Printable View
The tower is tall and thin. Look at a map. Draw a line from the Anglican cathedral and through the proposed site. A few houses in Bebington might have a view partially obscured of the very distant cathedral. So we suffer because of a few people in Bebington.Quote:
Originally Posted by christy
This is total madness. This daft tart needs to be exposed. Well her husband has been.
http://www.saveliverpooldocks.co.uk
.
People need to e-mail her and Warren Bradley/planning dept and tell them what they think,complaining on a forum wont change a thing and if people feel so strongly about it do something about it.
Yep. I am going to put the details to complain on the web site:Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
http://www.saveliverpooldocks.co.uk
.
Nice one John.:PDT_Piratz_26:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
Government minister Ruth Kelly has decided to reject Maro Developments plans for a skyscraper at Brunswick Quay in Liverpool.
The ministers controversial decision comes despite the advice from the planners who carried out the public inquiry and wrote the final report recommending that it be approved.
At the crux of the decision is the fear that the tower would block views of Liverpools two cathedrals from some areas across the River Wirral, a certainty given that if you put one object between the viewer and the further away object it will always appear in-between from one angle.
The ironic thing, as images clearly show, is that the tower is unique amongst Liverpool skyscraper proposals in being nowhere near a world heritage site. The second illustration has been prepared to show exactly where this tower is in relation to Liverpool when looking across the Wirral.
Despite praising the "excellent inherent architectural merit" of the scheme, she believed that "the harm to the setting of the World Heritage site, and to the setting of and views from listed buildings and conservation areas, weighs against the proposal."
In other-words, even if your proposal has the best architecture on offer it can be refused if seen from or too a world heritage site. This turns on the head the previous decisions by John Prescott who preceded Kelly when he refused to call in developments such as the Minerva Building.
Kelly already has form for a less than logical approach to the planning system. Having backed a housing development in her capacity as a minister she proceeded to oppose it as the local m.p carrying out the nice trick of being for and against something at the same time.
The decision also conflicts with the reasons Liverpool Council originally refused planning permission, namely that Brunswick Quay broke their unitary development plan by being where it was by not being in a residential zone. The planners at Liverpool City Council refused to accept that it was of sufficiently high quality to approve it because these reasons counted against.
The minister has managed to argue against their grounds for refusal whilst at the same time coming up with new grounds that do not actually concern Liverpool City Council, a novel piece of governing that would make Yes Minister proud.
This ruling probably marks the end of the line for the Ian Simpson designed development. Maro Developments have pushed hard to get it through the planning system with the local council voting against it both times. Their only hope was an approval via a public inquiry and now that direction has been closed off there are few places left they can go.
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=781
I think we should really scrap Heritage status, what people really know we have it apart from locals, tourists aren't interested if we have it or not, they just use MB's of phot space and rolls of film, Pathetic if its going to stop good buildings going up
I have sent an e-mail to Warren Bradley, Liverpool Planning Dept and Maro. I felt it was important to let Maro know just how much I am in support of the project and how I think they should press ahead with an appeal. I hope others will do the same. Their e-mail address - info@marodev.co.uk
World Heritage has nothing to do with this. Because some incompetent minister screws up don't blame WH. When people call Liverpool a slum, because the London and Manchester based media have perpetuated that myth, and you say most of the centre and extensive parts of the docks are World Heritage Zones I just like the look at their faces when told. The status pulls Liverpool up to world city. Value it!!!! Don't blame WHS status, blame primarily the idiot LibDem councillors who voted against this project, who you can always vote out and should be voted out, and then some idiotic washed out tart in Whitehall with a bent husband.Quote:
Originally Posted by Westy
Central government in London should have no say in what is built in Liverpool - not their business. This over centralised country again - the most centralised in the western world. Appeals should be local - maybe with some regional people called in as independent.
The site in the distance. Nothing around it. The school is St. Malachy's. From Mill View.
