SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Buildings at Risk

20K views 107 replies 29 participants last post by  baias 
#1 · (Edited)
Buildings at Risk


The national register of Buildings at Risk is restricted to Grade 11* listings(although churches only require Grade 11) can be accessed through English Heritage's website. What I want to do here on a local basis is include all listed buildings that are under threat, plus, buildings that are of historical and or architectural interest that are vacant, in a state of disrepair etc, that aren't listed. I know there are people on the forum who take an interest in this and some who have been actively involved in protecting historic buildings in the city(Jane, in particular) Hopefully this list will highlight some buildings that are at risk and will bring them to the notice of a wider public. Anyone who has an in interest in the historic environment will be aware that we cannot rely on our local authorities and English Heritage to safeguard the future of some of these buildings.


Eldon Grove

Eldon Grove is three storey tenement block located in the Scotland Rd area. The building is Grade 11 listed but is in a delapidated state. In fact it is probably beyond any commercial restoration project and possibly even structurally beyond saving. If it can be rescued from the jaws of the bulldozer it will certainly be an expensive undertaking.

Eldon Grove in an historical context. It was built in 1911 and along with the nearby terraces of Summerseat and Bevington St, which were part of the original scheme,comprise the oldest surviving examples of municipal housing in the city. When built, this and about a score of similarly designed blocks erected between 1905 and 1912 and located in the Scotland Rd and Toxteth areas were palatial(indoor toilets) in comparison to the court housing that surrounded them. The majority of the courts weren't cleared for another 25 years after Eldon Grove was built.

Liverpool has a proud record in pioneering municpal housing in Britain. In the 1860's the corporation built St Martin's Cottages(also in the Scotland Rd area)this tenement block , was one of the earliest examples of municipal housing provision in the country. Of course it can be said the city having the worst overcrowding problem in England necessitated some form of local corporation intervention. Nevertheless, the city led the country in this respect. Eldon Grove and the other blocks of similar design built in the early years of the 20thc around the central core of the city,were a progressive,humane example of housing for the poor. These blocks couldn't match the very high design standards of say, Port Sunlight, but, of the blocks that remained when architectural historian Nikolaus Pevsner visited the city in 1967, all were individually commented on by him, and indeed, praised. Eldon Grove is a small but important part of Liverpool's history, so why has it been let get into this state?

In 2007, in his book 'Lost Cities of Britain' architectural historian, Gavin Stamp, singled Liverpool out for its neglect of its historic buildings , quote, " It's difficult not conclude that, in its relentless post-war decline Liverpool became consumed by a hatred of its past" In September of this year the city once again offended the dilettante sensiblities of Mr Stamp and was on the receiving end of another barbed attack from him.Ths time concerning the granting of planning permission to demolish a building in the city's historic Ropewalks area. Sniffily Stamp opined that such a thing wouldn't happen in a civilised city. I personally believe Mr Stamp has never seen the building in question. Although built in the 1770's it has been much altered and little remains of the original Georgian building. All things considered I think the decision to allow the application by the planning committee was the right one , the building is/ was expendable under the circumstances. Liverpool is one of Britain's poorest cities, this wouldn't have escaped the notice of even the likes of Mr Stamp (ensconced as he is in the world of Oxbridge academia)but Liverpool is an easy target for self-publicist Mr Stamp. I would find his 'concerns' about the plight of the city's Georgian heritage would have more crediblity if he had made overtures to English Heritage about the genuine Georgian buildings crumbling away on Duke St, in particular number 75, which isn't evn listed ! I emailed Mr Stamp about this, I'm still awaiting a reply some weeks later.

