SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Baltic Gardens | Great George Street | Apartments/Commercial/Offices/Hotel/Linear Park | 18 Storeys | Proposed

342K views 1K replies 171 participants last post by  CGV11 
#1 ·
GGSD Development | Former New Chinatown | Great George Street | Apartments/Commercial Space/Linear Park

Nice :)

http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3106308&c=1

Urban Splash unveils Liverpool’s biggest ever residential scheme

Urban Splash has today released details of its plans to develop Liverpool’s largest ever residential scheme.

The 706-homes mixed-use development at Great George Street, next to the fourth largest cathedral in the world, will be known as Tribeca, it was announced.

What’s in a name

Urban Splash said the name has been derived by combining the words ‘triangles beneath cathedral’ – because the site is separated into three triangles.

It also shares its name with downtown New York neighbourhood Tribeca.

The scheme will also include 80,000 sq ft of office and retail space, a new hotel, two acres of public space, an acre of private gardens, shops, underground parking and a crèche.

Quartet of architects

Four architects were appointed on the scheme: Liverpool’s shedkm, Riches Hawley Mikhail and Alison Brooks Architects, both based in London, and Austrian architects Querkraft.

shedkm is masterplanning the scheme and has designed two apartment buildings for the scheme containing 230 apartments.

Riches Hawley Mikhail is designing 15 family homes at Tribeca while Alison Brooks is working on three tall commercial and residential buildings.

Querkraft is designing a range of buildings including office space, apartments, the hotel and the public realm.

Tribeca’s phased development is expected to take eight years with the first apartments up for sale next year. Work will start on site in Spring this year.
 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
Those are private gardens for residents. I'm happy with that, although a little jealous that it's not open to us. Hey ho, many of there people had too live in crap accomodation for ages in that area, unasble to afford to move. Fair play I say. I get some shiny new buildings to look at and a feeling that the city is really growing, they get a better home. Win win.
 
#4 ·
Urban Splash aren't too bad at converting warehouses or exisiting buildings that already have architectural merit and don't have to rely on architects to generate it.

I have a number of concerns about this one.

(1) The main block reminds me of the UCL (Depts of psychology/geography) and Institute of Education 'block' on Bedford Way. It looks more like a uni building than a residential one from that render and the lame referencing of exisiting architecture with the redbrick touch looks a bit desparate.

A private park in the city centre is not a good idea in the 21st century.

I'm assuming that the low builds on the left constitute the social housing. Social housing in this type of development should never be en bloc - it should be indistinguishable from other forms of housing. They look like hobbits' dwellings and people who aren't in social housing will sneeringly call them "holes for proles." Great for social cohesion.

I'm very much in favour of Gt George Street development but I'm not impressed by this. The best that I can say is that it's better than what is there now.
 
#5 ·
Looks good from the inside, I still worry about how it looks from the outside, and earlier render showed quite a disjointed looking streetscape... also does that park take up the whole space within the site. While it's great to see a developer who actually wants to create more open space, there are also opportunities for creating streets through the site which will have a vista onto the cathedral.... maybe with a view to these vistas being extended by a future replacement of the oval houses.

as for Tribeca... ugh, what horrendous marketing bs.

Do you think it will be a private park... if it is we could always stage a mass break-in lol.
 
#6 ·
I think this type of design would work better on Sefton Street - knock out a car showroom or two.

I liked SY's idea of creating a boulevard from the Dock Road to St James Road. In terms of making a city look beautiful and urban instead of just urban (and beautiful is best in the long run because there are so few beautiful cities around), this closes down that option.
 
#8 ·
Another hit for me

I think this looks boss. Urban splash sure do know how to knock out some gooduns!:) I dont think this will distract in any way from the cathedral because the pink facade is facing away (or am I looking at this wrong lol). We need more colour in Liverpool!! we aren't Capital of Bland are we?? And this just about achieves that.

Oh btw hi everyone!! Iv been looking at this forum for yrs but only just joined so I guess im new :)
 
#9 ·
Welcome Roo.

This is an exciting development and from the renders appears to be a vibrant one and holds some original concepts as far as Liverpool architecture is concerned. This is a difficult site to design for, giving the proximity of the Cathedral and Georgian Quarter but I think Urban Splash and associates have done a fine job.

