I seem to remember that plot 3a was in between City Lofts and the car park on the original plan. Could be wrong though

Here's the plan for Prince's Dock showing the plots.
http://www.123lcc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/post/PRINCESS%20DOCK%20MASTERPLAN.pdf

Here's the plan for Prince's Dock showing the plots.
http://www.123lcc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/post/PRINCESS%20DOCK%20MASTERPLAN.pdf

I'm still none the wiser is this something we already knew about?

that is an old masterplan isnt it

It's an old masterplan, clearly, but the plot numbers stay the same or else the whole thing gets very confusing.

that is an old masterplan isnt it

That is an old masterplan that i stored but as MrKITE says the plot numbers will still be relevant.

Just wondering if the dock wall opening is also shown here on site 3c, opposite the minge bridge.

oh ok

That is an old masterplan that i stored but as MrKITE says the plot numbers will still be relevant.

Just wondering if the dock wall opening is also shown here on site 3c, opposite the minge bridge.


So will the minge bridge be getting a vulva opening on the dock wall?

So very rude :)

I do like the fact that the place Liverpool is traditionally seen as female and the river mersey male.....quite sweet really with what must have been a lot of harbour side hugs and kisses.....etc.

Hello sailor.....

[QUOTE=Doug Roberts]It's quite obvious that Lady D is not a happy bunny!! she didn't even go on the site inspection!!

the committee, anything to get out of the office!!!
http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/1162/0f8c369507de4a30b5e68250982569.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

There they are the arseholes!!! Destined to wreck this great city with there stupid decisions! Let's get rid of them!!! :bash:

Not exactly Princes Dock site but this pic gives a feel of how that end of the Strand is changing. Instead of there being only sky there is now something along there.


http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/2522/dsc023945mw.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Canning Dock.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5800/dsc023954ze.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1844/dsc023965kg.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I think we should make tall ships pernament in the Albert Dock they look great and you can imagine being back in the 18th century when you see them. Maybe we could buy a few :)

I think we should make tall ships pernament in the Albert Dock they look great and you can imagine being back in the 18th century when you see them. Maybe we could buy a few :)
That would be too much to ask that mate.Every decent size port of any signifiance has sailing ship moored up but not for the greatest mercantile port of the 19c in the world.

Just realised from Doug's picture that we will get a great view of Alexandra Tower from the strand when it starts to rise.

agree with 1878EFC tall ships look great in the docks you cannot help but turn and look at them (not great when your driving!)

That would be too much to ask that mate.Every decent size port of any signifiance has sailing ship moored up but not for the greatest mercantile port of the 19c in the world.

and that is very sad that there isnt permanent ships here

Cambrian Alexandra Tower will be where the white crane is.

I think we should make tall ships pernament in the Albert Dock they look great and you can imagine being back in the 18th century when you see them. Maybe we could buy a few :)

When the `Albert Dock` water space was restored and the wharehouses refurbrished (1980s) it was the intention that the `Albert Dock` itself should be `A Tall Ships Haven`, vessels were invited to make their base in Liverpool and to help fill the Albert Dock water space.

It reduputedly has space for 100 tall ships and if you see the forest of masts in old pictures I can well believe it.

The `Maria Assumpta`(The worlds oldest sailing ship)(which I think also starred in the `Onedin Line`) did have a fairly lengthy stay in Liverpool but founded on rocks off the `Cornish Coast` some years ago, I think due to poor navigation and was beyond salvage.

`The Albert Dock - Tall Ships Haven` founded on the rocks of greed, charges were too high.

I see no reason why `Peel` and `Stanley Dock` couldn`t do a better job in the central docks.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Re, Maria Assumpta, I`ve found this account.

http://www.schoonerman.com/amsink.htm

The application for Plot 3a is for a 36 storey tower! :)

Plot 3a, Princes Dock, Liverpool, L3

To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 no. one and two bedroom apartments with 135 bed hotel, offices and mixed commercial development, including car parking, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure ***Revised Description***

The application for Plot 3a is for a 36 storey tower! :)

Plot 3a, Princes Dock, Liverpool, L3

To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 no. one and two bedroom apartments with 135 bed hotel, offices and mixed commercial development, including car parking, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure ***Revised Description***

Fook me is that all. :eek2:

The application for Plot 3a is for a 36 storey tower! :)

Plot 3a, Princes Dock, Liverpool, L3

To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 no. one and two bedroom apartments with 135 bed hotel, offices and mixed commercial development, including car parking, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure ***Revised Description***

This fella should have its own thread,we were only talking about this on Saturday at the meet up,our little cluster is going to be quite impressive in a few years. :)

Does anybody know when this application was submitted?

With 3a, New World Square, Alex and (fingers crossed) King Eddy, it will be one of the UK's prime clusters.

And hopefully a Central Business District tower

Does anybody know when this application was submitted?

According to the planning explorer the application was received on the 30th of June. This was one of towers Property Week said was been planned for the area, the others being an Albany tower, a tower on the RSA carpark and King Eddy so hopefully we've got even more coming!

Does anybody know when this application was submitted?

With 3a, New World Square, Alex and (fingers crossed) King Eddy, it will be one of the UK's prime clusters.

Without a doubt. :cheers:

so the tower on rsa car park wasnt a rumour?

Our city is going to look Sick in 5 years time, we will have an airport with flights worldwide, a cluster to match anything in London (not as tall) we will be the UK's seond city by far IMHO

Our city is going to look Sick in 5 years time, we will have an airport with flights worldwide, a cluster to match anything in London (not as tall) we will be the UK's seond city by far IMHO


Westi,I hope you meant sLick. :cheers:

of course i did;)

I'm sure there's another plot on PD that hasn't got anything on it yet so you never know we may get another tower there,then Peel said they'll start to develop Central Docks when PD is complete so the possibilities are endless. :D

Fook me is that all. :eek2:

No Thanks, it is a bit of a bummer ONLY 36 STOREYS :hahaha: :laugh: :omg:

I'm sure there's another plot on PD that hasn't got anything on it yet so you never know we may get another tower there,then Peel said they'll start to develop Central Docks when PD is complete so the possibilities are endless. :D

Yes there is Paul, its between Alex Tower and the last office block on the waterfront, this I hope will be the site of the Cruise Liner TERMINAL.

The application for Plot 3a is for a 36 storey tower! :)

Plot 3a, Princes Dock, Liverpool, L3

To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 no. one and two bedroom apartments with 135 bed hotel, offices and mixed commercial development, including car parking, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure ***Revised Description***

On that old masterplan map, Plot 3b next to it is identical, so hopefully twin 36 storey buildings. WoooHooo........! ok let's calm it down nothing approved yet... :runaway: :scouserd:

Peel Holdings :applause: :applause: :applause:

I'm sure there's another plot on PD that hasn't got anything on it yet so you never know we may get another tower there,then Peel said they'll start to develop Central Docks when PD is complete so the possibilities are endless. :D


I would say 6 sites currently empty awaiting developments.

Site 11a and 11b in front of City lofts, which may be limited in height, due to the other buildings closer to the river front being lower level.

Site 3a and 3b between City Lofts and the MSCP, 3a with a 36 storey proposal as mentioned above.

Site 7 being the New world square development.

Site 13 the second 9 storey City Lofts development

Princess Dock Masterplan (oldish version) (http://www.123lcc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/post/PRINCESS%20DOCK%20MASTERPLAN.pdf)

So hopefully in no time at all the 'northern cluster' will have:

Beetham tower 30 (?) stories
Beetham west 40 stories
City lofts 22 stories
Alex tower 27 stories
Unity Towers 27 stories
New world square 25 stories
King Eddie tower 46 (?) stories
Princes dock site 3a 36 stories
RSA carpark tower
CBD tower
possibly more?

Nothing to get excited about i s'pose :eek: :rock: :drool:

O well with them 3 buildings the average floor count is 31.6. 8 buildings with an average height of 300ft or so is the best in england behing london, plus the others you say might join them, RSA, CBD etc

The application for Plot 3a is for a 36 storey tower! :)

Plot 3a, Princes Dock, Liverpool, L3

To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 no. one and two bedroom apartments with 135 bed hotel, offices and mixed commercial development, including car parking, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure ***Revised Description***

Does anyone have any more information on this I'm desperate to read a bit more about it?

This application is on a lamp post in the Princes' dock, walked past it today. Hope the bastard is a good one and more importantly it goes through.

This application is on a lamp post in the Princes' dock, walked past it today. Hope the bastard is a good one and more importantly it goes through.

You do realise don`t you that `Bill Posters` will be prosecuted. :)

Hi,

If anybody can read my messages then please reply! That 36 storey towers going to have hard time being approved isn't it?

What we now need is a tall office tower (or two or three) to ensure there is a good balance of activities. We have the 17 storey Unity tower, which I believe is the tallest new office building outside London and with office rents in the city now reaching £20 per square foot per year (which is catching up with other major cities) lets hope we will soon see a proposal for a 40 to 50 storey tower.

Interestingly, the first scheme for the old Richmond House site, where Unity is now located was for a 40 storey office scheme.

