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2017/06/ged-fitzgerald-answers-questions-about.html

Why has frank McKenna from Downtown Liverpool in Business gone quiet these days?????

It was Kavanagh that Joe Anderson said brought to his attention the fact that Cunard Buildings were up for sale and they should move the whole council from, the quite newly build council offices on Victoria street and sell the block to Lawrence Kenwright. https://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2018/09/lawrence-kenwrights-carbuncle-shankly.html

Maybe another investigation should take place. 

This corruption goes right to the top in our opinion.

Here is a couple more we did earlier

https://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2016/06/elliot-developments-where-is-all-money.html

https://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2016/08/elliot-group-build-block-of-student.html

Heaps Rice Mill-A Letter To Joe Anderson. The building is in a bad state.

Mayor Joe Anderson

Liverpool City Council

Municipal Buildings

17.8.16

By Post and email.

Mr Anderson.

I enclose pictures of Heaps Mill which is in a perilous state at present.

You will recall both myself and numerous other people who care about the citys past campaigned vigorously to save the building from demolition. I think the developer was Elliot Developments.

English Heritage decided the building was of national historic importance and decided to list it after the Merseyside Civic Society made the application.

It seems that Liverpool City Council with its non existance conservation people consider it to be of little importance.

There are now trees growing out of the structure, mainly around the top which will create structural problems. The roots of these buddlia trees are growing through the courses of brickwork seperating them and if left unchecked for any longer will lead to the building being of little significance. I do not wish to watch this building become the same fate as the Futurist in Lime Street, being allowed to deteriate and then spurriosly be claimed it is unsafe.

I would request an immediate structural survey to ascertain the situation.

I would further request a repairs notice be served on the owner of the property who does not it seem respect the historical context of this, a piece of our history.

Please would you advise me what you are doing to stop this disgraceful situation falling into a place where the developers will claim it is too far gone.

I look forward to hearing from you by return.

WHY NOT DROP HIM A LINE YOURSELVES HIS EMAIL ADDRESS IS EASY ENOUGH TO FIND.

LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL HERITAGE LIES.

This is a picture of a property that has been left to rot, and now the roof has fallen in. So while parts of the rest of the Baltic Triangle are being PR'd by back room organisations such as Archetype Studio Liverpool. when they were known as Aurora Media, worked for Joe Andersons as PR during his Mayoral campaign, this is reality.  The council just told all the media that the council have a good record on the Heritage At Risk in Liverpool. This was lapped up by the Echo and the Two man ( and his dog) band at Liverpool Confidential who didn't even question the figures or how they were arrived at. The council said that the buildings at risk figures are below the average for the country at 3% while the national average is 6%.
They used a method to calculate the figures that was a shameful attempt to deceive the public. 

And it did so because it deceived the media.
 If you can call Liverpool Echo and the likes of Confidential Media, with its trolls.                                                                                                                                                                   

This is the reality away from the Heritage Lies propagated by the city council.

Rob Burns should be ashamed of himself.

Rob Burns is running the planning department and is a dangerous man to Liverpool Heritage. 

 Liverpools historic warehouses are falling down in The Baltic Triangle, and will be left to fall down so that grubby property developers such as Neptune Developments or others will be able to get their dirty hands on the land.

Just look at what has happened to Bridgewater street. It has become an architectural abortion.

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/baltic-creative-or-baltic-architectural.html

 This has developed while Uncle Joe “Stalin”Anderson spins rubbish about it all is happening there in the Baltic Triangle.

What is also alarming and should be considered, is

 by the media before they run with spin is that there are numerous historic warehouse property's in the Baltic Triangle that need saving. Just look at Heaps Mill they were about to knock it down, right next to a site now owned by Neptune Developments that was was owned by Trevor Jones and was home to the last ships chandlers in the city

.http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/heaps-mill-now-grade-ii-listed-is-about.html

This property is a strong looking property it looks as if it has been a bonded warehouse at some stage with its iron doors. It has very interesting iron transoms and should not have been allowed to fall into this disrepair. It is next to safestore the storage facility and is on the corner of Simpson Street and Norfolk Street. This is an obscure part of town that is not frequented by many people which is how it may have fallen under the radar.

What is even more alarming is that it has been owned by the city council for decades and is now about to fall down. 

And all we hear is rubbish about lies about how the city council is preserving historic buildings.

CLOSE BY IS ANOTHER WAREHOUSE JUST WHERE LEY RUBBER USED TO BE BEFORE THEY WERE PRICED OUT BY THE DEVELOPERS IS FALLING INTO DISREAPAIR.

Heaps Mill Now Grade II Listed Is About To Be Threatened Again With A Monstrous Scheme.