It's clear from Gavin Stamp's comments about the city's neglect(methinks he thinks it wilful ) of its historic environment he thinks there is an ideological dimension to it, Leftist apparently. There's absolutely nothing to supprt that theory whatsoever. The reality is more Duck Soup than Das Kapital, Groucho more than Karl, idiocy not ideology and there's no end in sight to it. :eek:hno:







 
See less See more
4
#4 ·
Heap's Mill

Heap's Mill is on the northern edge of the Baltic Triangle. It has been vacant for the past 5 or 6 years and is showing signs of deterioration. I spoke to someone in a senior position at the Urban Design and Heritage dept at LCC about the future of the building a few months ago,they simply weren't interested. This is because the building isn't listed and isn't in a conservation area.(not council policy just a mindset) :eek:hno:





 
#69 ·
The above was posted back in December so the following is all very predictable;http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1732763


A couple of months ago my sister attended a public debate at the Albert Dock about the future of the city's derelict historic buildings. It was organised by Hidden Liverpool, a lottery funded project, a member of whom was on a panel that included Jim Gill from Liverpool Vision,Joe Anderson and head of the council's Urban Design and Heritage Dept, Rob Burns.

During the debate, my sister, a resident of the Baltic Triangle, raised the issue of the decaying historic warehouses in the area, stressing if actions were taken as a matter of urgency we would lose some of these buildings to the bulldozer. She was met with silence from the panel. She pressed further, addressing Joe Anderson personally, asking why nothing had been done about the deteriorating condition of Heap's Mill, he responded by saying he would send someone out to look at the building, what transpired I don't know, probably nothing. More pertinently though, the person who should've answered, Rob Burns, remained silent, displaying the same apathy towards the future of Heaps Mill he had shown to me in telephone conversation we had about the building last year. :eek:hno:

I'm cautiously optimistic Heap's Mill can be saved. My sister and two other residents of the Baltic Triangle are starting a petition to save the building as well as exploring other measures to prevent demolition.

Heap's Mill is one of the last remaining large Victorian warehouse complexes in the city. Joseph Heap founded a rice mill on the present site in the 1780's and although nothing of that original building remains the present srtucture does have some architectual merit as well as historic interest, it is worthy of retention certainly.
 
#6 ·
^^ I orginally posted the above in June 2011 on the Georgian & Regency Liverpool thread. The derelict building is due to be demolished as part of a planned redevelopment of the site for apartments. The two houses on Stanhope St,although occupied, are vulnerable to demolition/redevelopment, simply because they aren't listed( why ?)and aren't in a conservation area,which means they are off the radar.
 
#10 ·
Baltic Triangle

Norfolk St

This area isn't part of the WHS and neither is it a conservation area so the remaining Victorian warehouses that aren't listed are vulnerable to demolition/redevelopment. The following two warehouses aren't listed.

Kitchen St
These two buildings are quite special. Any chance of getting them listed?
 
#9 · (Edited)
^^Yes, see post 6. I've spoken to someone at the council planning dept about this and unfortunately I was told they have been advised by the Urban Design and Heritage dept that the building isn't of any interest:eek:hno: What they meant to say is they should've had it listed years ago but now it's too far gone. .:eek:hno:
 
#13 ·
I don't believe these are beyond redemption at all. In fact I think it is imperative that they are preserved. They are just a small but important part of the fabric of the Scotland Rd/Vauxhall Rd area and deserve it. I have family who live in the slightly younger St Anne's court. Other family lived in them in 20's and 30's. I can remember them being a real mess yet they are now immaculate and quite desirable....... These could be even better, and prompt further medium to high density development locally.
 
#14 ·
^^
I didn't say they were beyond saving(I'm not qualified to say so) I said possibly. I also want them restored, that's why I featured them first. I take it that since you feel so strongly about this building and its present condition you will be contacting the relevant bodies as a matter of urgency. Look forward to your update. :cheers:
 
#15 ·
#17 ·
Another great thread G.V. You have nearly all the same photos as me. I wish I knew what could be done to help preserve these or had faith that any moans to the council would be taken on board. I rang once about the Everton Road/Plumpton st building and they were very off putting and didn't seem to know who owned it (I know the fella has appeared in the Echo recently and been told to do them up) then amazingly there was a fire at the property a fortnight later (though there has been a paint job) but it's £1m that's really required.
 
