Waterfront canal threat
Oct 11 2006
Revised plans for the Pier Head have been rejected. Sam Lister reports
Daily Post
http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/ic...BFB6FA0000.jpg
THE future of Liverpool's multi-million pound waterfront canal was in doubt last night after a bid to re-route it was rejected by city planners.
British Waterways already had permission to build the Leeds-Liverpool extension and work was due to start this summer.
But it wanted to change the scheme by filling in West Waterloo dock with the rubble excavated from the Pier Head, which residents fear would create potential new building sites.
Last night, British Waterways would not guarantee the future of the scheme but insisted it was confident it would still go ahead. The organisation could also appeal the planning decision, which would mean the link almost certainly would not be ready by 2008.
Martin Clarke, regeneration manager for the organisation, said: "We will have to review this decision and discuss our options with the landowners, Peel Holdings.
"Until then, we cannot be certain what will happen next.
"In planning terms, we don't believe there were grounds for a refusal.
"It is too early to say what we will do next but I would not rule anything out.
"We believe this is a better scheme. It brings people closer to the water and it's a catalyst for regeneration.
"I'm confident it will still go ahead."
British Waterways wanted to shift the route several metres inland at Trafalgar dock, allowing more attractive landscaping.
The city council received more than 50 objections from local residents and businesses who complained it would destroy a vital piece of the city's heritage.
They claim they are already suffering health problems because of the amount of dust created by work already going on in the area and fear the problems would become even worse.
Tony O'Leary, chairman of the residents association, said: "We are not Luddites. We endorsed the canal coming through this area and that planning application is still on the table.
"We are a World Heritage site because of our docks. The West Waterloo Dock is as significant as the Albert Dock. "Instead of filling in docks to create more Legoland apartments, they should think about how they could use the history of the place."
Resident Paul Burnell said: "The historical significance of the West Waterloo Dock is the same as the entire dock estate.
"It is the largest remaining dock estate in the world and filling it in is ludicrous."
Planning officers recommended the application be refused because of the historical significance of the area.
John Hayes, planning officer for the council, said: "The main issue is the historic significance of the area. It is adjacent to the Stanley Dock conservation area and the World Heritage buffer zone.
"To move a body of water would not be acceptable. We do consider there is a significant impact on the World Heritage site."
samlister@dailypost.co.uk
Source:
icLiverpool