Oh No it makes you despair. We save Heaps Mill from destruction and the developer appoints Falconer Chester Hall, the architectural whores of Liverpool  to come up with a crap scheme that is going to destroy the whole essence, of the now, listed building.
http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/heaps-rice-mill-listed-by-english.html

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/heaps-mill-english-heritage-slam-plans.html


Liverpool Confidential writes up the story, that is knocked out by PR whores Dougal Paver who are tying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public....again; Shame on you, don't you care about the heritage of your city, or do you just turn a blind eye like the other moles at Archetype Studios or is it Aurora Media.
http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Where-theres-a-mill-theres-a-way

Liverpool Confidential quite rightly put an arrow showing where the Mill is.........practically obliterated.
All plans that are near or adjacent to a listed building have to be treated with respect for the listed structure.

This scheme is an insult to the intelligence to all those who fought to save the building from demolition.
Don't trust the Merseyside Civic Society on this scheme. though they did a good job on the listing, Peter Brown its Chairman is 'bessy' mates with the directors of Neptune Developments who have plans passed for an equally awful scheme on the old Lamb and Sons, the last ships Chandlers in the city. 
Once owned by Trevor and Doreen Jones (who passed Mann island with casting vote as planning committee chairperson) right next to Heaps Mill. 
These plans would not be passed now, as the affect the listed status of Heaps Mill.
Peter Brown promoted the Three Black coffins on behalf of Neptune, in our opinion stitching the public up with an architectural disaster when he as Chairman should know better.
We dont trust any of them at MCS.
http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2010/04/merseyside-civic-society-heritage.html

Just why are they supporting building on Sefton Meadows when the public is against it.It all looks well dodgy to the writer. They only have 90 members and on average 4 turn up to a meeting.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/controversy-civic-society-says-build-6429590

Don't believe the hype. 
The fight to save Heaps Rice Mill has only just begun.

Heaps Rice Mill Listed by English Heritage

31 July 2014

Dear Mr Ward,

Heap's Rice Mill, Beckwith Street, Liverpool – Awarded Listed Building Status

I am writing to inform you that the above building has been added to the List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest. The building is now listed at Grade II.

I attach a copy of our advice report, which gives the principal reasons for this decision. The List entry for this building, together with a map, has now been published on the National Heritage List for England, and will be available for public access from tomorrow. This List can be accessed through our website.

Listing helps us to mark a building’s significance and celebrate its special architectural and historic interest. It brings specific protection so that its special interest can be properly considered in managing its future.

Please be aware that the listing of the building took effect on the day that the List entry was published on the National Heritage List for England.

As of 25 June 2013, the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act (ERRA) has enabled a number of heritage reforms, including an amendment to the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 that provides two potential ways to be more precise about what is listed. Whether or not the new provisions have been invoked with regard to this building is explained in the Advice Report. A List entry that makes use of these provisions will clarify what attached and curtilage structures are excluded from the listing and/or which interior features definitively lack special interest; however, owners and managers should be aware that other planning and development management constraints might apply to these structures, and should clarify these with the Local Planning Authority. Further information is available on our website athttp://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/listed-buildings/listing-and-the-erra/ .

If you consider that this decision has been wrongly made you may contact the DCMS within 28 days of the date of this letter to request that the Secretary of State review the decision. An example of a decision made wrongly would be where there was a factual error or an irregularity in the process which affected the outcome. You may also ask the Secretary of State to review the decision if you have any significant evidence relating to the special architectural or historic interest of the building which was not previously considered. Further details of the review criteria and process and how to request a review are contained in the annex to this letter.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance. More information on designation can also be found on our website at www.english-heritage.org.uk.

Yours sincerely

Victoria Ellis

Designation Co-ordinator - North

Designation Team North

English Heritage

37 Tanner Row

York

YO1 6WP

Data Protection Act 1998

Your personal details, along with the other information you have provided and information obtained from other sources, will be retained by English Heritage for administrative purposes and, where applicable, for future consideration. English Heritage will not release personal details to a third party if the disclosure would contravene the Data Protection principles.

Freedom of Information

English Heritage is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 which provide a general right of access to information we hold. We may provide the information you have supplied in response to a request made under this legislation, subject to any exemptions which apply. English Heritage will consult with external parties as necessary prior to releasing information.

Annex 1

Review Criteria and Process

A review will only be carried out in the following circumstances:

(1) there is evidence that the original decision has been made wrongly. Examples would include:

- where there was a factual error, eg. the wrong building was listed; or

- where there has been some irregularity in the process which has affected the outcome, eg. relevant

considerations were not taken into account or irrelevant considerations were taken into account.