Remember also that office towers are storey for storey quite a bit taller than residential towers.

true, Unity is 17 stories and 210ft, were as a 17 story resi would be about 180ft, if BW's lower 5 were going to be used for the other 35 BW would be over 500ft

Public notices in this mornings DP:

06F/2006 - To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 flats, 135 bed hotel, offices and commercial development including car parking at plot 3a Princes Dock, application by Mersey Property Company (never heard of them! must be a new company set up by Peel maybe?)

Public notices in this mornings DP:

06F/2006 - To erect a 36 storey building to provide 183 flats, 135 bed hotel, offices and commercial development including car parking at plot 3a Princes Dock, application by Mersey Property Company (never heard of them! must be a new company set up by Peel maybe?)

I'd love them not to interfere with this in any way because there's a hole in the skyline that this would fill very nicely indeed.

According to the planning explorer the plans had a press notice date of 19-07-06, does this mean we should see renders soon?

There's been a lot of discussion over on the West Tower thread about a park on the King Eddie Ind Est. site, but I think these pics are a bit more relevant here.

Now that Peel have bought the site they will need to put out a masterplan for the area, Liverpool Vision have suggested in their development update one possibilty being looked at is the closure of Bath Street. If this were to happen then how much longer will the wall stay standing?? there'll be one hell of a row, WHS and so on, but looking at the road and the wall yesterday I think this is a real prospect.



http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/607/bathst1kg9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/6491/bathst2sv9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/9924/bathst3lt9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

looks shitty round there, needs to all be re-developed

Peel will want to recoup their money so expect at least one tower from them.

Change the layout of the Juction with Leeds street, connect directly to Princes Dock etc and you don't need Bath Street. Closing Bath Street and retaining the current Strand/Leeds Street set up won't work.

That wall has to go, at least in part. It's devisive, obsolete and unsocialble.

I agree Toadboy get rid.

You'll have to take on EH to get rid of the wall and it is a big bastard of a wall, you'd never get planning permision for it now!! I think it has served its purpose it is a real barrier now to a joined up city center!

Heritage is a problem.

For the sake of heritage alone the wall, in part, could be featured, incorporated or used in any development. It must not impede development of the downtown though, I'm not advocated destruction for the sake of it, I'm looking at 21st centruy requirements Vs 19th century needs.

For the docks to have a full 21st century use, the city can't be split by a crumbling brick wall.

I'm looking at 21st centruy requirements Vs 19th century needs.And those "Needs" were to hide and protect the wealth looted from the empire, by a few powerful people, from rest of the populace. The wall also had the effect of depriving Scousers from having access to their river.

The wall is shit, but the gateways are quite nice and should be preserved.

Thanks for the pics Doug, very useful.

I think it would be a lot easier to argue for selective demolition of the wall if there was a good rationale, rather than just doing away with the wall. The reason I say that is that in parts of the South Docks walls, the wall has been replaced with ugly high metal railings. In a way they are even worse than the wall, because they are a) showing the ugliness within (car parks) and b) obviously saying "we in this age want you - whoever you are - to keep your thieving eyes off our property". If it's an obviously historic old wall, with shiny big buildings above it, it's obviously a throwback and may not necessarily be intended to say "stay away you plebs" from those passing by. This issue is compounded by poor planning in parts of Princess Dock, where the "backs" of the buildings would become very visible, complete with service entrances, bin sheds, car parks etc. - the development wasn't designed to present a polite and formal face to the street.

So I'd be keen on a good half or more of the wall going, and bits that are left perhaps being lowered in a stepped pattern, leading up to the gateposts, but only if there was genuine commitment to opening up, and high quality urban design applied to making the Princes Dock structures face the street in an appropriate manner. As I don't trust Liverpool City planners or Peel on the matter of urban design, I'm a bit sceptical, and so I can see why EH might want to fight to retain every brick.

Thanks for the pics Doug, very useful.

I think it would be a lot easier to argue for selective demolition of the wall if there was a good rationale, rather than just doing away with the wall. The reason I say that is that in parts of the South Docks walls, the wall has been replaced with ugly high metal railings. In a way they are even worse than the wall, because they are a) showing the ugliness within (car parks) and b) obviously saying "we in this age want you - whoever you are - to keep your thieving eyes off our property". If it's an obviously historic old wall, with shiny big buildings above it, it's obviously a throwback and may not necessarily be intended to say "stay away you plebs" from those passing by. This issue is compounded by poor planning in parts of Princess Dock, where the "backs" of the buildings would become very visible, complete with service entrances, bin sheds, car parks etc. - the development wasn't designed to present a polite and formal face to the street.

So I'd be keen on a good half or more of the wall going, and bits that are left perhaps being lowered in a stepped pattern, leading up to the gateposts, but only if there was genuine commitment to opening up, and high quality urban design applied to making the Princes Dock structures face the street in an appropriate manner. As I don't trust Liverpool City planners or Peel on the matter of urban design, I'm a bit sceptical, and so I can see why EH might want to fight to retain every brick.


Why not dismantle it,number each brick and rebuild it somewhere else.
A plaque could be set in it saying this was the wall that protected our docks from the thieves. :)

I think like peeling an Orange, the wall should be broken into and peeled back to form openings. The wall can be rebuilt along these openings, in a curved fashion, reducing in height.

I think it should be blown up and dumped on Hightown beach. If it was good enough for the homes of hundreds of thousands of Liverpudlians, then it's good enough for a fucking scabby obsolete stretch of masonry.

I had nothing better to do so here is my idea, a bit rough, but the opening could be wider with a bigger curve to the wall, and the wall reducing in height. Openings of some sort could be added to the main road sections....!

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/2010/zprinceswallopency3.jpg

Nice work Juxt.

It still smacks of 'gated community' and 'stay away you rabble' instead on seamless and inclusive downtown though.

One potential problem I can foresee with knocking down the wall: have any of the buildings been designed to have Bath Street Frontages? If we knock the wall down we could just expose some unsightly backsides.

One potential problem I can foresee with knocking down the wall: have any of the buildings been designed to have Bath Street Frontages? If we knock the wall down we could just expose some unsightly backsides.

Always use a towel to hide your ugly backside when getting out the Bath

We just need a huge one - who was that artist who used to wrap buildings?

:scouserd:

Bath St and the Ind Est grassed over (for now)

Blue area on the left is Peels plot 3a 36 storey application, yellow area is City Loft 9 storey building and AFL's 35 storey feasibility project, finally red area to the right is the King Eddie pub site with 48?? storeys.

If any clever chap out there could clone building images on to those sites we'd be cookin!!

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/7096/image005azn8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

original image from Daves excellent:http://www.**************************/ (http://)

who was that artist who used to wrap buildings?


Christo. (http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/christo/)

Get him on the phone!

Looks strange seeing the dock drained.
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/4677/princesik1.jpg

http://img324.imageshack.us/img324/9771/princes2ak7.jpg

Superb shot Doc. The clouds look amazing.

Why has the dock been drained?

Those clouds are awesome, nice to see the car park at AX comingo on nicely

Looks like they are starting to fill it in.
I did hear they were going to partly fill it to a depth of about 6'.

[QUOTE=Doug Roberts]Bath St and the Ind Est grassed over (for now)

Blue area on the left is Peels plot 3a 36 storey application, yellow area is City Loft 9 storey building and AFL's 35 storey feasibility project, finally red area to the right is the King Eddie pub site with 48?? storeys.

Hi Doug,

I saw on the AFL site that tower mentioned. I though the whole of the Princes Half Tide Dock was for the approved 9 storey building? It would be great if an area was reserved for a future development of this idea. Who knows? I do like the 36 storey tower by the Mersey Property Company. It will be difficult to acquire approval. On a postive note if the LCC Planners picked this out from other schemes then it should be recommended. I think also Harvey Developments will propose a tower probably about 40 storeys. I hope they can think bigger maybe 48? And Peel; expect a 50 storey tower on the King Edward Industrial Estate! They always build tall.

was princes dock filled into a lower depth before all the stuff happened around it?

was princes dock filled into a lower depth before all the stuff happened around it?
:dunno:

Saw a City Lofts sign at the 9 storey site. Does this mean the end to the 35 storey tower idea? Perhaps what we saw was really old news for the feasibilty study!

If it is, boo.....

Saw a City Lofts sign at the 9 storey site. Does this mean the end to the 35 storey tower idea? Perhaps what we saw was really old news for the feasibilty study!

If it is, boo.....

Hi Richie,

I think the 9 storey building is going to occupy the whole of the Princes Half Tide Dock. But there was a 6 storey building mentioned along with the 35 storey tower in the fesability study so who knows? It makes sense for the developer CityLoft to maximize there investment which could be better achieved with a taller structure.

I suppose, thanks Whooper and Welcome to SSC Liverpool

Don't want to start to sound like John, but is this dock getting filled in? If so I'll be upset, I think we should keep this one, in fact keep, preserve and use all the remaining docks. Actually I do sound like John, DOH.

Picture i found from www.liverpoolviews.co.uk

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/9592/prin1006061bn5.jpg

what a great development if i must say :scouserd:

It works for me :)

Several more dotted around the docks and city would do very nicely IMHO.

Found this back on page 9!

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y135/yapachoo/PICT1172.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y135/yapachoo/PICT1178.jpg

Found this back on page 9!