#18 ·
Another great thread G.V. You have nearly all the same photos as me. I wish I knew what could be done to help preserve these or had faith that any moans to the council would be taken on board. I rang once about the Everton Road/Plumpton st building and they were very off putting and didn't seem to know who owned it (I know the fella has appeared in the Echo recently and been told to do them up) then amazingly there was a fire at the property a fortnight later (though there has been a paint job) but it's £1m that's really required.
I remember,Keayman,you posted about it on the Georgian Liverpool thread. The response you received is typical,it's infuriating. I photographed the Regency houses on Everton Rd a couple of weeks ago, I'll post the pics later.:cheers:
 
#20 ·
The house on the corner of Everton Rd/Plumpton St you made enquiries to the council about and features on the flickr link. Yeah, part of the rear of the building has definitely been demolished, although I don't think it has happened recently, not in the last few years anyway. Grade 11







Immediately south of the house on Everton Rd/Plumpton St is this terrace. Grade 11














Shaw St, Everton Grade 11 Listed

Large Regency houses from about 1830. Fortunately the doorcases are still in very good condition and the rest of of the exterior looks restorable. However, the last planning application(permission granted )I remember seeing was for facade retention only. Over the last decade or so the council have granted planning permision for dozens of Regency houses in the city on a 'facade retention only' 'refurbishment/restoration' application. This type of application is often put in for planning permission by developers because it's the cheapest option to 'refurbish' a listed building. At one time I naively thought it was because the rest of the building was beyond saving, this is sometimes the case, but quite often it isn't.
I do recognise the council's dilemma here,the city is desperate for investment and also the buildings concerned have usually been lying vacant for years and are in a state of decay. A warnng though, and this is a realistic prospect, buildings that are currently listed and have been renovated with facade retention only, planning applications could well be de-listed in the future. A sort of heritage time-bomb.










75 Duke St

This merchant's house dates from the 1770's but isn't listed. I contacted the Urban Design/Heritage Dept at the council about this building around 10 months ago. I asked why it wasn't listed and that I was concerned a notice had been put up on the door saying the building was dangerous and to keep out. I also asked if they could get access to inspect the bulding for a possible future application for listed status. I was told they didn't know why is wasn't listed but they would make enquiries about the ownership and possible access, but not to worry they would keep an eye on it. When I phoned back a few days later they at least had looked into the matter but couldn't contact the owner to gain access. As far as I know nothing has happened since, meanwhile, the building continues to rot away with no obligation on the owner to maintain the building other than a duty of public safety.





 
#21 ·
Great work and valuable efforts GV. If people such as yourself did not do these things; take the trouble - the city council would just let everything slip by their notice.

I know everyone here seems to hate Wayne Colqhoun; but if it wasn't for him, too, then much would have been lost and denigrated.
 
#22 ·
There is no evidence whatsover that Wayne Colquoun's various activities have had any effect on conservation of the city's built heritage beyond generating negative copy in the London media about the entire city. You are bizarrely bigging up a marginal and always confused figure into someone who has had a large influence in how the city has evolved. Florence Gersten is sometimes wrongheaded but through her decades long diligence has certainly had an effect. You can add people like the late Quentin Hughes to this as well. If you do not comprehend why it is that Wayne Colquoun has been criticised by any half informed contributor on here for years (and back when there were many more people worth reading) then read again why it is that he has been criticised.
 
#24 ·
There is no evidence whatsover that Wayne Colquoun's various activities have had any effect on conservation of the city's built heritage beyond generating negative copy in the London media about the entire city. You are bizarrely bigging up a marginal and always confused figure into someone who has had a large influence in how the city has evolved. Florence Gersten is sometimes wrongheaded but through her decades long diligence has certainly had an effect. You can add people like the late Quentin Hughes to this as well. If you do not comprehend why it is that Wayne Colquoun has been criticised by any half informed contributor on here for years (and back when there were many more people worth reading) then read again why it is that he has been criticised.