(2) there is significant evidence which was not previously considered, relating to the special architectural or

historic interest of the building, as set out in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. An example would be where new evidence relating to the date of a building has been discovered which might make a material difference to the architectural or historic interest of the building.

Having conducted a review, the Secretary of State will either affirm or overturn the original decision. It is important to understand that the original decision will stand until the Secretary of State has made a decision on whether the original decision should be affirmed or overturned. If the original decision is overturned, this will not have retrospective effect.

How to request a review of a listing decision

Reviews are carried out by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and review requests should be made on the Department’s ‘Listing Review Request Form’. The Form is accompanied by Guidance to assist you in making a review request. Both the Form and the Guidance can be downloaded from the ‘Reviews of Listing Decisions’ page of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s website at:

https://www.gov.uk/how-to-challenge-our-decision-to-list-or-not-list-a-building

If you are unable to access the website please contact:

The Listing Review Officer

Heritage Protection Branch

Culture Team

Department for Culture Media and Sport

4th Floor

100 Parliament

London

SW1A 2BQ.

Review requests should normally be made within 28 days of the date of this letter. Requests made beyond this period may be considered in exceptional circumstances.

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of English Heritage unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it. Any information sent to English Heritage may become publicly available.

Portico: your gateway to information on sites in the National Heritage Collection; have a look and tell us what you think. 
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/archives-and-collections/portico/H

Heaps Rice Mill Demolition Refused 25th July 2014

Excellent. But its not all over. Last night an impassioned meeting attended by local Councillor Civic Society members general public and council funded vested interests such as Engage Liverpool and Baltic Creative, heard that the plans for demolition of Heaps Rice Mill were to be decided today by delegated powers by un-elected officials at the planning department.
Not sure whats happened yet at this early stage but we have just heard from World Heritage Watchdog David Swift that they have refused prior-application demolition. We thought the reason they were evoking delegated powers was to pass them. (Why did they need prior application discussions when English Heritage are considering listing it).
Maybe Councillor Mumby and the other ward Councillor have intervened, as there is a law that if two Ward Councillors object they cant use delegated powers. Having said that the groundswell of public opinion may have been enough to do it.
Its not all over but its good news.
It is so curios how they tried to slip this one in and last week the electric to Heaps was turned off by the utility companies.


http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/heaps-mill-english-heritage-slam-plans.html

Update: 12.30pm
It has now been confirmed that Councillor Steve Mumby declined to object to the delegated powers decision on the basis of legal advice he had received.
He refused to divulge this legal advise. His advice to campaigners was to do nothing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can we trust Steve Mumby? The ward councillor for Riverside.
Mr Mumby reminded the meeting about previous schemes, calling Windsor developments attempts to regenerate the area as bordering on fraud. Yet what did he do about it at the time.
How long can Councillor Mumby sit on the fence before he gets a sore behind.  

Update 15.45 pm David Ward

Why is Steve Mumby, who is a Cabinet Member, getting away with this inactivity.
After all its his council under Joe "Il Duce" Anderson's leadership, err we mean dictatorship, that has done away with the City Council Conservation Office.
 Now on this occasion it may have proved that the campaigners have got a stay of execution.......................but what about the next one.
The council website which has the planning application to view on planning explorer application no 14PM/1338 (what does PM mean its usually a F or L) was supposed to allow comments till the 30th July and there are complaints from campaigners that various planning numbers have been changed and altered.
Mumby's Cabinet members are the ones who give the un-elected officials the power.

Heaps Mill-English Heritage Slam Plans EXCLUSIVE

We have been informed by Head of International advice at English Heritage that the 25 Storey element of the proposals which will demolish Heaps Rice Mill will be in conflict with the Tall Buildings Element of  Liverpool's Supplementary Planning document for the World Heritage Site.

Liverpool City Council have been instructed by English Heritage not to consider the application until the application to have the building listed has been considered by them.

JOHN ROWLANDS

If you care about conserving your heritage, and stopping the demolition of Heaps Rice Mill, please come to the Public Meeting tomorrow at Unit 51, Baltic Creative, Jamaica Street Liverpool.It will take place from 6p.m. to 8 p.mm. Joe Anderson Mayor of Liverpool has been invited, as has a representative of English Heritage, at least one local councillor we be there. Peter Brown from Merseyside Civic Society will chair the meeting. If you have ideas or comments about the Mill here is your chance to air them at the meeting. 

http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Liverpool-World-Heritage-Site-stays-on-danger-list

Thats Thursday 24th July 2014

This is exceptional news for us all who are campaigning to save Heaps Mill in light of the recent re-in statement of Liverpool on the Unesco "In Danger" list.