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y135/yapachoo/PICT1178.jpg

That whole area could look fantastic in approx five years time if developed to it's full potential.

aye... but sadly that is a big if mate!

aye... but sadly that is a big if mate!

Gotta keep that water clean though. Nothing worse than waterways full of shite. That also applies to Central Village.

Not a chance the area will look anywhere near fantastic. The revised NWS is an eyesore in the making, the office buildings are very Milton Keynes and the car park is a monstrosity. Plot 3A will be chopped down to stumpy nothingness.

Even City Lofts was pretty disappointing. An okay building, but disappointing all the same.

There will only be two half decent developments in the whole area- Malmaison and Alexandra Tower.

waterways full of shite.

Aye, but don't hold that that aginst him... He was no worse than the city council...

Not a chance the area will look anywhere near fantastic. The revised NWS is an eyesore in the making, the office buildings are very Milton Keynes and the car park is a monstrosity. Plot 3A will be chopped down to stumpy nothingness.

Even City Lofts was pretty disappointing. An okay building, but disappointing all the same.

There will only be two half decent developments in the whole area- Malmaison and Alexandra Tower.

That just proves how people have different tastes.

I think City Lofts is quite classy but I'm not highly impressed with Malmaison. Got to agree with you about Alex tho. In fact I would say it looks more than half decent.

Great news about plot 3A only having a couple of floors chopped off. If it gets the go-ahead how many empty plots are left to develop on Princes dock. I did read a couple of months ago that a company specialising in Apart-hotels, where building 5, in selected cities around Britain. They were spending 40-45 million quid on each hotel, and that they wanted to build on Princes Dock. Just wondered what kind of appartment building (height-no. of rooms) you could get for 45million.

in a way it just highlights how pointless it is to make the developers chop anything at all off... that is why all of this drives me so nuts... it is ALL SO UTTERLY POINTLESS!

I can't find who made the comment that what drives CABE and EH is simply the fact that they are empowered in Liverpool, so they do so just for the hell of it... is spot on.

Why do we persist in allowing this situation to continue?

Great news about plot 3A only having a couple of floors chopped off. If it gets the go-ahead how many empty plots are left to develop on Princes dock. I did read a couple of months ago that a company specialising in Apart-hotels, where building 5, in selected cities around Britain. They were spending 40-45 million quid on each hotel, and that they wanted to build on Princes Dock. Just wondered what kind of appartment building (height-no. of rooms) you could get for 45million.

beetham west was £35 million, But beetham 1 was £60 million...

Beetham 1 had the radisson and unisys

in a way it just highlights how pointless it is to make the developers chop anything at all off... that is why all of this drives me so nuts... it is ALL SO UTTERLY POINTLESS!

I can't find who made the comment that what drives CABE and EH is simply the fact that they are empowered in Liverpool, so they do so just for the hell of it... is spot on.

Why do we persist in allowing this situation to continue?

That was me Toe on another thread. Not so much for the hell of it more for the fun I suspect, TWATS

Thanks Rich... your analysis summed the situation up perfectly.

That was after a bottle of red too.

Great news about plot 3A only having a couple of floors chopped off. If it gets the go-ahead how many empty plots are left to develop on Princes dock. I did read a couple of months ago that a company specialising in Apart-hotels, where building 5, in selected cities around Britain. They were spending 40-45 million quid on each hotel, and that they wanted to build on Princes Dock. Just wondered what kind of appartment building (height-no. of rooms) you could get for 45million.


I think this "Aparthotels" thing is more a case of buying chunks of apartments in developments, and running them as hotels. Beetham could be an example, whereby there is a hotel attached, so the aparments could order hotel style room service, and be serviced by the hotel or an outside contractor.

You can't beat this building on a good sunset...

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/5493/imgp2536kn3.jpg

When I was walking past the other day I noticed that the ground floor carpark uses an automated 'stacking' system for the cars, so they effectively get 3 cars per space! (sorry for poor photo quality)

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/8345/imgp2542ae4.jpg

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/1526/imgp2541rw1.jpg

Very good top picture, it does photograph well at dusk, with a good sunset. It's like the Taj Mahal in that its colour changes at different times of the day. :)

See the story bout Malmaison, sounds very posh indeed, watch and listen in on your chef doing your food, a suspended yellow submarine with tropical fish init, hehe

Wheres thats story westy?

lmao i think the webcam has been knocked by the wind and is now facing straight ath the crane/top of the doka

in the echo craigie. lol good view of the crane like:)

http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/6771/dsc0004514sn.jpg

Well it's taken a while but this is the first images I have posted, actually it's turned out pretty small.

Taken late afternoon - sunset from Princes Dock. I used the panoramic feature on my phone.

As small as it is, that picture inspires me

Hopefully full size this time, still trying to find my feet with this posting images malarkey....

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/7574/dsc0004516gl.th.jpg (http://img442.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc0004516gl.jpg)

wooo BW is well wonky donkey

Like i said, still trying to find my feet :nuts:

Great picture Richie! I find the easiest way to edit my pictures is to use Microsoft picture manager (if you've got it) and simply resize them all to 800 x 600 then upload them via imageshack and they should be the right size for the forum. You can use any editing software to resize them, or even resize them as you upload them into imageshack. Keep em comin!

Cheers TOM, will try better next time.

http://onfinite.com/libraries/1092115/b6a.jpg

Wow, very nice! Good to see that the city gets the sexy side for once!

What is going on over there guys? :(

From Architect's Journal (sorry to be the bearer of bad news - unless you already knew?):

RMJM reduces Liverpool tower after CABE criticism

RMJM Architects has cut down the height of its Princes Dock tower in Liverpool, following a damning report from CABE.

The skyscraper, on the edge of Liverpool’s tall-buildings cluster, has been reduced from 37 storeys to 30 due to its impact on views of the World Heritage-protected waterfront.

The £80 million scheme originally comprised a luxury 135-room hotel and 183 apartments, including two penthouse units at the top of the tower.

However, after the CABE report stated its ‘serious reservations’ about the project, the scheme has been reduced.

The practice’s tower is not the first in Liverpool to be chopped down to size, with John Lyall seeing his waterfront scheme cut from 25 storeys to 17 late last year Lyall trims tower in bid for Liverpool approval.

RMJM’s Roger Whiteman said of the-new look scheme: ‘We had to submit the planning application earlier than we would have wanted, and we knew there would be more work to be done afterwards.

‘We had many consultations with CABE, English Heritage and the planning authorities, and we came to an agreement, knowing we had more aspects of the scheme to look at.

‘We worked through the design when the comments came back, looking at many aspects such as the different views, and came to an understanding over the height of the tower.’

What is going on over there guys? :(

From Architect's Journal (sorry to be the bearer of bad news - unless you already knew?):

Thanks for the posting Biosonic, yes we knew of the changes, but no worries,ok the tower has been chopped down, but I (we?) think the revised scheme still looksgood and will still soar over Princes Dock.

Cheers Bio, it's Plot 3a. We reckon it's gone down from 39 to 33. It still locks pretty good though.

New:

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/5039/dsc04047sl2.jpg

Old:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/9959/untitled3jf6.jpg

Ah - it all becomes clear! Thanks.

FWIW I prefer the other schemes Liverpool's proposing. This looks a little too M*******er for me... ;)

What does FWIW mean? Metro also uses it a lot.

What does FWIW mean? Metro also uses it a lot.


For what its worth....:)

Cheers Bluenose! :cheers:

Been trying to decipher that for ages. :lol:

Cheers Bluenose! :cheers:

Been trying to decipher that for ages. :lol:

Thick Git, you shouldn`t skip lessons,:ohno: I bet the kindergarden teacher is happy when you don`t show:lol: :colgate:

ps, Cheers bluenose, of course I knew that :ohno: :stupid:

Fookin' Woody: Idiot Wool :lol:

Fookin' Woody: Idiot Wool :lol:

Thats just the sort of INFANTILE reply I would expect from you Pesky:lol:

how did aj come up those floor counts. im a little confused as the revised plans show a different floor count.

Cheers Bio, it's Plot 3a. We reckon it's gone down from 39 to 33. It still locks pretty good though.

New:

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/5039/dsc04047sl2.jpg




According to today's Daily Post it is to be reduced to 30 floors, although we all know that the local press is to be taken with a pinch of salt at the best of times.

If I'm being honest, I do not see that this new design is any more "joy"ful than its predeccesor, so if CABE support this one then I will be confused.

I also think that the clean lines, and attractive facade of the last one has been spolied by these strips of protruding balconies. These strips seem to be randomly placed and sloppy on an otherwise ordered and 'clean' design.

I'm afraid to say that I think that the original proposal has been interfered with for no good reason. I'm not saying balconies aren't a good idea- they are. But they haven't been integrated well at all. I am also of the opinion that balconies at that height, on the river front, are going to be uninhabitable for much of the year. They are nothing more than a token gesture to a ridiculous organisation obsessed with strange architectural concepts- including "joy", and the way housing "should" appear.

Balconies in this location would have been better based on the concept proposed for Lime Street- i.e. internal balconies protected by an outer skin. However, in this instance, this would have meant retaining the so called joyless and office-like facades. And so strange aesthetic opinions are having very inpractical consequences.

I really do wonder how CABE will answer for their mistakes when the full extent of them is realised in the future.