Not entirely true, Wayne was instrumental in getting the recent listing upgrade for India Buildings. He has without doubt done some good conservation work over the years although I have to admit I'm in disagareement with him on lots of his objections to new builds. On balance though, I'd say he's asset not a liablity. Awayo, this is an area(conservation) that as far as I know you have contributed nothing to, at least in the nearly nine years I've been on this forum so unless you have something constructive to say, buzz off.:cheers:
 
#23 ·
Wayne has a lot of faults and is wrong on many occasions ....exhibit Liverpool Waters your honour. But to be fair he is also right on many occasions too....he kicked off about Mann Island and the loss of one of the finest views in England. On his blog he rightly points to the loss of many of our historic buildings that Liverpool city council has declared open season on just because they're not listed ...see some of the posts above. At least he is willing to speak out unfortunately the vast majority of people are apathetic and only kick up when the building has gone ....by the way I include myself in that I don't do enough so hats off to GV and others on here who do make it their business.
 
#26 ·
WRONG! Seventeen years ago and half cut in town with my buddies I found that the door of the then being renovated Lyceum building at the foot of Bold Street had been left swinging open in the wind. I think it was the another part of the building under renovation and nobody had sought to secure that part of the building that would become the Life Cafe. This could have left, I mused, the long derelict building vulnerable to people entering and pissing in its interior (rather than, erm, outside it like... :sly:), lighting fires inside and God knows what else. So I shut it.
 
#28 ·
A warnng though, and this is a realistic prospect, buildings that are currently listed and have been renovated with facade retention only, planning applications could well be de-listed in the future. A sort of heritage time-bomb.
Interesting point GV. However, wouldn't the listing be amended for the facade only, meaning any future demolitions would have to retain the old bit? It'd be like allowing the demolition of Croxteth Hall because of Victorian additions otherwise.
 
#29 ·
Interesting point GV. However, wouldn't the listing be amended for the facade only, meaning any future demolitions would have to retain the old bit? It'd be like allowing the demolition of Croxteth Hall because of the Victorian additions otherwise.
If it was one the higher grades , Grade 11* and Grade 1, yes but as we're talking about the lowest grade here, which is Grade 11, they just get de-listed. I'm pretty sure this has already happened to a pair of houses on Shaw St.
 
#30 ·
Nice one. Thanks for clearing that up. :cheers:

By the way, do you think Wayne would've been so vocal about the India Building's listing if he didn't have a vested interest? Whatever happened to the Philharmonic panels he discovered? Did they end up back in the hall?
 
#31 ·
I think you'll find that Wayne has often considered 'throwing in the towel' at India Buildings - and going elsewhere - but out of principle has stayed and fought his/our corner.

And yes, I think he is far too readily 'anti' anything new - but that does not take away from his many efforts of behalf of the city's heritage. At one point The Lyceum was under threat of demolition, for example.
 
#34 ·
I don't know anything about the panels - but I do know that he recently bought the Sean Rice sculpture that was, previously, in the courtyard of the Atlantic Thistle Hotel - which the owner had decided was incompatible with his new refit, and was selling off.

Rice also has a figure displayed in the Metropolitan Cathedral.

It is me who considers that he can be too automatically "anti anything new"; but that does not detract from his other more worthwhile battles, in my opinion. :)
 