Let's hope it is completed more quickly than the 8 years they estimate and that they or someone with a similar track record have the opportunity to tackle the inane dross directly in front of the Anglican.
 
#11 ·
I wonder if that brick thing in the middle of the park is referencing a Cheshire Lines ventilation shaft for the underground railway?

Although it needs to be a bit taller and taper off towards the top to be convincing. Could be faux-Roman though.

You never know.
 
#13 ·
its just the same as Manchester's castlefield that urban splash are responsible for, only Great George st is one step better.

Castlefield is successful and the quality has gradually increased, so they should have learnt some new tricks for Tribeca.

There is even a competition for an under 35 year old architect to design a new sales office, again, similar to what happened in manc with their marketing pod.
 
#15 ·
Knowing that this site wasn't going to remain the same for much longer I decided to pop down with my camera to get a record of how bad it's looked for the last 30 years or so... not a moment too soon, demolition has already begun!

It beggars belief that houses in such a prime location in the city have been allowed to be reduced to this state.





















This view is going to look very different soon!
 
#17 ·
Ah Tom, i had recently done the same, i have virtually the same shots you have, i also wanted photos of that gothic sandstone building on it's own, which i now have, as in, i took my own, not just nicked your photo above....:)

Nice work JUXTY, I got a very 'gothic' looking shot of that wedding shop.. had a bit of a play with it in photoshop and managed to make it look quite sinister... looks more like something out of a Hammer Horror film...! :runaway:

 
#18 · (Edited)
So what's what permission-wise here?



The above pic shows the three Allison Brookes residential buildings, which is the first phase of this whole project, and which we learned a few weeks ago, has planning permission.
There is confusion here though, as, in their original statement (on the "Great George St" thread) they say,

"...we have designed a point BUILDING.." singular. The report says that the permission covers, I think, 93 apartments.

What we don't know is whether, the other two smaller, sister buildings are included in that and have got permission, are waiting for permission or have been dropped from the application.
We also know that between 10-15 rehousing homes are included in the Allison proposal- do they also already have permission?


Today we get the news that a hotel part of the masterplan has recieved permssion also.
Is this the unspecified building at the top of St.James St, next to these sandstone appartments?

The block with the garden and the red strips, next to the sandstone blocks going up Grt. George St. is part of the Shed KM (?) part of the proposal and is waiting for permission- unless that's the hotel which has just got permission????

Following on from that, and bookending the Northern extremity is the Barbican-like Querkraft triangle, featuring the second, this time all-white, block on G.G.St.(just visible on the pic), and five square blocks just behind it, as posted on the G.G.St. thread.


So...the question is, exactly what's being built starting Spring, and, where's this hotel?
 
#20 · (Edited)


The above pic shows the three Allison Brookes residential buildings, which is the first phase of this whole project, and which we learned a few weeks ago, has planning permission.
There is confusion here though, as, in their original statement (on the "Great George St" thread) they say,

"...we have designed a point BUILDING.." singular. The report says that the permission covers, I think, 93 apartments.

What we don't know is whether, the other two smaller, sister buildings are included in that and have got permission, are waiting for permission or have been dropped from the application.
We also know that between 10-15 rehousing homes are included in the Allison proposal- do they also already have permission?


Today we get the news that a hotel part of the masterplan has recieved permssion also.
Is this the unspecified building at the top of St.James St, next to these sandstone appartments?

The block with the garden and the red strips, next to the sandstone blocks going up Grt. George St. is part of the Shed KM (?) part of the proposal and is waiting for permission- unless that's the hotel which has just got permission????

Following on from that, and bookending the Northern extremity is the Barbican-like Querkraft triangle, featuring the second, this time all-white, block on G.G.St.(just visible on the pic), and five square blocks just behind it, as posted on the G.G.St. thread.


So...the question is, exactly what's being built starting Spring, and, where's this hotel?
Ok so to partly answer myself here...the above Alison Brook buildings are actually 2 (they only look like 3) and they have the permission.

The hotel has permission and is part of the Querkraft contribution, but what building it is I don't know.

On the Alison Brook site is another block (pictured below) at the top of St.james St, and I still don't know what that is...still could be the hotel I suppose.
 
#24 ·
This is an interesting idea which does look initially impressive, but is all that traffic going straight through the cathedral....:lol:

Ok a joke, but there would be one hell of a road or t-junction or roundabout like "L'Arc des Triompfheses" needed at the top, as in the original which can just be seen in the picture.

