Brunswick Dock Area

[twiz]

Dont suppose anyone knows how the decision went? It was to be decided today but I haven't heard anything, I hope it gets through or Liverpool will lagg behind in the provincial city tallest tower race.

[Waterways]

Was the appeal hearing yesterday, or was it postponed? Anyone heard anything yet?

[AK1]

Look at that view. How Mancunians rave over Manchester is beyond me. I have tried and just can't see what they see.

Agreed! Manchester never has been and never will be as visually impressive as Liverpool. Liverpool has numerous iconic buildings such as the graces, st Georges hall, both cathederals, Albert dock plus many more outside the city centre. Manchester has the town hall and not much else. This is why alot of people prefer Liverpool to Manchester. Liverpool must capitalise on this much more. Liverpool is very unique and seems alot more impressive than alot of other cities such as Birmingham and Newcastle.

[Waterways]

Agreed! Manchester never has been and never will be as visually impressive as Liverpool. Liverpool has numerous iconic buildings such as the graces, st Georges hall, both cathederals, Albert dock plus many more outside the city centre. Manchester has the town hall and not much else. This is why a lot of people prefer Liverpool to Manchester. Liverpool must capitalise on this much more. Liverpool is very unique and seems alot more impressive than alot of other cities such as Birmingham and Newcastle.

Forget new buildings. Just smarten up the existing buildings, and that includes re-cladding the RSA, and Liverpool is still miles better than any of those cities. The new developments and dock waterways regeneration and the Wirral Waters will totally outdo any of those places.

I always thought Manchester was characterless - a very forgettable place. They are trying like mad, and good on them, however they would have to totally re-build the place to get near Liverpool.
Manchester would be better moving the centre to Salford Quays. The water makes it attractive.

Ian Nairn, Britain’s Changing Towns (1967)

"The scale and resilience of the buildings and people (of Liverpool) is amazing - it is a world city, far more so than London or Manchester. It doesn’t feel like anywhere else in Lancashire: comparisons always end up overseas - Dublin, or Boston, or Hamburg. The city is tremendous, and so, right up to the First World War, were the abilities of the architects who built over it – the less said about the last forty years the better…… The centre is humane and convenient to walk around in, but never loses its scale. And, in spite of the bombings and the carelessness, it is still full of superb buildings. Fifty years ago it must have outdone anything in England."

Note: "outdone anything in England", including London.

[PhilipG]

Agreed! Manchester never has been and never will be as visually impressive as Liverpool. Liverpool has numerous iconic buildings such as the graces, st Georges hall, both cathederals, Albert dock plus many more outside the city centre. Manchester has the town hall and not much else. This is why alot of people prefer Liverpool to Manchester. Liverpool must capitalise on this much more. Liverpool is very unique and seems alot more impressive than alot of other cities such as Birmingham and Newcastle.

And that was designed by Alfred Waterhouse, born in Liverpool.

[kenotoole123@msn.com]

OH NO!! Ruth Kelly has turned it down....even though the 'Planning Inspector' gave it the O.K.

[Paul D]

OH NO!! Ruth Kelly has turned it down....even though the 'Planning Inspector' gave it the O.K.

Gutted I was starting to believe this might happen.

[Waterways]

Gutted I was starting to believe this might happen.

Ah well, back to 4th rate shoebox ticky-tacky 3 high flats. Pathetic!

See all the quality developers desert Liverpool now.

[Waterways]

OH NO!! Ruth Kelly has turned it down....even though the 'Planning Inspector' gave it the O.K.

On what grounds?

[Paul D]

On what grounds?

In her decision letter, released today, Kelly says: ‘[i] consider 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 proposals.’

The letter goes on: ‘[i] consider that the proposals would be of a high quality, though [I do] not consider that the proposed buildings would be appropriate in this location.’

[Sloyne]

OH NO!! Ruth Kelly has turned it down....even though the 'Planning Inspector' gave it the O.K.

Liverpool is a prisoner of it's past. It is it's own history, it's own inept highly politicized council, a very apathetic electorate and not just a little help from Manchester based bureaucrats, that will condemn Liverpool to being a relic and museum piece of mainly nineteenth and early twentieth century and an abundance of appalling 1950's/60's architecture. World Heritage status, lobbied for by a very shortsighted council leader, Mike Storey and his fellow Lib/Dem councillors, has preserved present day Liverpool in aspic, for all time. Liverpool will gradually assume the role of places like York, Chester, Gloucester, Canterbury, Lancaster et al. Liverpool, the once dynamic commercial powerhouse, architectural, engineering, social and health innovator, is now sliding, rapidly, into history. Liverpool's plight becomes even more poignant when you see places forging ahead places that were once basket cases when Liverpool ruled the oceans, insurance, banking and whose archtecture was marvelled at. Places like Singapore, Casablanca, Manta, Recife, Mombassa, KL, Valparaiso, Callao, Cartagena, Montevideo, Dubai and hundreds more cities throughout the world which have surpassed Liverpool's meagre efforts of redevelopement. And most of the foregoing didn't have the benefit of having enemy bombing clear out almost half of thier city centres. Most of them had to choose what buildings to replace.

If it is true that you get the leadership you deserve then the citizens of Liverpool must have committed some very bad sins to deserve the lot they have been electing since 1945. IMO. Rant over.

[Waterways]

In her decision letter, released today, Kelly says: ‘[i] consider 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 proposals.’

The letter goes on: ‘[i] consider that the proposals would be of a high quality, though [I do] not consider that the proposed buildings would be appropriate in this location.’

It is not in the WHS or even the buffer. It is way away at the far end of Brunswick Dock with even Coburg Dock (not in the buffer either) between Brunswick and the start of the buffer. The tower blocks nothing whatsoever and is way away from anything of any significance.

This is madness. Well the real culprits were the LibDems on the City Council who originally rejected the tower. About time they were voted out of power with Storey being an embarrassment and all. They are so incompetent.

[Paul D]

That's exactly why WHS is a problem,it's not even in the WHS buffer zone and yet this is the reason she used to reject it,it makes it all so easy for the heritage lobby to oppose new developments in Liverpool.We're now left with a load of vacant low grade warehouses but the Victorian Society will be so pleased tonight.

[Waterways]

That's exactly why WHS is a problem,it's not even in the WHS buffer zone and yet this is the reason she used to reject it,

It is not a problem at all. All she had to do was look at a frigging map. The initial problem was the councillors (all LibDem) who voted against this proposal in the first place. If they had said yes it would be near built by now.

it makes it all so easy for the heritage lobby to oppose new developments in Liverpool.We're now left with a load of vacant low grade warehouses but the Victorian Society will be so pleased tonight.

EH never opposed this scheme at all, neither did UNESCO. I don't think the Victorian Society opposed it either as it was not obscuring anything Victorian. It was the retarded councillors. It is nowhere near the WHS and buffer and is remote from any major building in Liverpool.

BTW, does Hargeaves of Matalan give money to any political party?

This will set the city back decades. Investors will not look at Liverpool after this.

They rejected this and approved the Mann Island scheme. What madness. What double standards.

[Waterways]

Liverpool is a prisoner of it's past.

It is clear what the politicos want. They want commercial money making activities on the docks. These will be owned by large non-Liverpool based companies. The areas will be rendered lifeless as Kings Dock will be most of the time. Places were crowds turn up and then all go away after a number of hours.