Originally Posted by
Waterways
The Strand behind the Three Graces needs a lot doing to it to create animation... The inner motorway, that was partially built along there needs removing. It also divides the Albert Dock from the main bulk of the centre - a real dumb idea and one of the few parts of the 1960s Shankland plan to get built. What was teh city thinking of when they adopted the ideas of this lunatic?
In its way, the Shankland plan was visionary (if dramatically flawed in retrospect). Coming out of post-war austerity, it represented a brave new world for the city and the investment perhaps something of a reward for the pasting taken in WWII.
We know now that we can work in the sky and even live there to a degree but generally speaking and no matter how high the buildings are, we like our feet on the ground when we’re moving about and generally we prefer to walk rather than ride (as long as it’s not too far).
So you’re right, The Strand should be full of ‘active frontage’ at street level and to be fair, council and the planners have always pushed for this.
The micro-climate is poor if better than at the Pier Head itself but the biggest problem is lack of people - of course millions used to pass to and from the ferry or the bus station. Now, those are gone, or all but gone. Buildings on the 'Strand Wall' are empty and there’s plenty of room for restaurants and night life in less exposed parts of the city.
Many cities have dealt with the problem of a big, wide road cutting off the waterfront - usually by making the waterfront worth getting to. There’s a lot more to happen at the Pier Head to make it worth a visit.
div>
Rebuilding the Goree Piazza would help reduce the width, slow traffic and help the pedestrian to cross but without a strong reason to go to the Pier Head or to The Strand itself they’re never going to be what they were, road or no road.
---------- Post added at 05:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 PM ----------
Originally Posted by
Waterways
They get filled on a regular basis. Even in a World Heritage Site Buffer Zone. Disgusting....Liverpool could have done the same by laying a pipe in the river bed and taking sewage and waste to nearer Liverpool Bay.
It is right that a lot can be done to keep the old docks as docks with some imagination and lateral thinking but it’s not always the right thing to do. The docks were built in a spirit of enterprise and new uses could and should be found likewise. Sometimes that means filling them in, albeit only with very strong reason.
George’s Dock for example was both obsolete and something of an eyesore by all accounts and building in it has given the Liver Building the prominence that has helped make it so famous - a positive, forward-thinking and imaginative outcome.
Putting them to work in one way or another seems the most sustainable and people will always be drawn to live by the water. The V&A Waterfront at Cape Town is a good example of an old port that has continued to work while the commercial port has moved on. The recent announcement of Pelican Tall Ship cruises from the Albert Dock complex is good news in a similar way.
The waste treatment plant might seem negative but it has made huge improvements in the quality of the Mersey and as far I know doesn’t treat the Mersey itself or any waste in it from Manchester.
In any event it would have been extraordinarily difficult to find anywhere else to put it North of Seaforth and it’s hard to see how untreated waste can be pumped into Liverpool Bay.
---------- Post added at 06:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:53 PM ----------
Originally Posted by
ChrisGeorge
I would love to see the
Victoria Tower rehabilitated where it is, or, if that is not possible, moved to Albert Dock where it can be seen and enjoyed.
It is an unknown treasure of Liverpool's dockland.
Chris
I've often thought I'd like to live in it but the bus service probably isn't that good...
Bookmarks