Liverpool Skyscraper Boom Over?

[SteH]

The decision to demolish was totally wrong. They were fine blocks indeed. They were no Piggeries. Local residents can still be accommodated locally.

You don't want working class ghettos, and Liverpool is full of them.

Neither you or I know the exact details of why the decision to do what they did was made, but these blocks must have consisted of at least 300 households, all of which were on assured tenancies. The housing trust had a duty to relocate them and would they have been legally allowed to force them out then sell on the blocks to be done up? If the blocks had loads moving out because they were crapholes and nobody would move into them so they were only 20% occupied maybe they could justify such an action, but I'm sure that wasnt the case.

Whats wrong with the working class anyway, thats an insult to most people! Gutter class or Underclass may have been a better phrase to use if you want to talk about ghettos.

[Waterways]

Neither you or I know the exact details of why the decision to do what they did was made, but these blocks must have consisted of at least 300 households,

You sound like you are making excuses or apologising for the needless demolition. It would have been cheaper to give them away than demolish. The council and other agencies could have ensured their survival and housing of the remaining tenants. It isn't rocket science to do that.

[SteH]

You sound like you are making excuses or apologising for the needless demolition. It would have been cheaper to give them away than demolish. The council and other agencies could have ensured their survival and housing of the remaining tenants. It isn't rocket science to do that.

Rehousing such a large number of households in the same area isnt that simple, Sheil Park was quite close knit and a large number of residents had been there since it was built and wanted to stay in that area. CDS took the decision to demolish and rebuild on the site,maybe they couldnt get grants or whatever for new properties if the old ones were simply sold on for refurbishment. Like I said if nobody wanted to live there things may have happened differently but it would have been morally wrong to forcibly break communities up when there was such an active residents involvement there.

[petromax]

Don't forget the heavy and constant criticism of tower blocks almost from when they were built. Nobody could see any use for them and they were being demolised all over the country.

Most people would have needed a crystal ball to see that it was not the design that was the problem. As soon as they passed into private hands - problem solved!!

[Waterways]

Don't forget the heavy and constant criticism of tower blocks almost from when they were built. Nobody could see any use for them and they were being demolised all over the country.

Most people would have needed a crystal ball to see that it was not the design that was the problem. As soon as they passed into private hands - problem solved!!

The last Shield Rd block was demolished only a few years back. London blocks had successfully been passed to private hands and renovated for over 20 years and a few Liverpool blocks too. The solution was known.

There was no need to have destroyed these nice buildings - and some of them were very nice.

I personally think the reason was to get the middle classes with money into the centre. Hence a few block went into private hands near the centre and around Sefton Pk.

[petromax]

The last Shield Rd block was demolished only a few years back. London blocks had successfully been passed to private hands and renovated for over 20 years and a few Liverpool blocks too. The solution was known.

There was no need to have destroyed these nice buildings - and some of them were very nice.

I personally think the reason was to get the middle classes with money into the centre. Hence a few block went into private hands near the centre and around Sefton Pk.

The first to go was in Louisville Kentucky. You could probably find the famous film of the demolition on Youtube. The first in UK blew itself up at Ronan Point (a gas explosion caused progressive collapse of the prefabriacted panel system - "like a deck of cards"). There has been a constant stream of demolitions since starting in Sheffield, then Leeds and Birmingham including Liverpool piggeries and right up to today's plans to demolish Trellick Tower and Robin Hood Gardens in London.

Only privately owned or well-situated high rise residential has survived completely intact up until recently eg Highpoint in Highgate and Roehampton Vale, London.

The reason for demolition was poor construction; high maintenance costs and lack of care from the users (eg p*ssing in lifts, rubbish or beds thrown off landings). Only the 'better' ones survived

[Waterways]

Only privately owned or well-situated high rise residential has survived completely intact up until recently eg Highpoint in Highgate and Roehampton Vale, London.

Shiel Rd flats where well situated. The few 22 floor blocks in the North End could have been moth balled, until re-generation.

The reason for demolition was poor construction; high maintenance costs and lack of care from the users (eg p*ssing in lifts, rubbish or beds thrown off landings). Only the 'better' ones survived

In other words keep the working class out of them. Seeing what happened in Liverpool 8 with 3 distinct changes in completion of the whole are except the Welsh Streets, what do you put the working class in?