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/watercity...xtethDocks.jpg
Go to this thread about Kelly......
http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/sho...2Ruth+Kelly%22
Agreed! IT isn't WHS causing the problems, it is the way it is being used that is scuppering major projects. Having a WHS in a city is completely different from having it somewhere like the Taj Mahal. Liverpool is a thriving city and any WHS here must expect to have new 21st Century buildings built nearby. Another thing that has confused me about Kellys' comments is the fact that she said that it would damage views from and to the WHS. So why the F**k is there a 40 storey skyscraper being built right next to the Liver Building? (beetham tower) This just proves that there is something going on to stop projects like these going ahead. Beetham West Tower proves that tall buildings can be placed close to, or even in WHS' without damaging any of the existing architecture. The thing is, Brunswick Quay is miles away from the WHS compared to Beetham West. This is really starting to P**s me off!!!:disgust:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
I received a reply from Maro thanking me for my support and saying that they are commited to developing the site. I aslo received a reply from Warren Bradley informing me that he had forwarded my e-mail to the planning dept.
CONTACTS: info@marodev.co.uk
: warren.bradley@liverpool.gov.uk
Does anyone know Ruth Kellys' e-mail address?
If anybody does get in touch in with her I don't think it serves any purpose to call her a tart or her husband bent.Quote:
Originally Posted by AK1
There are plenty of other good reasons why she is wrong.
Yep. You must be diplomatic and polite to them, which still does not detratct from her family's demerits.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipG
Whatever you do don't mention 'Opus Dei'...(Of which she is a member/acolyte)...You really don't want them on your Back !!!!:unibrow:
kellyr@parliament.ukQuote:
Originally Posted by AK1
But don't hold your breath for a reply.
Tallest tower dream dashed
A PIONEERING £100m plan to build Merseyside's tallest tower, a 52-storey skyscraper, on Liverpool's waterfront was rejected yesterday by Local Government Secretary Ruth Kelly.
She rejected the recommendation of her own planning expert who wanted the tower at Brunswick Quay to be given the go-ahead.
The minister based part of her decision on possible damage to the city's World Heritage site, as well as views of the two city cathedrals from Wirral, which one critic last night described as "bizarre".
The decision was condemned last night by supporters of what would have been an iconic building by one of the world's best-known architects, Ian Simpson.
Applicants Maro were last night studying the details of the 58-page report by the government planning inspector, as well as the written decision by Ms Kelly's office.
Maro executives will this weekend be locked in talks to consider launching a legal challenge on Monday.
A source close to the company said last night: "Maro convinced a highly respected and expert planner about the merits of the scheme, and in his eyes won their appeal, only to have it rejected in Whitehall."
Chris Ives, development director at Maro Developments, said: "We are extremely disappointed that the Secretary of State has decided to overturn the decision of the planning inspector whose recommendation was to approve our plans to regenerate Brunswick Quay.
"We will review the Secretary of State's reasons in detail and consider our next steps carefully. Maro remain committed to regenerate this gateway site."
Maro's plans for the South Docks at Brunswick Quay included a 52-storey glass tower, designed by Ian Simpson, who was responsible for the new Beetham Tower in Manchester, No1 Deansgate and the Urbis Centre. Plans included a boutique hotel, a large public piazza with shops and restaurants, as well as residential and commercial space.
Although it was the rejection of the scheme by Liverpool council planners which triggered the appeal, the city's cabinet member for regeneration, Cllr Peter Millea, was a long-term supporter of the plan.
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0...name_page.html
I wonder if they've decided to make a legal challenge? everyone seems supportive of it and shocked it got refused I hope they don't give up now.
EDIT:the tower would compromise views from The Rock Ferry conservation area well maybe Wirral Waters will block views of the Welsh mountains from a World Heritage site,they don't want to go down that road.:disgust:
Everyone should send Maro a letter of support to encourage them as a matter of urgency it'll only take you a minute and let Warren Bradley know what you think while you're at it.Remember these zealots rejected West Tower originally so it's not a lost cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by AK1
This was one of her ridiculous reasons for rejecting it,I think she'll find that's what we call perspective we learnt about that in art lessons at school.:rolleyes:Quote:
The Brunswick tower would appear considerably taller than the cathedral.