I do however like the large 'cutting' balcony that has been introduced to the 7th/8th floor.

I agree, i prefered the other design. What gives CABE such a voice? who regulates or monitors them? they seem to be very interfering and powerful and make alot of very questionable attacks on new design, very often with a negative outcome when a design is amended......they certainly are not fans of height!

I'm still undecided on which is best, I'd like to see scale models or decent renders to make a real comparison. I think that 30 storeys is the absolute minimum height which is acceptable for this site without it being a completely wasted opportunity. 30 storeys that close to the water will have still a significant (if slightly reduced) impact. I guess we should be greatful that they're still pushing for one tower and have resisted pressure to chop it in two.

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) is a UK executive non-departmental public body established in 1999. It is funded by both the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). CABE's function is to promote best practice in the commissioning of new building and urban planning by both the public and private sector which it supports by a process of peer review. It also supports wider public education in the appreciation of architecture. Its board members are appointed by the Secretary of State. CABE's first Chairman was Stuart Lipton who was also Chief Executive of the Property Developer Stanhope PLC. Private Eye's architectural correspondent complained that this represented a conflict of interest.

CABE is the successor body to the Royal Fine Art Commission, originally established in 1924.

CABE's main objective is to justify it's existence.If planners ignored them, they wouldn't exist.They have to be seen to be influential in planning decisions.Unfortunatley in Liverpool, this is a simple process:in the most esoteric of ways object to a tall building,ditto EH,this will send the LCC planning dept running for the slide rule.It's strange that CABE have never recommended a building in Liverpool to be made taller! EH actually done this with the London planners on the "Gherkin" because they knew that they had litle chance of unduly influencing the London planners and instead made a genuine appraisal of the building on aesthetic grounds.Pity we have such spineless little planners in Liverpool.

Thats just the sort of INFANTILE reply I would expect from you Pesky:lol:

Truer words were never spoken... :sleepy:

Go shag a sheep.

CABE's main objective is to justify it's existence.If planners ignored them, they wouldn't exist.They have to be seen to be influential in planning decisions.Unfortunatley in Liverpool, this is a simple process:in the most esoteric of ways object to a tall building,ditto EH,this will send the LCC planning dept running for the slide rule.It's strange that CABE have never recommended a building in Liverpool to be made taller! EH actually done this with the London planners on the "Gherkin" because they knew that they had litle chance of unduly influencing the London planners and instead made a genuine appraisal of the building on aesthetic grounds.Pity we have such spineless little planners in Liverpool.

Yes, "spineless" is the word. And you are right to use the Gherkin example. This bold, iconic tower has a historic church literally next door to it. The church is completely over shadowed and dominated by the Gherkin, which also clashes with it in terms of design style. And yet EH supported the Gherkin.

Now, nobody here should need telling what would've happened had this identical situation occurred in Liverpool. Indeed, even if the church were not directly below it, but 2 miles away we know the words "view" and "blocking" would be near by.

These quangos, CABE included, are just spouting anything to get involved and to justify their existence, even when the results seem to be nonsensical. In London and other cities where they are not listened to, they adapt their approach and support buildings- they wouldn't want to be seen as being ignorred and ridiculed would they?. In Liverpool, with its spineless planning authorities, they take the opposite approach. Because they know they can.

It is pathetic. I think the original Plot 3A design was better.

How tall is teh gherkin out of interest, it was my favourite building in london for a while, until i saw the plans for bishopgate (the helter skelter) and the shard, which is replacing my gap year companies old offices, PWC. They have an office in liverpool aswell, its that yellow block on princess dock, they wer at one point thinking of moving into unity!

How tall is teh gherkin out of interest, it was my favourite building in london for a while, until i saw the plans for bishopgate (the helter skelter) and the shard, which is replacing my gap year companies old offices, PWC. They have an office in liverpool aswell, its that yellow block on princess dock, they wer at one point thinking of moving into unity!


roughly 180m

Prefer the first design if I am honest, CABE are a bunch of armatures and LCC should just ignore their comments, they hold no power what so ever. An example of this is the HMRI in Bootle CABE have heavily criticised the design but basically Sefton MBC have just ignored them (CABE are actually right on that case though).

With regards to EH they are just as bad and should hold very little weight in terms on planning applications that are not on listed buildings. They are also very fickle in their thinking and seem to be very harsh on Liverpool. For example they have allowed a Grade II listed cinema in Southport to be demolished but if this was in Liverpool there would have been a different outcome.

Cheers Bio, it's Plot 3a. We reckon it's gone down from 39 to 33. It still locks pretty good though.

New:

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/5039/dsc04047sl2.jpg

Old:

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/9959/untitled3jf6.jpg

The new image makes this building look more of an apartment block.
Mind you that's what the stumpy building society wants isn't it?

Can't have the centre of Liverpool looking like it's full of office blocks now can we?

Tbh, i think the new one is a poor render, its a diagram, it will look different, hopefully better, just the same as the original plan was a diagram, from our expierence, the renders dont do the finsihed product justice

I prefer the old one by a mile - i agree fuzi its a bit Benidorm from some angles but i'll wait to see a few more renders

Chicago Tribune design competition entry from Walter Gropius (founder of Bauhaus) 1923!!!

he didnt win by the way

http://www.brynmawr.edu/Acads/Cities/imgb/imgb3/164d.jpg

Definitely the addition of the balconies gives the new building more of an 'apartment block' look and I can't see that it is a bad thing. I also think that the increase in height of the low level part of the building has given it better proportions with respect to the tower.

One of the problems that I can see with the use of the flush glazed walls on an apartment tower is that British apartments are seldom air conditioned. It therefore follows that the nice taut glazing, that is often a feature of office towers would be broken up by opening windows in practice.

All in all, I think the second design is an improvement on the first.

Chicago Tribune design competition entry from Walter Gropius (founder of Bauhaus) 1923!!!

he didnt win by the way

http://www.brynmawr.edu/Acads/Cities/imgb/imgb3/164d.jpg

looks just like New World Square only a hell of a lot bigger. it;s amazing what can be accomplished after 80+ years. :ohno:
the winning design was a superb gothic revival styled skyscraper.

imo, i prefere the old 3a design to the new one by far...

Saw some activity on the City Lofts II site this afternoon, not even arsed though as I think from the renders at least, it looks like a stinking pile of dog turd.

Princes Dock , 3-3-07..............


http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/3994/20070303shotsfirst0053re2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


URL=http://imageshack.us]http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/9750/20070303shotsfirst0057gr1.jpg[/URL]

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8296/20070303shotsfirst0049zf0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

New camara, still leaning on which buttons to press, must read the bloody manual :nuts: pic 3 shows our favorite footbridge from the REAR :lol:

Bloody 'ell Woody the night pics are great, and with the new camera!

Cheers Doug, I was shooting anything that moved , great fun. I did enjoy my trip, Thanks to you and Martin.

Cheers Doug, I was shooting anything that moved , great fun. I did enjoy my trip, Thanks to you and Martin.

was gonna say that your photos are quite impressive bearing in mind how many bacardi and cokes you had !

was gonna say that your photos are quite impressive bearing in mind how many bacardi and cokes you had !

:lol: I just hope that everybody remembers that the more B+C I sup the better my photos look, :ohno: well thats till I have another look at them when I sober up:cheers2: :cheers2: :cheers2:

With all the fuss :lol: over the mighty towers further north its gratifying to see that Peel will not be leaving any holes behind in Princes Dock and across Bath Street ,which looks if it has disappeared under a canopy of trees.


http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/1564/princesdockwl4.png (http://imageshack.us)

While Peel take 12 months to apply for outline planning approval, I am sure we will see some action around PD long before LW kicks off

URL=http://imageshack.us]http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/6406/lwgsc6.jpg[/URL][/IMG]

Doug spy camara shows the King eddy site fully occupied, I wonder were the 2 x 50 storey towers (by others) will fit in ?

Princes Dock and the Bath Street sheds could really motor over the next 5 years or so. And King Eddies.

Peel have to make a statement, the corpy have to been seen to take a dynamic, can do approach.

It the photo's and renders, the King Eddies pub is still there. Perhaps a bit more communication between the MPC and Peel is needed here.

The impressive new City Lofts 2 starting whoopeee dooo.:ohno:

This is to be the last ever heritage affected building in Liverpool....! :|
http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/8210/zcitylofts233sc2.jpg

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/6406/lwgsc6.jpg

That tower just south of Alex looks like it's sitting on the old timber staging. May be suspect structural engineering but it does look like they have seen the advantage of making use of this unique structure.

Judging by the size of the tower compared to Alex, it must be around forty storeys.

Might be made of balsa...

Either that, or they've taken the images on Google.earth as a given....

This layout of the development reaching from the King Edward Industrial estate to Central Docks is incredible! The area around the King Edward pub site acts as an excellent gateway.

It would feel like New York if driving from Great George Street along towards the Liver Buildings. I like the density and balance of tall buildings distributed across the Princes Dock.

I still can't believe the scale and ambition of this fantastic scheme!

This layout of the development reaching from the King Edward Industrial estate to Central Docks is incredible! The area around the King Edward pub site acts as an excellent gateway.