#38 ·
I did say that Florence Gersten is frequently wrongheaded. Not as bad as Wayne Colquoun however. Who is? Liverpool probably could do with more and better heritage campaigners. An intellectually confused but arrogant and attention-seeking character is no help whatsoever and must be resented by those who care about heritage for the way he brings discredit on their concerns. As for Mann Island, Colquoun's beef didn't seem to be the view. Actually as someone on here once said, that was just about the only view that was worth preserving. Florence Gersten and others seem to wish to preserve every single view of everything from every single direction thus meaning that nothing would every be build again anywhere. :nuts:. Wayney was instead, incoherently as always, attacking the Mann Island buildings for being 'black slugs' (word of advice son, slugs are curved off and not boxy) and other illiterate jibes while doing nothing constructive to stop the development. He did however make sure that the whole city got bad publicity by nominating the development (as buildings good quality ones in the current style) for the Carbuncle Cup. That was a disgrace for a few reasons, not least actually really bad buildings being put up elsewhere in the country each year. The Carbuncle Cup appears to be a publicity wheeze of its magazine owner and relies entirely on what is nominated by 'readers' (I doubt Wayne reads AJ...). I assume that Wayne's success in getting Liverpool buildings nominated on two occasions (he tries every year) is evidence of how few nominations they actually receive each year. But we can guarantee that on a yearly basis Wayne Colquoun will be on hand to attempt to get Liverpool abused and attacked in the London media each year as he nominates often a fairly good building while crap is erected in the four corners of the land and doesn't get noticed.
 
#40 ·
Let me refresh your memory on the development of Mann Island. When ideas were put forward for the possible development of the site, it was agreed by Liverpool City Council and English Heritage that only a building that was the equal of the buildings it would sit alongside would be allowed. We then had an international competition with architects such as Richard Rogers putting forward designs. It transpired that Will Alsop's ' Cloud' would be the building that would 'grace' the site. About a year into the planning it became clear that EH and LCC has messed up badly, the project was scrapped. Some months later the company that would've built the Cloud(Neptune) threatened to sue LCC. Very shortly after LCC agreed a deal with Neptune to develop the site. Gone was the proviso that the site would only be developed with a building(s) of an international standard, Neptune could develop the site as they saw fit.

Wayne was primarily concerned with loss of the views from the south , but no doubt was angered as I was and probably thousands of others were at how the site had been handed over, it was an utter disgrace. That's the reality of Mann Island.

The Carbuncle Cup, I'm not as sensitive to this type of thing as you are but I will concede that I find his motives questionable on this one. Anyway, I've nothing more to say on this. :goodbye:
 
#39 ·
I'm sure that Wayne has done some good at some point somewhere. The problem I find with him is the tone he gives on his website. It is that of an angry crank who is outraged with the world and seems to think there is a big conspiracy against his wishes. If you don't believe me have a look at his website. I think that is why most people think he isn't very credible on the whole:

http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/
 
#42 ·
Then that's terrible. Where was WC and EH in this instance?

I knew I was right earlier when I said there was a huge chunk missing from the back including that curved window which must have given fantastic views over the city. I'd only photographed this again during the summer.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
#47 ·
Then that's terrible. Where was WC and EH in this instance?

I knew I was right earlier when I said there was a huge chunk missing from the back including that curved window which must have given fantastic views over the city. I'd only photographed this again during the summer.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Don't you mean where were the employees of the council who are paid to oversee the management of these buildings ?
 
#44 ·
Yeah, I knew it didn't look right, didn't notice practically half of the building was missing, I wonder how that happened!?

The fire a couple of weeks ago, apparently made it unsafe and there were warnings up around the building for a couple of weeks. I went past this morning and just seen a pile of rubble, which was much smaller when I returned this evening.

I'll get some pictures tomorrow, too dark to get anything good now.

But yes, the whole building has gone, all that is left at the minute is a pile of bricks from the facade and the lower courses of brick that go down Plumpton Street, as seen in the above images, although I imagine these will go over the next few days - ready to be replaced by some lovely rabbit hutch houses.
 
#54 ·
I have to say this really saddens me that this such a beautiful and unique building has been vandalised and completely fucked. This epitomises some fundamental issues/problems we have in Liverpool towards our history, heritage, built indentity and general attitude to how we see our city and what we care about.

Why not just finish the job and wipe out every last bit of charming, picturesque, historical and typically Liverpool architecture and just replace it will cheap non-geographical shite or just move to Manchester and give up.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top