I think if Maro continue the fight they'll win because these reasons are a joke.:disgust:
Hope so Paul, its all a bit depressing. Are we supposed to know our place/ status in relation to the rest of the country? :Colorz_Grey_PDT_24: Scousers can't have our scrapers? We'll see.....
Ruth Kelly on Liverpool's urban renaissance
LIVERPOOL is ready to become a leading European city that will rival places such as Milan, Rotterdam and Turin, communities and local government minister Ruth Kelly has said.
In a speech to a summit meeting of civic leaders from ten English cities, Ms Kelly said Liverpool had the chance to become "an engine of growth" for the region and a major international player on the international stage.
A independent report for government called State of the English Cities showed that Liverpool has experienced an urban renaissance since 1997, with strong economic growth, higher levels of employment and noticeable improvements to the local environment.
But it also concluded more was needed to be done if it was to become a city of European importance.
Ms Kelly said: "Our cities have turned the corner in recent years. In Liverpool, the big increase in the number of graduates in the workforce is supporting the growth of dynamic new economic sectors in the local economies.
"However, we know there is still much more to do. We must be ambitious and visionary. Liverpool has the opportunity not only to become an engine of growth for its region - a Rotterdam of the North West, but also to compete on the international stage.
"Over the next 20 years, with its diverse economic base, it should be looking to rival places such as Milan, Rotterdam and Turin in the international arena."
She added: "This is a new exciting time for our cities and regions.
"We in government need to look at devolving more strategic powers to cities and they need to have governance arrangements that provide a clear mandate to take the tough decisions.
"Being bold and strongly led, we can take our cities to the next level." Ms Kelly highlighted the Government's work to strengthen the urban renaissance at a summit in Bristol yesterday.
The Government is already working with a range of UK cities, including the 8 Core Cities, to help them develop "business cases" to deliver a step change in their economic, social and cultural performance.
Her speech is the clearest indication yet that the region will be viewed favourably by the Government's 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review. The Government also plans a parliamentary paper on the future of local government expected to push ahead with plans to create authorities serving wider areas.:disgust:
Yet Beetham Tower west will be taller than the Cathedral.:disgust:Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
But that is not blocking the view from Rock Ferry, so that is OK Even the Labour MP's consituancy the tower fell into supported the tower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
There is some ulterior motive behind this. It just doesn't all fit.
If it was a bland out-of-the-box design it would have gone through. Liverpool overshadowing London..or Manchester? Can't be son.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev
I know everyone will have got this same reply but it's good too see they haven't cut their losses and run,they deserve credit for this.Quote:
Many thanks for your support. We are reviewing the decision and taking stock.
We are committed to redeveloping the site.
Kind Regards
Chris O'Brien
The Governmnet planning inspectors report and Ruth Kelly's report:
http://www.saveliverpooldocks.co.uk
Go to the Brunswick Quay page. Under Links in the centre yellow section
The inspector was diplomatically critical of the silly Liverpool Council, while praising the scheme on all points. He did not see the tower obscuring views.
The only thing that concerns me about their comments is ' We are commited to redeveloping the site'. They don't say ' We are commited to this project'. This suggests that they might cut back on the project and reduce the size of the tower, or even come up with a brand new scaled down project of less quality. I hope they don't give in!Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
From Daily Post
Meanwhile, Maro, the developer wanting to create the tower at Brunswick Quay, is seeking a meeting with city council leader Cllr Warren Bradley and council chief executive Colin Hilton.
Maro wants to know if the £100m project can be rescued, and is also considering whether to legally challenge the decision by Ruth Kelly to refuse permission.
A source close to Maro said: “The meeting will aim to determine whether there is merit in submitting a modified project that would be endorsed by the city council.”
It'll be great aye.. Walking through the precinct to the benifits office, or your place of work, from the area you have lived all your life. This will really be of economic value to the area once they fence in this gated community.
Blackpools tower is 518ft tall and is the highest viewing stage in the UK.