The French had the right idea. I never saw a grotty council area there, even in Paris. Each block has a concierge. Offenders were quickly evicted/prosecuted. If you had a poor track record they wouldn't allow you into a council place.

A part of the answer was get them into owner/occupation. But that takes land - we have it but in the hands of the chosen few who will not sell.

[Ged]

I was in Manchester today, the city that's more forward thinking than Liverpool and so attracts big business and world bank HQ's and all that or so we're constantly informed.

Counted more than 20 residential high rise blocks on the fringe of the centre at the end of the M602.

[Waterways]

I was in Manchester today, the city that's more forward thinking than Liverpool and so attracts big business and world bank HQ's and all that or so we're constantly informed.

Counted more than 20 residential high rise blocks on the fringe of the centre at the end of the M602.

We can learn a lot from that city.

The sooner the LibDem mob are voted out the better. No co-incidence that Mchr city council is the same party colour of Whitehall. That must make a difference.

[Max]

Liverpool needs new buildings blending in with the old.

I agree, but barely any of the new blend In that much with the old.

[Max]

I was in Manchester today, the city that's more forward thinking than Liverpool and so attracts big business and world bank HQ's and all that or so we're constantly informed.

Counted more than 20 residential high rise blocks on the fringe of the centre at the end of the M602.

Considering were a major Uk city, It's disgusting that we haven't had things other major uk cities like Manchester have attracted. Only because of the 2008 thing the council are bothering trying and they still fail at that.

[Waterways]

I agree, but barely any of the new blend In that much with the old.

Max, go to post 15. I also said "Liverpool needs new modern state-of-the-art buildings", as well. We don't seamlessly extend buildings like in the Georgian quarter.

Along the dock waterways we need state-of-the-art designs. Buildings that make a statement to the world. We don't need them around Canning St.

[Waterways]

Considering were a major Uk city, It's disgusting that we haven't had things other major uk cities like Manchester have attracted. Only because of the 2008 thing the council are bothering trying and they still fail at that.

The council have been negligent, unable to cope with the massive regeneration of the city and coping with World Heritage too. The UN is considering putting Liverpool at risk. Still, listed buildings are being demolished and many allowed to deteriorate that in few years time they will be demolished on safety grounds.

It's the message the city gives out that matters - image. Manchester have been doing that for near 20 years, with publicity Olympic bids (they knew they were not going to get it, but what world media focus), Commonwealth Games etc. They have been overstating their city for 20 years, and it has worked. The city is at all brilliant but they have created that image.

Liverpool has one shot, and it is not being done that well - Culture city 2008. After that, back to the grind and trying to give a good image, which the city is not good at. The image will rise with actions: a rapid transit underground rail extension, proper re-generation of the dock waterways to make it an Amsterdam, etc. Then people will flock in with money to invest.

[christy]

Some very sensible suggestions and discussion here.
However, although I agrre totally about the calous demeolition of many perfectly good tower blocks, the Shiel road heights, as noble, well proportioned and amost monolithic a design as they were, were structuraly unsound as there was a fault with the original mix of concrete that led to cracks in the pre fab structure. Because it was one pre fab block on top of another that costituted the structure, the problem would have been a ridiculous price to sort out. Unfortunate but true. However, this only stands for the Camus constructed blocks (Shiel rd, Cantril Farm etc)

No excuses for the rest. I mean why demolish Coronation court in Fazackerly, the city's first ever high rise housing block? A landmark on the East Lancs entry to the city lost and replaced by boring brick 'anywhere' flats. By losing all of the flats around the city, a lot of the sense of scale has been lost. Ged was on about Manchester and the blocks I think he means are in Salford who kept theirs and they give an impression of a big city as you approach(Unlike Salford, Manchester followed the same line as Liverpool and demolished most of theirs)

Cant believe the houses in Duke street on the corner of Slater street were allowed to be demolished and allowed to get in such a state that they had to be. MR STONE AND FRENSON HAVE A LOT TO ANSWER FOR WITH THAT ONE!. Hopefully the council will now learn of their intentions nd not let this happen again (although I wont hold my breath)