It would feel like New York if driving from Great George Street along towards the Liver Buildings. I like the density and balance of tall buildings distributed across the Princes Dock.

I still can't believe the scale and ambition of this fantastic scheme!

Don't get your hopes up too much mate. I really hope the development goes ahead without being scaled down (too much) but anything can happen in Liverpool.

Welcome to the forum.

Report today on "Smooth Radio"................

The countrys first "floating apartments " are planned for Princes Dock.
They are being designed to look like boats, sound interesting check out tomorrows DP.


Ah ,just spotted this news on Liverpool Waters thread,

Yes its in the Liverpool Waters thread

Report today on "Smooth Radio"................

The countrys first "floating apartments " are planned for Princes Dock.
They are being designed to look like boats, sound interesting check out tomorrows DP.


Ah ,just spotted this news on Liverpool Waters thread,

Smooth radio.....:ohno:

Is this your cutting edge source of local development news... :lol:

Only joking, keep you ear to the smooth sounds of Smmmoooth erF erM...:dj:

From AJ Online:

Liverpool-based KKA Architects is the practice behind these striking designs for Peel Holdings’ ambitious plans to float 26 luxury homes in the city’s Princes Dock basin.

Proposals for the floating homes, each of which will be designed to reflect ‘naval architecture’ and will, according to Peel Holdings, ‘give the appearance of a row of high-quality multi-million-pound super yachts,’ have been submitted to Liverpool City Council.

Each home will be arranged across three ‘decks’, providing a living space of 172m2. The uppermost tier will feature a large sun deck with views of the rapidly developing dock area.

A Peel Holdings spokesperson confirmed that plans had been submitted and said that the company expected a decision from the council in June.

http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/020507_liverpool_MAIN.jpg
http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/020507_liverpool2_t_l.jpg

Beautiful :)

http://www.kka.ltd.uk/index2.htm

can anyone see any info on here i couldnt find any

These are brilliant,I really hope they get approved,wasn't there a similar idea for Kings Dock?

This...

http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/020507_liverpool_MAIN.jpg

...looks like a water-bound version of this...

http://g-ec2.images-amazon.com/images/I/41P4NQ2Y9XL._AA240_.jpg

Nice one Damon, fantastic album there (although a bit odd in places)... I knew I'd seen that design somewhere before! I'd rather have the one over the grand canyon though...

http://www.kka.ltd.uk/index2.htm

can anyone see any info on here i couldnt find any

No i had looked at that site also, but couldn't find anything.

No i had looked at that site also, but couldn't find anything.

cheers, maybe something to check every now and again

These floating apartments are now one of my favourite developments for Liverpool,I think they're fantastic,I really hope they get through the planners without any alterations,I love them.

The Daily Post said something a bit odd about this Flotilla development. Apparently the buildings will sit on stilts but are designed to float in response to tidal changes. That doesn't make much sense to me as for one thing there should not be a tide in an enclosed dock (even though water levels are likely to vary depending on how much water is lost through dock gates etc).

I suspect that the houses will be built on pontoons that will sit on legs, much in the same way that the temporary landing stage at the Pier Head has legs that stop it moving sideways but allow it to move up and down.

I'm also surprised at how many of them there are - 26. The LDP rendering only shows five so a large part of the dock surface will be covered. I wouldn't be surprised if the planners ask them to reduce the number.

As the people who will live in these places will be pretty well off, I suspect that they will have their own boats that they can moor alongside the houses and will have direct access to both the sea and the canal network.

I'm also surprised at how many of them there are - 26. The LDP rendering only shows five so a large part of the dock surface will be covered. I wouldn't be surprised if the planners ask them to reduce the number.

As the people who will live in these places will be pretty well off, I suspect that they will have their own boats that they can moor alongside the houses and will have direct access to both the sea and the canal network.

Martin, the location and number of boats is shown on this Peel render..........

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/2136/princesdocksn2.png

It does fill up the dock but there is still plenty of water left for the canal boats.

These are brilliant,I really hope they get approved,wasn't there a similar idea for Kings Dock?

Paul, the last time I can remember we all agreed so strongly that a proposal was good was New World Square. That was of course too good for the city. Given that a) there are no height / skyline issues b) the Council don't give a shit about the Docks or water in them, I am trying to think of pertinent objections they could possible raise. Actually I might have one of my own. Might it look better if the design of the houses were different in the left than the right hand side of the Dock? There might be something a tad monolithic and repetitive about the same design repeated along the entire length of the Dock. Would a different design work better (though similar massing and scale) in the southern-end of the Dock, for example something that contains a lot of angular coloured glass opposed to the strong curved concrete feel of the current proposals? Maybe they could be one or two floors taller than the curren plans in one side of the Dock, again just to add some variety?

Just an idea. I too think this is a superb proposal, and my anxiety is purely that Liverpool planners have a habit of mucking up good proposals. The "take" of water is actually not that great, and empty Docks are dismal bloody places.

From AJ Online:

http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/020507_liverpool_MAIN.jpg
http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/020507_liverpool2_t_l.jpg

Beautiful :)

Oooooh. just fab!

What a counter balance to the `X building` aka `Museum of Liverpool`.....

They do go well with the X-building to be, and also with Malmaison.

We all get excited about big projects, but this is so cool and modern and different. I really wan't this to happen.

prizes for EH's excuse, they ruin views of the historic water!

i think this will be absolutely superb, imagine hosting a party on one of them sitting off with a bbq on the balcony with the liver buildings to your left and the 'skyscrapers' to your right :)

I wonder whether they will all be identical in reality? In both those shots it looks as though the boat/house nearest us is different from the rest, although it could just be the same thing at a different angle.

Even if they were all similar, something simple like using different colours could make a real visual difference.

maybe on the buyers preference Tom

i dont know if anyone has covered this but the fact that such a small detail on the masterplan for Liverpool Waters meaning these boat house thingies have an application for them must mean that all the towers on the plan must be realistic and not just to show what the waterfront will look like with a load of towers, hopefully a few applications will go in in the next few years to show they mean business.

I think people are cottening on to that fact EFC... it's certainly an encouraging sign!

maybe on the buyers preference Tom

i dont know if anyone has covered this but the fact that such a small detail on the masterplan for Liverpool Waters meaning these boat house thingies have an application for them must mean that all the towers on the plan must be realistic and not just to show what the waterfront will look like with a load of towers

Other than the "house-boats" and maybe one of two towers, nothing in that plan will end up looking anything like what may or may not get built.

Think about it, we're talking about a 30 or 50 year plan.
In 20/30/40/50 years we'll probably have embraced, then rejected, embraced then rejected again the idea
of tall buildings 2/3 times over..

With all the changes in taste and styles over even a period of 10 years, will anyone, in 2037, be building dated sketches of buildings they designed in 2007??
Are there any cities around the world which are proudly erecting their Brutalist breezeblock shithole estates and walkways-in-the-sky they originally designed in 1977?

In 50 years we'll have demolished most of the talls we already have, in large part due to shifting tastes.

So, in terms of actual visualisation, anything "designed" for something which will take 50 years isn't a design at all.
When, in 30 years time, Plot X1Z actually gets to built upon, it will be something designed in tune with the commercial tastes of that time, which may or may not be a tall, may or may not be a Barratt box, may or may not be fitted with an outboard motor for short trips into Space....we just don't know do we?

The point EFC (and others) are making is that what could just have been total fantasy renders actually contained some real plans - so if house boats, why not at least a few of those towers? For example the 50 storey tower we can see in that render could reasonably be proposed anytime in the next few years, especially once we get a decent tall on the King Eddies site.

I don't think their plans were total fantasy, I think we'll see lots of those towers getting proposed, and although they might not end up exactly as they look in the renders, Peel have obviously put a lot of thought (and money) into designing the entire site, including the relative heights of towers, the residential/office mix, transport infrastructure and such like.

What's encouraging about the proposal is that Peel clearly don't intend to waste any time in getting these plans off the ground, as far as they're concerned the quicker they can get this scheme built, the more money they'll make. By proposing an attractive but relatively low impact scheme first they're likely to win over a number of key players before they begin to broach the bigger projects. Once Beetham West is finished I think the entire planning climate is going to change towards tall buildings in that area... so fingers crossed for the rest of the scheme

The point EFC (and others) are making is that what could just have been total fantasy renders actually contained some real plans - so if house boats, why not at least a few of those towers? For example the 50 storey tower we can see in that render could reasonably be proposed anytime in the next few years, especially once we get a decent tall on the King Eddies site.

I don't think their plans were total fantasy, I think we'll see lots of those towers getting proposed, and although they might not end up exactly as they look in the renders, Peel have obviously put a lot of thought (and money) into designing the entire site, including the relative heights of towers, the residential/office mix, transport infrastructure and such like.


Agree with that. Would like to see that 50 storey as a real proposition- so that's exciting. Hopefully they will crack on, as I'm all up for radical projects etc.

I have a problem with "50 year plans" though. That was just utterly silly on their behalf.

Agree with that. Would like to see that 50 storey as a real proposition- so that's exciting. Hopefully they will crack on, as I'm all up for radical projects etc.

I have a problem with "50 year plans" though. That was just utterly silly on their behalf.

