Originally Posted by
RoddersUK
"developers would line up to do that" Really? What is stopping them from doing just that?
Rodders, maybe the poor transport infrastructure? I think so. I an underground station was cut into the Wapping tunnel in the Georgian quarter, they would flock in. They need to see the city buying into matters too. Lay down the rapid rail transport infrastructure and they will come in.
Are the developers going to spend extending the Georgian houses up to Lodge Lane and Edge Hill? Not when they see nothing being done to change those areas.
They are only interested in profit and building to the size and proportion of those Georgian buildings wont make them the same (if any) profit as the Aylesbury example, which in my opinion is terrible and does not blend in with anything apart than other boring pastiche building that are slowly swamping this country.
Liverpool can continue to grow
and preserve is rich heritage but not if it believes the "beggars can’t be choosers" line. The money is at long last being spent in the city but it needs to be spent on the right quality building and not building that will become the noughtys equivalent of the 60's tower blocks.
Rodders, as those large Georgian homes around Canning St are fetching premium prices I think many would like to extend them and make them just the same. Smaller Georgian houses can be built to blend in - or even larger being apartments.
The Aylesbury example is a lot better than the tat that some dish up. The front doors are on the pavements and the new homes do match to some degree some of the older homes around. I have seen some of them. Others had railings in front, really looking good. The point is that new buildings can be built to blend in with the existing older homes.
I would not call Brunswick Quay a 60s tower block at all. An world-class iconic building designed by the architect who came second in the World Trade Centre replacement in NY. It would totally act as a catalyst for the south end of the dock waters, attracting top-class investment. It could have been there by now. I firmly believe the rejection of this building has had a negative affect of the city. Apart from the Shanghai Tower, no new large top class developments have come forward. If the Shanghai Tower goes through excessive official hassle then the investment money will dry up for certain. Some developers are having cold feet and Central Village and others are now not that certain to go ahead. The dynamic city they saw a few years ago appears to be turning 180 degrees, so better returns elsewhere.
I hope the LibDems get voted out - they are a wash-out. Then the new administration have a word in Maro's ear and say re-submit your tower. Maybe Maro are waiting for a regime change to see what way to go. I wouldn't blame them if they pulled out of Liverpool 100% ands sold up the land they own.
div>
Chris Ives, the director of the developers Maro, said in 2006: "If we had gone to Manchester, Newcastle or Leeds with this building we would probably already be on site." He expands, "Liverpool city council doesn't have any vision - they can't see around corners".
Says it all really.
Bookmarks