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/liverpool-mercantile-and-maritime-world.html

FRIDAY, 11 JULY 2014

Liverpool Mercantile and Maritime World Heritage Site-Stays On 2014 Unesco In Danger List

State of conservation of World Heritage properties WHC-14/38.COM/7A, p. 32

inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (United Kingdom of Great Britain and 19.Northern Ireland) (C 1150)

Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 2004

Criteria (ii)(iii)(iv)

Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger 2012 to present

Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

The proposed development of Liverpool Waters

Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger

In progress

Corrective measures identified

In progress

Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures

In progress

Previous Committee Decisions See page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150/documents/

International Assistance

Requests approved: 0 Total amount approved: 0 USD For details, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150/assistance/

UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds

N/A

Previous monitoring missions

October 2006: joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission; November 2011: joint World Heritage Centre / ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission.

Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports

• Lack of overall management of new developments;

• Lack of analysis and description of the townscape characteristics relevant to the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and important views related to the property and its buffer zone;

• Lack of clearly established maximum heights for new developments, for the backdrops of the World Heritage areas as well as along the waterfront;

• Lack of awareness of developers, building professionals and the wider public about the World Heritage property, its Outstanding Universal Value and requirements under the World Heritage Convention.

Illustrative material See page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150

Current conservation issues

On 31 January 2014, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report, which is available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150/documents/.

The report pointed out that, while the overall Liverpool Waters scheme received irrevocable approval, no concrete steps have yet been taken towards its implementation. It explained that detailed master plans for each phase of the 30-year-scheme as well as detailed proposals would need to be elaborated first and reviewed against numerous legal obligations and planning conditions before permission for actual execution would be granted. The State Party considered that this process would still allow addressing the Committee’s concerns and requests. It further informed that design and conservation bodies are being set up, which include the City Council, the developer Peel Holdings and English Heritage, to ensure the respect of the obligations and conditions for planning permissions.

State of conservation of World Heritage properties WHC-14/38.COM/7A, p. 33

inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

In its letter of 31 January 2014, the State Party confirmed that it had received a first draft of the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) prepared by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS on 29 April 2013. On 15 April 2014, the State Party submitted a draft DSOCR prepared on its behalf by English Heritage in coordination with and agreed by the property’s key stakeholders, City Council, Peel Holdings and the chair of the property’s World Heritage Steering Group. The State Party explained that the draft DSOCR focuses on those arrangements and controls that the English legal system allows within the terms of the non-cancellable planning permission. The draft DSOCR is currently being reviewed by the Advisory Bodies in view of its presentation to the Committee at its 39th session.

On 15 April 2014, the State Party also expressed its willingness to consider organising a consultative seminar that would gather the key stakeholders, ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre.

Furthermore, the State Party reported on concerns about an approved demolition scheme for an area within the World Heritage property (Ropewalks area), for which a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) had been elaborated, based on which English Heritage recommended to refuse consent.

Finally, the State Party also informed about achievements in restoring and converting significant landmark buildings of Liverpool to new functions, in particular hotel and conference uses.

Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM

The findings of the joint reactive monitoring mission of November 2011, as expressed in the opinion of the World Heritage Committee in its previous Decisions, indicated that the Liverpool Waters development scheme, if implemented as currently planned, would irreversibly damage the attributes of the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) and the conditions of integrity that warranted inscription, and could lead to the potential deletion of the property from the World Heritage List.

The State Party expects detailed master plans for each phase of the overall Liverpool Waters scheme to be developed as well as detailed proposals for each plan, all of which would need specific planning permission; it also considers that this process could address the Committee’s concerns. This process would need to clearly define how this can be achieved based on a revised overall vision for the entire development area.

It is noted that the State Party provided a draft DSOCR and a proposal for corrective measures, and also expressed its willingness to take concrete next steps to work in consultation with the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies. It is recalled that the corrective measures must be deliverable and clearly linked to an overall vision for the property.