Perhaps not quite that silly, it got them a hell of a lot of press coverage, both local and even national and has created the necessary 'buzz' to get the ball rolling... but as you say, it won't all materialise as planned, but if they hadn't produced as specific designs and plans people would have been less likely to take an interest..

Public notices in the DP reports planning application 07F/1521 submitted to erect 26 3 storey floating dwellings at Princes Dock, application by Princes Dock Development Co.

Great news! it will be very interesting to see how Liverpool's planning community react to this, personally I think these will sail through.

Public notices in the DP reports planning application 07F/1521 submitted to erect 26 3 storey floating dwellings at Princes Dock, application by Princes Dock Development Co.

Great news! it will be very interesting to see how Liverpool's planning community react to this, personally I think these will sail through.

:)

Public notices in the DP reports planning application 07F/1521 submitted to erect 26 3 storey floating dwellings at Princes Dock, application by Princes Dock Development Co.

Great news! it will be very interesting to see how Liverpool's planning community react to this, personally I think these will sail through.

I really hope these get approved,they're one of my favourite developments at present.

I really can't see who could object to this development? Although knowing our planners that's no reason to believe it'll be approved - but as odds go this has to be pretty good...

I really can't see who could object to this development? Although knowing our planners that's no reason to believe it'll be approved - but as odds go this has to be pretty good...

There wont be a problem with height this time that's for sure.:)

There wont be a problem with height this time that's for sure.:)

Unless the planners demand their usual 20% reduction in height,Just for the hell of it.

Nothing's beyond the realms of possibility here.

Nothing's beyond the realms of possibility here.

Yes,take nothing for granted.
The planners must be feeling rather frustrated at the moment,not having turned down a stunning proposal or two for quite some time now.

Let's hope they're not saving it all up for plot 3a.

Yes,take nothing for granted.
The planners must be feeling rather frustrated at the moment,not having turned down a stunning proposal or two for quite some time now.

Let's hope they're not saving it all up for plot 3a.

Good point, I wouldn't put it past them to pass this proposal, just so that they can then use it to scupper the 3a proposal because it would 'overshadow the historic houseboat community on Princes dock'....

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/1037/new023qt5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Only recently realised that this trench is supposed to be a water feature - has anybody ever seen it working?

^^ How absurd. The only water feature they need is to keep the bloody dock free from litter and algae.

... I suspect that the houses will be built on pontoons that will sit on legs, much in the same way that the temporary landing stage at the Pier Head has legs that stop it moving sideways but allow it to move up and down.
I'm also surprised at how many of them there are - 26. The LDP rendering only shows five so a large part of the dock surface will be covered. I wouldn't be surprised if the planners ask them to reduce the number.
As the people who will live in these places will be pretty well off, I suspect that they will have their own boats that they can moor alongside the houses and will have direct access to both the sea and the canal network.Houseboats like those pictured, occupied by wealthy people who keep their privacy closely, are so unspeakably ugly and anti-social. They destroy the very things they come to Liverpool for. In the words of the song, "Pave Paradise, Put in a Parking-Lot".

Liverpool city centre needs character not anonymity. Old Salts, not faceless people. Variety, not uniformity.

Live-aboard vessels are a fine idea, but the city should encourage variety rather than bland "formula" designs by whatever means comes to hand. For example they could require that each live-aboard vessel be either canal-going, seaworthy or historic (at least 50 years old).

It's a terrible shame that Princes Dock, arguably the finest location in the whole city, could not have been reinstated to receive (small to medium sized) cruise ships.

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/1037/new023qt5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Only recently realised that this trench is supposed to be a water feature - has anybody ever seen it working?



I have ... it looked quite smart though i dont believe it has worked for a long time!

Think it got clogged up with fags and litter etc!

Plans are back in with the planning dept., for the floating homes on the dock.

Plans are back in with the planning dept., for the floating homes on the dock.

Disappointed with that

I think they look awful and will make this dock even more of a tacky lost opportunity :ohno:

Plans are back in with the planning dept., for the floating homes on the dock.

I am happy they are back on the agenda, i thought they look great, as long as the general public aren't restricted from walking along the Princes dock due to private owners, which i'm sure won't happen anyway.

Plans are back in with the planning dept., for the floating homes on the dock.

begsy, well spotted cheers for info. I will post up all the known details on the appropriate thread.

Time to have a say on Liverpool’s floating homes
Jan 10 2008 by Liza Williams, Liverpool Daily Post

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/9346/70qa2.jpg

LUXURY floating homes on Princes Dock are one step closer to fruition now a planning consultation period has begun.

If given the go-ahead, 12 flotilla detached homes will be “anchored” in the dock in the first marina-style development of its kind in the UK.

The houses are likely to attract prices of around £750,000 and the backdrop will be the Royal Liverpool Building and the World Heritage Site.

The original application, submitted in May, was for 26 homes but this has now been revised and resubmitted by Peel Holdings, who own the dock.

Wayne Colquhoun, chairman of Liverpool Preservation Trust, thinks the structures will be a welcome addition to the city.

He said: “This is a new slant on our maritime history, I think they will look great. It is such a rarity to have good modern design like this and I welcome it. It has a relevant reference to the city’s heritage and is pleasing to the eye.”

The homes, designed by Liverpool-based Architects KKA, have a nautical theme associated with the marina environment, and will give the appearance of a row of multi-million pound yachts.

They will sit on stilts, but are designed to float in response to tidal changes.

The price tag will buy a detached home arranged on three decks, providing a total internal living space of 1,850sq ft. The prestigious homes could also feature an outside deck area that sits above the water, and master bedrooms with an impressive external balcony.

The top deck will feat- ure a sundeck with a large area for enter- taining that will have excellent views of the Pier Head and the fast-developing Princes Dock.

Dominic Burke, from estate agents King Sturge, says people have been enquiring about the unique homes: “I think they look fantastic, and will be brilliant for the city.

“They are so striking and we have had a lot of interest.

“We are still taking the details of interested parties but it is a waiting game now, until the project gets planning consent.”

PLANS are available for viewing at Millennium House on Victoria Street until January 28. Parties will have three weeks to make representations to the council’s planning department, before the application is sent to a planning committee.

TO REGISTER an early interest in Flotilla Homes, contact King Sturge on 0151 242 6490 or e-mail: flotilla@king sturge.com

Did I read that right... Wayne the Pain supports these floating homes! Wow. I think I might have to raise an objection to them on moral principle.. :lol:

Wayne Colquhoun, chairman of Liverpool Preservation Trust, thinks the structures will be a welcome addition to the city.


Jesus, I just snorted hot coffee down my nose.

Did I read that right... Wayne the Pain supports these floating homes! Wow. I think I might have to raise an objection to them on moral principle.. :lol:

Jesus, I just snorted hot coffee down my nose.

:lol: one of wayne's new years resolutions perhaps? "must not complain about everything" ?

:lol: one of wayne's new years resolutions perhaps? "must not complain about everything" ?

I think the interesting thing here is the fact that he was asked to give an opinion!

I think the interesting thing here is the fact that he was asked to give an opinion!

Not really PhilG, I believe Wayne ( well his organisation) is on Nigel Lee`s list of " interested parties " that always get consulted. It is this list that 21C Liverpool need to aspire too if we are to counter some of his anti-development views.

When I read his comments in the DP, I amazed and re-read the article, but I am not sure that his backing is a good thing, all his recent attacks on the developments around the Pier Head have ended in failure so his support for this proposal may well result in sinking the "house boats " to the bottom of the dock:nuts:

Time to have a say on Liverpool’s floating homes
Jan 10 2008 by Liza Williams, Liverpool Daily Post

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/9346/70qa2.jpg

LUXURY floating homes on Princes Dock are one step closer to fruition now a planning consultation period has begun.

If given the go-ahead, 12 flotilla detached homes will be “anchored” in the dock in the first marina-style development of its kind in the UK.

The houses are likely to attract prices of around £750,000 and the backdrop will be the Royal Liverpool Building and the World Heritage Site.

The original application, submitted in May, was for 26 homes but this has now been revised and resubmitted by Peel Holdings, who own the dock.

Wayne Colquhoun, chairman of Liverpool Preservation Trust, thinks the structures will be a welcome addition to the city.

He said: “This is a new slant on our maritime history, I think they will look great. It is such a rarity to have good modern design like this and I welcome it. It has a relevant reference to the city’s heritage and is pleasing to the eye.”

The homes, designed by Liverpool-based Architects KKA, have a nautical theme associated with the marina environment, and will give the appearance of a row of multi-million pound yachts.

They will sit on stilts, but are designed to float in response to tidal changes.

The price tag will buy a detached home arranged on three decks, providing a total internal living space of 1,850sq ft. The prestigious homes could also feature an outside deck area that sits above the water, and master bedrooms with an impressive external balcony.

The top deck will feat- ure a sundeck with a large area for enter- taining that will have excellent views of the Pier Head and the fast-developing Princes Dock.

Dominic Burke, from estate agents King Sturge, says people have been enquiring about the unique homes: “I think they look fantastic, and will be brilliant for the city.

“They are so striking and we have had a lot of interest.

“We are still taking the details of interested parties but it is a waiting game now, until the project gets planning consent.”

PLANS are available for viewing at Millennium House on Victoria Street until January 28. Parties will have three weeks to make representations to the council’s planning department, before the application is sent to a planning committee.