Tall structures do not equal wealth or benefit to the communities living in its shadow.
I hope it's true that Maro, the developers want to rescue their Brunswick Quay skyscraper project and are now demanding further meetings with city council leaders, Warren Bradley and Colin Hilton.
But there should be no question of that dread-word "modification" setting in - on this, as it has in so many earlier projects...!
Maro SHOULD maintain their determination to achieve lift-off according to original proposals...! - and MUST be encouraged to challenge Ruth Kelly's preposterous opposition with the sheer irrefutable logic of their case.
Frankly, I doubt that she's even looked at the site... Certainly, I'd be very surprised if she has any idea how far away the proposed building is from the "Three Graces" - OR how relatively small the World Heritage Site really is...! I'll bet she thinks it's THE WHOLE OF DOWNTOWN LIVERPOOL...!!!
Ruth Kelly must not be allowed to stifle Liverpool's ("Growth Engine") with such a shameless unimaginative piece of legislative ignorance...!!!
see:Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
http://www.saveliverpooldocks.co.uk
Go to: the Brunswick Quay page. There are links to the government planners report which was complimentary of the building and site and stated that the site was ideal for a tall building.
The history of the past 100 years has been the south supressing Liverpool by various means. This is just another.Quote:
Ruth Kelly must not be allowed to stifle Liverpool's ("Growth Engine") with such a shameless unimaginative piece of legislative ignorance...!!!
the whole saga is a nonesense it must have cost Maro millions and all because ms kelly is worried how it will look from the wirral.
I suggest that the next big development be a huge double sided mirror in the mersey so we can enjoy views of our fair city.... i wonder how the wirral would feel about that>? Maro is not such an eyesore anymore !! lol
Architect quits over ‘diluted’ iconic tower:PDT_Xtremez_12:
ARCHITECT Ian Simpson yesterday accused Liverpool City Council of lacking ambition as the Daily Post learned he had parted company with Maro Developments.
Maro, which wanted to build an iconic tower on Liverpool’s waterfront but had its plans rejected by government minister Ruth Kelly, is proposing what Mr Simpson described as a “watered down” replacement scheme in order to gain planning permission. The full details of the new scheme are expected to be ready for unveiling within a few weeks.
Mr Simpson was responsible for the design of what would have been Liverpool’s tallest tower – a 51-storey building on Brunswick Quay.
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/t...name_page.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
If only we had city planners like we had 100 years ago.
They OK'd the Royal Liver Building which was the tallest office block in Europe until after the Second World War.
I would rather they left the site empty for a few years than put up a scaled down version. This is a prime site for something tall and iconic, not just another low level building. Ruth Kelly is simply backward, and the council are pathetic. This was refused because it was too close to the WHS but beetham tower which is in the WHS was given the go-ahead. What are they thinking? I really don't understand how they think. Brunswick tower is the ideal project for this site. I urge everyone to write to the council and to Maro to express your feelings. If the new version is another bland, boring building, then the site must be left empty for future generations.:disgust:Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
What was that Monty Python (or Fawlty Towers?) quote? He has a degree in the Stating the Bleeding Obvious!Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
Would of been a great night picture If It wasn't rejected.
Innovative tower plans worthy of waterfront site
MARO Developments yesterday defended plans for its Brunswick Quay tower, describing how its redesign would be "innovative, imaginative and worthy of the key waterfront site".
Concerns were raised by the former architect on the scheme, Ian Simpson, who said there was a danger the development would be a "watered-down", "much less ambitious, non-iconic" building than was originally planned.
http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/t...name_page.html
I still reckon we'll get a great tower or two for this site but I'll always think of what might have been,unless it/they are a truly great design.
"Studio Egret West (SEW) has been named on a four-strong shortlist to replace Ian Simpson on the doomed Brunswick Quay scheme in Liverpool, the AJ can exclusively reveal. The frustrated developer behind the project, Maro, has approached the former Will Alsop duo as well as BDP, Broadway Malyan and Liverpool-based DTR Ormrod to come up with fresh designs for the waterfront plot"