 
#25 ·
Triangles Beneath Cathedral? Have to say, that's a cringeworthy attempt to be all "NYC". We've already got Central Village as well. What NYC neighbourhood are we going to shamelessly nick next? I know, SO of HOtel, we can build something by the new Beatles Hotel and label it SoHo!
 
#27 ·
Don't forget our lovely East Village :nuts: Most of these Manhattanisms are names for buildings or a development. This area will never be known as Tribeca, just as the bottom of Bold Street will never be known as Central Village. Developers aren't exactly brimming with originality, and this type of naff naming is just bling.
 
#29 ·
^^

Now maybe that was a lost opportunity, pity that semi and the new development are slightly in the way. I'm sure most of that will be demolished and redeveloped as part of the Baltic area, and the left hand side of the road could be shifted left to widen the road and open up the angled view to the cathedral.
 
#30 ·
If we were once again a rich city we could redesign central Liverpool (Leeds St - Parliament St and from the water to Grove St) to maximise the urban attractiveness of this area in much the same way Hausmann transformed central Paris.

We're dirt poor so I'd settle for this area being built up and glass and lego-type structures kept to a minimum.

Although dirt poor = endless glass (tinted), and generic lego. Let's just hope we can avoid retail shed inspired architecture breaking out towards the fringes of downtown.
 
#31 ·
The residents gardens look great and are very welcome. I think it's mistaken to call it a "private park". The actual green space is not huge given the number of dwellings - people in the suburbs think nothing of having 100ft x 40ft private gardens. The only problem I can imagine is kids from the social housing playing late in the gardens beneath the windows of private flat dwellers, but hey ho, mixed communities need to be about learning how to live together, not about sealing ourselves off from everyone else.

If the space were used for driveways / garrages etc., and not greened over, maybe people would not be so envious.

The centre desperately needs MORE and LARGER public parks, its a major issue for the regeneration and growth of the city, but that area is not badly off given the Cathedral gardens are a four minute walk away and are hardly over-crowded.

As for a grand boulevard at right angles to the cathedral, well the topograpy just doesn't allow it - Tom had a better idea of a boulevard that approaches at another angle through the vastly under-utilised bunaglow zone.
 
#33 ·
I did indeed Poli.. :)



In retrospect the main problem with this plan (low-rise housing estate aside) is that it cuts through a section of China town.

Anyway, I agree with Poli about the 'private garden', in this setting I think it's a great idea. Let's face it, we don't complain when single houses get 'private gardens' so why complain when we see lots of private gardens stuck together to be shared by the residents?

I think it's partly because we have a common perception that 'parks' (as opposed to gardens) should be public spaces, so the idea of a 'private park' seems horribly exclusive. But in this instance it's simply an effective use of space. Lots of families get a well maintained shared area to enjoy, which will encourage a sense of community and make much more efficient use of the space. We're so used to living in isolation in this country, many people not even knowing their neighbours, that we need more of this type of communal shared space between residents which is distinct from other 'public' parks.

When I was a kid living in toxteth we had a small patch of concrete in our 'back yard' so we used Princess Park as our 'garden'. But there simply aren't enough green open spaces near this area of town for families to make use of - so a safe, well maintained green patch outside your appartment is a great way to encourage families into the area and create a sense of community. I don't have a problem with 'gated communities' - as long as they are communities and not just collections of private houses.
 
#34 ·


And yes, traffic probably will be travelling on the right by the time this happens, though I've always been fond of the concept.

Anyway, one thing I would hope for with this development is retail and leisure facilities on the ground floors. It will be disgraceful if they don't have this. Having those meffy railings on the other side of Great George Street is bad enough.
 
#35 ·
One thin I would hope for with this development is retail and leisure facilities on the ground floors. It will be disgraceful if they don't have this.
I don't agree with you on that. This can be a successful residential area. Whilst the occasional corner shop is okay, we need to consider just what is going to happen with the RAPID hardware sites and how to somehow recover the disaster that is Renshaw Street. There are only so many shops to go round, and I believe it would be wrong and damaging to have any retail as part of this development. What this develoment can do is create a new resident population to support improved local shopping in Renshaw Street.
 
Top