TO REGISTER an early interest in Flotilla Homes, contact King Sturge on 0151 242 6490 or e-mail: flotilla@king sturge.com

They might not be so bad, they might make a nice photo as Princess docks too modern for much uniquness at the moment other than the burnt out looking shack.

Golly, I thought that this project was a dead duck as I read somewhere that the planning application hade been pulled in by `Peel` themselves.......?

^^

It was indeed pulled. But Peel have submitted a new plan which is now the one under consideration.

^^No surprise Crispy answered that one! ;)

^^

You're just jealous Pietari didn't reference a squirrel! ;)

KKA floats idea to put Liverpool homes on stilts

Building Design 8 February 2008

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=426&storycode=3105859&c=1
^^includes images

KKA has submitted for planning an extraordinary proposal for 12 floating homes, dubbed “Flotilla”, next to Liverpool’s world heritage site in Princes Dock.

The individual dwellings, within the Liverpool-based practice’s £8.5 million scheme for developer Peel Holdings, have been designed to sit on stilts but will lift off their bases when water levels rise.

They are kept in position by vertical poles which they can slide up and down, according to the tide.

KKA director Mark Roberts said: “In a doomsday scenario, everyone will be happy in our houses — they’ll be sitting watching TV and everyone else will be under water.”

The design also uses a lightweight steel frame and will be clad in a single-skin fabric — either glass-reinforced plastic or epoxy render.

The project represents one of the first attempts in the UK to build permanent floating housing — a concept used more widely in Europe and the US.

Liverpool Council is to decide whether to give the houses the go-ahead within the next month.

I hope these are approved they're superb.

These went in last month so I hope they get approval before April.

House Boats on the Murrey River, South Australia......

hthttp://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc242/woody43/2008_020208AUSTRALIA0073.jpgtp://

hthttp://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc242/woody43/2008_020208AUSTRALIA0078.jpgtp://

hthttp://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc242/woody43/2008_020208AUSTRALIA0090.jpgtp://

These look fine cruising this giant river, but not sure how their "scouse cousins" would look like moored in Princes ?

If they are approved, will it happen quickly enough to get the pilars in before they refill the dock? Or would that be too much like joined-up thinking?

If they are approved, will it happen quickly enough to get the pilars in before they refill the dock? Or would that be too much like joined-up thinking?

Are they going to construct a concrete reinforced channel along the dock, as with the pier head, or will it be free open movement, and so what were the now covered concrete piles for..!

If they are constructing a channel, then this will take a long time, plenty enough to add floating house piles also.

After initially being deferred to allow for a site visit, the proposed changes to the Princes Dock MSCP have been refused on the grounds that -

the proposed extension by virtue of its height, design and massing, would appear as an over dominant and intrusive feature that would detract from the appearance of the existing car park building and adversely affect the character and
setting of the surrounding historic area

http://councillors.liverpool.gov.uk/Published/C00000307/M00007952/$$$Minutes.doc.pdf

Cheers Chris, didn't even know that there was a proposed extension. Can see why more parking is needed, but also agree that anything bigger in terms of the current MSCP would be out of place and overbearing on the site.

Doesn't bode well for other developments though.

It would have been a vertical extension, so as noted in the original Planning Officer's report, it would have matched the Malmaison more closely in terms of height. I think the problem stemmed from the fact that the extra floors were not to be of the same design as the existing structure, leading to the appearance of what was described as an over-sized plant-room placed on top of the existing structure. If they re-submit, it should pass, but only with a re-design of the proposed appearance of the extra floors.

It would have been a vertical extension, so as noted in the original Planning Officer's report, it would have matched the Malmaison more closely in terms of height. I think the problem stemmed from the fact that the extra floors were not to be of the same design as the existing structure, leading to the appearance of what was described as an over-sized plant-room placed on top of the existing structure. If they re-submit, it should pass, but only with a re-design of the proposed appearance of the extra floors.

I would hope it isn't passed whatever the design.

The thing is already a bloody eyesore in a prime location. Adding more height would REALLY take the piss.

From Property Week -

City Lofts crisis

17:30 | 01.07.08

By David Doyle

City Lofts has become the first major residential developer to fall victim to the credit crunch with around 250 of its unsold properties today put into receivership.

Bank of Scotland Corporate, which is City Lofts biggest lenders, today appointed Jon Gershinson of Allsop as LPA (Law of Property Act 1925) receiver on the unsold units in five regional cities and a Birmingham development site. An LPA receiver is an individual, appointed either by the court or by the holder of a fixed charge over one or more properties.

‘City Lofts has requested its residential portfolio and one of its development assets be placed into LPA receivership,’ a spokesperson said. ‘This is part of a restructuring process which City Lofts has been pursuing in light of the extremely difficult market condition which it and many of the other housebuilders and residential developers are currently experiencing in the UK.

‘City Lofts hopes the restructuring of its business can be successfully concluded in as short a time as possible.’

Bank of Scotland has lent on the majority of City Lofts’ schemes. Properties now being looked after by Gershinson include apartments at the 203-apartment Salford Quays in Manchester, the 105-apartment Springfield Mill in Nottingham, the 198-apartment Roberts Wharf in Leeds, the 162-apartment Prince’s Dock in Liverpool and the 167-apartment Admiral House in Cardiff.

Continues here - http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3117221&c=1

It should be noted that it is City Lofts 1 in question here, not the current development on Princes Half-Tide Dock. I suppose in view of the current economic conditions, situations like this were inevitably going to arise.

I think the chances of us seeing the City Lofts development on Kings Dock have now also become a whole lot smaller as well.

Further to the above -

City Lofts in administration

10:19 | 07.07.08

By Mike Phillips

Residential developer City Lofts has gone into administration.

Ernst & Young was appointed administrator by the company, which is one of Bank of Scotland Corporate’s joint venture partners, on Friday.

Receivership

Last week, Property Week revealed that City Lofts had appointed LPA receivers on six assets across the country.

City Lofts Group Ltd and City Lofts Development Ltd have been placed in administration. Individual holding companies carrying out specific developments in Liverpool and Sheffield have not been placed in administration, and Ernst & Young said it will review the companies in administration with the aim of continuing the current developments under construction.

More here from Property Week - http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3117668&c=1

Don't know if this is the right thread.

From http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/

http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/assets/_files/cached/img/400x337.26090283091/aug_08/pnw__1217596878_Plot_3a_Image_(Jan_07)1.jpg
MPC's proposed scheme drawn in the foreground, flanked by completed schemes by City Lofts, left, and Beetham, right

Princes Dock tower becomes latest victim of market slump
1 August 2008, 14:30

Mersey Property Company, the special purpose vehicle set up by a group of Worcestershire-based investors to develop a 33-storey tower on Liverpool's Princes Dock, has ended talks with landowner Peel Holdings to acquire the land for the scheme.

Negotiations were called off after the downturn in the market meant lower rental values and rising construction and debt costs made the scheme unviable.

Planning permission for architect RMJM's design was gained in June last year. A mixed-use project with a gross end value of £100m was envisaged, comprising 120,000 sq ft of offices, a 140-bed hotel and 180 apartments.

MPC had agreed to buy the site, plot 3a, for £6m from Peel. Banks were understood to be willing to finance the scheme but not at the necessary rates to make it work. The scheme was based on appraisals from the start of 2007 and if planning consent had been obtained six months earlier it could possibly have gone ahead.

David Porter, partner at Knight Frank, advising MPC, said: "Sadly, the purchase from Peel has been pulled due to the dramatically altered financial factors in today's market."

Peel owns developable land either side of the site and is now considering incorporating it into a larger design.

Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Not really surprised though. :(

Without actually being told that I think we already knew it anyway.

Peel owns developable land either side of the site and is now considering incorporating it into a larger design.

Peel are our best bet too see it developed in the future.

This does just confirm what we'd already suspected. In a way it's better that it's out in the open now, and that the site is therefore 'back on the market' - rather than just sitting around with an uncertain future.

The good news is that the site has planning permission for a decent sized tower, and as far as we know Peel is still in a healthy financial position. Now that Alex and the cruise liner facility are finished, and once the canal is complete this site is pnly going to increase in value (despite the downturn) and it will remain a high priority on developers lists.

I hold some hope that Peel will develop this site themselves, and that as a result we might see something more dramatic and impressive than 3a. Remember those Liverpool Waters models?.. It may take a bit longer, but if we get a better tower in such a prominent location as a result I think it'll be worth the wait.

The other good news is that given the current downturn, planners are much less likely to object to anyone who is prepared to actually build in the city (which can be a double edged sword, meaning lower quality stuff gets approved as well as higher quality stuff).

And to think, Brunswich tower would have been complete now, if those arrogant sods hadn't decided it didn't fit in their neat little business district plans... yeh, 'cause Brunswick is really thriving now... phew, dodged a bullet with that one! :bash:

I for one am happy. Although the design was ok (personally I felt it was watered down too much from the original). The site should be subject of a twin tower development imo. Roughly the same height as what is alreday approved.

From Place North West

Lead Asset 'close to hotel deal' at Princes Dock
8 October 2008, 13:11


Lead Asset Strategies claims to be close to announcing a winner in the bidding contest to choose a hotel operator for the New World Square corner site at Princes Dock, Liverpool.

