YO! Liverpool
Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: Why didn't they just build this one?

  1. #1
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Why didn't they just build this one?



    That would of been boss to build.



    That other one they nearly went for looked crap. Seriously wouldn't of been bad to go with this one.


    ADVERTISING


    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  2. #2
    Creator & Administrator Kev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Under The Stairs >> Under The Mud.
    Posts
    7,489
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 11 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    I've never seen that before Max, wow!
    Liverpool in Pictures/ YO! Liverpool has taken me over 10 years to develop and maintain.

    All server & domain costs are covered by myself & kind donations of individuals.

    If you like the website, please donatevia PayPal!




    Thank you


    Kev
    2005 - 2017

  3. #3
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Skyscrapernews.com has the pics.
    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  4. #4
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,678
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    That looks fabulous ! I like that !

  5. #5
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max


    That would of been boss to build.



    That other one they nearly went for looked crap. Seriously wouldn't of been bad to go with this one.
    They thought it too high and would overpower the three graces. It was also considered not different enough. That is the case with the tower. The ship shaped building is something else though. Also you have to view these buildings from ground levels as that is where people view them from. Some look great from the air, but at ground level not good at all. At ground level, would you see the ship shape of the building? Would it be obvious? Probably not. Many buildings look great as models look at the 1960s crap we were served up. They do look good from the air though.

    A great iconic new building in Liverpool the Brunswick Tower would encourage more high quality iconic proposals. The current talls and those being built and to be built are very forgettable.

    This picture really shows the levels of dock filling at Kings and Queens Docks- the removal of the water is really apparent.

  6. #6
    Per Ardua Ad Astra bazzacat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Warrington
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    We noticed on the boat trip on Saturday how there is an imbalance in the skyline when viewed from the river- all the newer, taller stuff to the north, and nothing comparable to the south.

  7. #7
    FKoE
    Guest FKoE's Avatar

    Default

    Thats a good point Bazza.. Maybe because the Northends river view is of Seacombe, Wallasey and New Brighton, and the Southends view is of Birkenhead and Rockferry

    LOL

  8. #8
    Senior Member Paul D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,099
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bazzacat
    We noticed on the boat trip on Saturday how there is an imbalance in the skyline when viewed from the river- all the newer, taller stuff to the north, and nothing comparable to the south.
    Brunswick Quay would be a giant step in the right direction if we get it but I'm scared to build my hopes up with this,fingers crossed.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bazzacat
    We noticed on the boat trip on Saturday how there is an imbalance in the skyline when viewed from the river- all the newer, taller stuff to the north, and nothing comparable to the south.
    Nothing can be above the Albert Dock buildings, until Queens Dock. The abandonment of the tall building policy may have the odd tall around the south, but as the Batic Triangle and Paradise is being build there are few place to put them now. None will be in front of the Anglican Cathedral either. So, that section will stay short. Basically, Parliament St/Queens Dock and to the south can go high.

  10. #10
    Junior Member richie1878's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Unhappy

    I've also thought (and said this on other forums), this was simply stunning. This was when they asked Joe public which design they liked, people said this one (if I remember correctly) and low and behold they picked the one that people liked least.

    This really was a superb design, Liverpool has missed a tremendous opportunity.

    Boo boo boo

  11. #11
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by richie1878
    I've also thought (and said this on other forums), this was simply stunning. This was when they asked Joe public which design they liked, people said this one (if I remember correctly) and low and behold they picked the one that people liked least.

    This really was a superb design, Liverpool has missed a tremendous opportunity.

    Boo boo boo
    Liverpool has missed a tremendous opportunity? What is new about that? Since WW2 it is a continuous saga. A 50 floor plus glass block was proposed for the old Custom House site in 1950 - aka New York style at time. They said no. The site was only cleared in the mid-1960s (I used to play on it as a kid). We always end up with cheap tatty crap instead. The serious world renowned architects I read have given up on the city as the city has no imagination or vision. They know what they forward will be rejected.

    Look at the low level view above and imagine the Brunswick Towers at the end. It may mean that what could be will be not at all, but low level tat still keeps getting built on and around the dock waterways. Princes Dock has been heavily criticised by many.

    What the city needs is a Frenchman to head the citys planning Dept. They have it. They can do it. They have a record of imagination and delivering. He must have total control and be able to override - even English Heritage. The only conditions is that the docks and waterways stay and infilled docks are excavated, and WHS is respected. That still leaves a lot to work with. With one man all is with him. Curently we have quangos polking their noses in - like Liverpool Vision. We need one point where it all come in and out.

    Then something would happen - and something that will matter.

    Well its back to the low level tat again, as that is not going to happen.

  12. #12
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways
    They thought it too high and would overpower the three graces. It was also considered not different enough. That is the case with the tower. The ship shaped building is something else though. Also you have to view these buildings from ground levels as that is where people view them from. Some look great from the air, but at ground level not good at all. At ground level, would you see the ship shape of the building? Would it be obvious? Probably not. Many buildings look great as models look at the 1960s crap we were served up. They do look good from the air though.

    A great iconic new building in Liverpool the Brunswick Tower would encourage more high quality iconic proposals. The current talls and those being built and to be built are very forgettable.