While the State Party submitted a draft DSOCR and a set of corrective measures, it is considered that there have been no further actions to remove the potential danger as requested by the World Heritage Committee at its 36th and 37th sessions. The property is therefore considered under continued threat and it is consequently recommended that the Committee retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Draft Decision: 38 COM 7A.19

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-14/38.COM/7A,

2. Recalling Decisions 36 COM 7B.93 and 37 COM 7A.35, adopted at its 36th (Saint-Petersburg, 2012) and 37th (Phnom Penh, 2013) sessions respectively,

3. Also recalling the results of the joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission of November 2011,

4. Reiterates its serious concern over the potential threat of the Liverpool Waters development scheme on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the property, and notes that the implementation of the development, as currently planned, would

State of conservation of World Heritage properties WHC-14/38.COM/7A, p. 34

inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

irreversibly damage the attributes and conditions of integrity that warranted inscription, and could lead to the potential deletion of the property from the World Heritage List;

5. Also notes the information provided by the State Party, and requests it to:

a) submit comprehensive documentation for any proposed detailed master plans and detailed planning proposals, before they are adopted, together with an overall vision for the property over-arching such master plans, as well as details of the draft legal obligations and draft planning conditions for granting permission for any future development proposals,

b) ensure that the process whereby master plans and detailed plans for the Liverpool Waters scheme, when developed, takes into consideration the concerns of the World Heritage Committee;

6. Strongly urges the State Party to consider all measures that would allow changes to the extent and scope of the proposed Liverpool Waters scheme to ensure the continued coherence of the architectural and town-planning attributes, and the continued safeguarding of the OUV of the property including the conditions of authenticity and integrity;

7. Further notes with appreciation that the State Party submitted a proposal for the Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger along with a set of corrective measures, and expressed its willingness to pursue consultations with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies in view of its finalisation for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 39th session in 2015;

8. Also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2015, an updated report, including a 1-page executive summary, on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 39th session in 2015;

9. Decides to retain Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) on the World Heritage List in Danger.

Save Heaps Rice Mill-From Mayor Joe Anderson's Money Motivated Leadership.

A petition has been set up to save Heaps Rice Mill.

No wonder we are on the Unesco WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER LIST.

Joe Anderson wants investment, but at what risk to Liverpool's historic past, we at LPT consider that Joe Anderson neither has the desire or the intelligence to work out that if you lose your past you end up with a homogonised landscape and that Liverpool's must rely on its historic links.
Our history is the reason we are a Mercantile and Maritime World Heritage Site.

While Joe Anderson is, courting, and being courted by his new found property developing mates, he should stop and think about the damage that is being done to Liverpool's Historic past.
He should intervene and stop this demolition.
 Is he trying to lose us World Heritage Site status.
We at LPT consider he neither has the will or the intellect to understand the damage a Labour council is doing and not since the overnight bulldozing of Clayton square, at the time conservation area, has Liverpools heritage been at such risk from a Labour Council.
While closing care homes and libraries he is spending fortunes to assist his property developing mates at Downtown Liverpool.
Come back Derek Hatton all is forgiven.
Strange that, he is back, setting up an office in the Tithebarn Street area.............now isn't that a  co-incidence.

   http://www.petition.co.uk/save-heaps-rice-mill-liverpool/

Save Heaps Rice Mill-Its Too Good To Be Demolished.

How many more historic structures can the city lose. laying there like a ghost of its former self, a working mill up to 1988, the owners of Heaps Rice Mill have let it decline.
It has recently sprouted a roof garden. Now they are to do us all a favour and demolish it.
Plans have recently been submitted to down it and make way for some bland shoeboxes.
Liverpool lost 46 listed buildings under the Fib-Dems led by Mike Storey and Warren "War Zones" Bradley.
How long can this go on.

Liverpool today is prostrated before the Unesco World Heritage committee who are meeting in Doha, Qatar. Where we are promising them we know how to manage a World Heritage Site.
Liverpool is on the Unesco World Heritage In Danger List.
We thought Heaps was listed, which is why it is still standing while all around it has become bland. This area was once, as recently as the 80's home to many small businesses (most of which were owned by Sir Trevor Jones and his Moll Doreen).

Windsor developments were Clever Trevor's Partners In Crime. They crawled all over this part of Town. The Ships chandlers that he and Dot demolished after a application to list it was made was Liverpool's last. The same site is now owned by Neptune Developments.
Greenbergs Outfitters was also demolished, and is now a car park.
So who is going to put up a fight to save this historic structure, who cares?

Lets hope there is such a swell of feeling that the building can be spotlisted and Joe Andersons developer mates can be sent packing. 

   http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2009/03/undeclared-interest-of-jones-vote.html

Larry Neild and Co at the Liverpool Echo wrote at the time

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2009/03/superlambanana-land.html

After it made Private Eye.
http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/knock-me-down-with-feather-its-clever.html

October Communications now Aurora Media or is it Archetype Studios were the PR for Windsor Developments.

All this while Trevor and Doreen "Partners in Slime" lived next door to the Duke of Westminister.


So who is watching whats going on with Liverpools Historic past. Certainly not Steve Corbett or Chris Griffiths at the now none existant Liverpool Conservation office.

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/liverpool-conservation-office-not-fit.html