Ian Pollitt, property surveyor at Peel Holdings, the majority landowner at Princes Dock, said: "It is a done deal with us [to acquire the site] and LAS has told us they will announce a hotel operator very shortly with a view to starting on site in January 2009 with a three year build."

LAS, owned by wealthy Asian entrepreneur Raj Basu, retained CBRE Hotels to conduct a search for a hotel operator of "at least four stars".

The £130m scheme was granted planning permission for a 224-bed hotel in December 2006. If developed, New World Square would include 16,900 sq ft of commercial space, 8,000 sq ft of offices, a 4,500 sq ft restaurant and 356 flats.

Basu and CBRE Hotels were unavailable for comment.

The 'New World Square' site is being cleared of the old IoM buildings.

Would be more excited if it was the original design, however more bulk for this area is a bonus :)

anybody know what the hoarding going up between car park and resi at princes dock is getting ready for...?

Didn't know peel own some of the land on Princes Dock

http://www.liverpoolwaters.co.uk/content/planningapplications.php

The yellow section on this page shows what plots they own, hopefully they'll develop it soon!

Interesting find EFC, I didn't know that either. It's a good sign though. Hopefully we'll see some development there soon. Seems like the most natural and least risky place to start. I'd like to see Princes Dock 'complete' before we start moving too far northwards.

Didn't know peel own some of the land on Princes Dock

http://www.liverpoolwaters.co.uk/content/planningapplications.php

The yellow section on this page shows what plots they own, hopefully they'll develop it soon!

They will if they can fill in that section of Princes Dock. They are land/property sharks.

From Place North West -

http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/assets/_files/cached/img/402x266.325/jun_10/pnw__1275561219_Building_12_PD.jpg

Space released at 12 Princes Dock

3 Jun 2010, 11:34

Following a reshuffle by the Charity Commission, more than 14,000 sq ft of office space has become available at Building 12 of Peel Land & Property's Princes Dock development in Liverpool city centre.

The Charity Commission reconfigured its space at the building, freeing up 14,200 sq ft on the top floor, overlooking the Royal Liver Building and River Mersey.

Chris Lloyd, associate director at DTZ, joint with CBRE, said: "Building 12 is generally recognised as one of Liverpool's finest modern developments and will no doubt appeal to existing city centre occupiers from all sectors.

Full article here - http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/archive/6355-space-released-at-12-princes-dock.html

:eek2:

A re-shuffle? They were either using swathes of space or have got rid of quite a few people!!

60 redundancies.

60 redundancies.

Bloody hell! Any details? How many jobs are going in London? According to the Smith Review, published as part of the last budget, the presumption now is to reduce jobs and floorspace in central and inner London, not in places like Liverpool.

Bloody hell! Any details? How many jobs are going in London? According to the Smith Review, published as part of the last budget, the presumption now is to reduce jobs and floorspace in central and inner London, not in places like Liverpool.

I do wonder whether the greater move towards regionalisation - in the bid to save money - will now be a priority. I suspect that the regions will take the brunt of the cost-cutting and the London-centric bias will continue.

Bloody hell! Any details? How many jobs are going in London? According to the Smith Review, published as part of the last budget, the presumption now is to reduce jobs and floorspace in central and inner London, not in places like Liverpool.

Any lost job is bad news, let alone 60 of them. That said, it is entirely possible that the bulk, or even the entirity, of the charity commission is based in Liverpool. Their website (http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/About_us/Contacting_us/post.aspx) lists only one postal address, and it's in Liverpool.

I do wonder whether the greater move towards regionalisation - in the bid to save money - will now be a priority. I suspect that the regions will take the brunt of the cost-cutting and the London-centric bias will continue.

Hmmmm, localism. It's certainly an interesting exercise in poilitical thinking.

It is always healthy to retain skepticism of government, especially if it is a Tory one. I do, however, think that some things the Tories have said of localism are good (though none spring to mind at the moment).

An article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/07/high-speed-rail-chilterns-localism) I read not too long ago in the grauniad brought the issue into focus with regards to high speed rail.

Any lost job is bad news, let alone 60 of them. That said, it is entirely possible that the bulk, or even the entirity, of the charity commission is based in Liverpool. Their website (http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/About_us/Contacting_us/post.aspx) lists only one postal address, and it's in Liverpool.

It's entirely possible but sadly not the case - some time ago I believe around 200 staff out of around 500 in total were based in Liverpool, but what the position is now I have no idea.

I do wonder whether the greater move towards regionalisation - in the bid to save money - will now be a priority. I suspect that the regions will take the brunt of the cost-cutting and the London-centric bias will continue.

That is why I was surprised at the Charity Commission news, because as far as I know policy is to chop in London first, but a lot of it has to do with leases, so perhaps they were up for lease renewal at Princes Dock, but not in London, so it was easier to make cuts here.

In the current environment Government cannot afford to move staff out of London, because, as the BBC have found with their forced move to Salford, it's horrendously expensive to pay-off staff who can't or won't move, to relocate those who will, take up new premises etc. The savings, if they exist, take a long time to appear - I've heard 10 years mentioned - if you are moving to a place that is cheaper than London.

So even if the Government wanted to move staff out of expensive London to inexpensive Liverpool it doesn't actually have the money to make such moves currently - if the messages we get about the public finances are correct.

But this makes it all the more vital that Greater Liverpool councis and MPs are vigilant and work with unions and others to identify any such cuts where Liverpool should not be bearing the brunt, that is when an organisation has the scope to reduce staffing in London and retain their Liverpool staffing levels. In theory at least, I think Charity Commission should be cutting only in London, not in Liverpool, in my opinion.

Manchester has to do the same with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, ensuring that those jobs stay in the North and that any cuts EHRC suffer are in the London office. Or perhaps the core cities could get together (as they are not competing on this one) to share intelligence.

This is really were as a city we want to grow and encourage proper private sector jobs, which are not effected by any type of budget cuts. Princes Dock, should be a highly sort after area for offices, hotels and high end apartments, it doesnt make sense why there are still empty plots

After seeing workmen busy on the ground floor of the multi-storey carpark I spoke to security and I was told.
1, A creche at the back
2, A branch of W H Smiths
3, Relocation of the coffee shop across the dock BUT it will double as a wine bar in the evenings.
He said within weeks, so we won't have long to see howmuch of this materialises.

Thanks for the info Liver. Interesting stuff.

There are a couple of other retail units at the bottom of Alexandra and City Lofts Tower. Would be good to see these developed too.

Princes Dock would make a great area for trendy bars and restaurants. It is similar to the Albert dock, only has potential to be really exclusive.

From the Daily Post -

Liverpool coffee shop Bean opens new premises on Princes Dock

THE latest outlet of Liverpool coffee shop Bean has opened on Princes Dock.

Situated in a corner unit of the multi-storey car park next to the Malmaison Hotel, the shop will provide its signature “latte art” as well as eat-in or take-away pasta, salads and pastries and up to 30 different sandwich varieties via a “make while you wait” service.

The shop, on the Peel- owned riverside development, is also fully licensed and will offer a range of premium wines and beers for Princes Dock residents and workers.

Article continues here - http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2011/05/20/liverpool-coffee-shop-bean-opens-new-premises-on-princes-dock-92534-28728831/

Peel adds to Princes Dock amenities

A new convenience store is set to open at Peel Group's Princes Dock development in Liverpool.

The new store, which will be called Princes Dock Newsagent & Convenience Store, will occupy 1,163 sq ft on the ground floor of the multi-storey car park, next to Bean Coffee.

The store will open on 26 March and is the latest addition to amenities at Princes Dock, which include bars, restaurants, a children's nursery, coffee shop/deli, gym and hotels.

The new store will be open from 7am to 7.30pm seven days a week. Liza Marco, property manager for Princes Dock, said: "It is a facility that we have been keen to bring to the development and we are sure that the occupiers, hotel guests, car park users and the many visitors to the dock will find it an excellent addition to an already great mix of amenities we have on offer."

The store owner, Mohamed Abdo, said: "Princes Dock is an excellent location for us to open a convenience store, the number of people based on site as well as the number of visitors to the development each year present us with an excellent opportunity to do business here."

More than 2,500 people work in Princes Dock with occupiers including Coutts Bank, PricewaterhouseCoopers and KPMG.

http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/archive/11248-peel-adds-to-princes-dock-amenities.html

Surprised so many people work around the dock, but the store will also benefit from the many apartments on the dock, just look forward to the day that the gaps are filled in.

Noticed some work happening adjacent to Alexandra Tower today. Is the anything immediate planned for this site? There seemed to be some piles of aggregate and possibly and pile drill?! Can't upload my photo at the moment.

Noticed some work happening adjacent to Alexandra Tower today. Is the anything immediate planned for this site? There seemed to be some piles of aggregate and possibly and pile drill?! Can't upload my photo at the moment.

If you mean where I think you do Martin its where theyre mixing concrete to transport it to the cruise liner terminal,was watching this yesterday. They seem to be laying that car park in concrete

If you mean where I think you do Martin its where theyre mixing concrete to transport it to the cruise liner terminal,was watching this yesterday. They seem to be laying that car park in concrete

I started to think after I looked at the photos again. Thanks