    This picture really shows the levels of dock filling at Kings and Queens Docks- the removal of the water is really apparent.
    I can;t understand why people voted for the weird one though over this.
    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max
    I can;t understand why people voted for the weird one though over this.
    To be honest by what is being built and proposed around the world this submission is poor. In comparrison it is bland. Look at some of the tall thin spires that are going up. That is what we need, and three or four of them. Something radically different and highly attractive - more than iconic. Like these:







    But few will spend serious money on a city with an image problem on many fronts. So, back to dreaming.
    Last edited by Waterways; 07-12-2006 at 02:04 AM.

  14. #14
    Senior Member lindylou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,678
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    OMG ! They would look brilliant.
    Oh, if only they would build something like that !

  15. #15
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Suprised the first picture will be London's first 1000 foot skyscraper though. We probably can;t get giant towers so were not competing with the capital.
    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  16. #16
    Per Ardua Ad Astra bazzacat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Warrington
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max
    Suprised the first picture will be London's first 1000 foot skyscraper though. We probably can;t get giant towers so were not competing with the capital.

    Thats true. But wasnt there a mid 70s proposal to build some enourmous building in Liverpool? I have a vague reccolection from the Guiness Book of Records, round about 1978, saying it would (if built), be Britains tallest building.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bazzacat
    Thats true. But wasnt there a mid 70s proposal to build some enourmous building in Liverpool? I have a vague reccolection from the Guiness Book of Records, round about 1978, saying it would (if built), be Britains tallest building.
    There was two proposals, or one morphing. On in 1979 to build around Kings Dock, another at Dingle Lane/Otterspool. It would have been the world's tallest building.

    http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php?id=428


  18. #18
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Wonder why it didn't happen.
    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  19. #19
    FKoE
    Guest FKoE's Avatar

    Talking

    Well Max son, as the Head of Liverpool City Council (notice me caps), I thought it was a waste of space, and the people of Liverpool would much more prefer a 120ft life size bronze statue of you in yer grots, than another hotel!!.


    .... Don't be hittin me Maxie now, or I'll sic me secret Squirrel on yer!!

  20. #20
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max
    Wonder why it didn't happen.
    The city didn't want it (the council that is) and other factors I can't remember. They didn't want the 50 floor tall tower on the customs house site at Canning Place in 1950 either. They didn't want Brunswick Towers either, or Rogers 4th grace. Richard Craniums the lot of of them.

  21. #21
    Aliens Ate My Buick. Bunnyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Trancentral
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    The Otterspool tower wasn't a serious proposal. It was designed to test the water to see what the council would turn their noses up at. The developer was a piss-poor company called Wiggins that couldn't fund so much as a can of WD-40 for the gardeners mower.
    Who was the greatest of them all?
    Little, Curly, Alan Ball.
    R.I.P. Bally.

  22. #22
    Otterspool Onomatopoeia Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nowhere
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,908
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunnyman
    The Otterspool tower wasn't a serious proposal. It was designed to test the water to see what the council would turn their noses up at. The developer was a piss-poor company called Wiggins that couldn't fund so much as a can of WD-40 for the gardeners mower.
    What a rip!

    Ever since going up the Eifel Tower I want to see more towers.
    Gididi Gididi Goo.

  23. #23
    Aliens Ate My Buick. Bunnyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Trancentral
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Have a look here Max. It's pretty good.

    http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=380
    Who was the greatest of them all?
    Little, Curly, Alan Ball.
    R.I.P. Bally.

  24. #24
    Junior Member Gazzab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    23
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Max View Post


    That would of been boss to build.



    That other one they nearly went for looked crap. Seriously wouldn't of been bad to go with this one.
    Is that the same Foster that is designing one of the new towers for the World Trade Centre - see link.

    http://www.wtc.com/index.aspx

  25. #25
    Junior Member Gazzab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    23
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Not sure if it's the same Foster that put a design in for the Fourth Grace.

    Foster's tower for WTC - 200 Greewich

    Wasn't there a Rogers involved also who is designing a tower for the WTC site - 175 Greenwich.

    http://www.wtc.com/inner_page.aspx?id=11
    Last edited by Gazzab; 09-18-2006 at 09:58 PM.

  26. #26
    no longer a lurker johnmed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    70
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Not too keen on that ship-like structure; blah!

  27. #27
    Goin' up up up The Teardrop Explodes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    183
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    People really shouldn't take these architect's impressions as seriously they do on here...

    It's a sales card on behalf of the practice

    to give a fantasy illusion of what they're proposing to build would look brand new, in the most perfect and neigh impossible light conditions, with

    highlight and enhancements which couldn't possibly exist from angles no-one will ever see.

    Always imagine them 5-10 years on, from street level,

    looking slightly dated, not quite as big as you were lead to believe, coated with a not-quite-so-hitech layer of grime, pigeon **** and peeling paintwork-

    like London's Waterloo Eurostar Terminal.

    Then if it still seems like a good idea say "Yes please"

Similar Threads

  1. Should Liverpool build 'L.A.' type Skyscrapers?
    By Tockeyhead in forum Liverpool City Center - Inner Zones
    Replies: 226
    Last Post: 07-02-2010, 11:43 AM
  2. At Least Ten Things You Didn't Know About Kensington
    By SteveFaragher in forum Scouser Hall of Fame
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-04-2009, 02:58 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

For daily updates, to support us further or to join in the conversation: Follow us on Twitter @YOLiverpool / Like our Facebook Page: @yoliverpoolpics / Join the Facebook Group: YO! Liverpool Pictures

× Thanks for coming to the web site. Support our future by turning off your Ad-Blocker or consider a donation via PayPal or Credit Card!