Liverpool Waters

[EuxTex]

Originally Posted by Wallasey Dave

Playing on people's insecurities and (ridiculous in my opinion) notions that there is some manc conspiracy against the city.

Maybe not but, Manchester looks after Manchester and will, if permitted, garner for itself anything it can get, even to the detriment of other places in the region. Nothing wrong with that but, it's friends and neighbors would be well advised to take the advice of General Sun-Tzu when he said; "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"

[yoshef]

Originally Posted by LNGCats

What if Peel determine that Costco style buildings are most appropriate for all over this area and bring in a couple of hundred jobs over the next 40 years?

That is what they are putting a planning that allows for.

They'd want much larger footprints in the planning application to do that.

[design_man]

I think Peel have now compromised sufficiently for this to be a real winner for them and the city. A bigger concern I have is about phasing - Princes Dock has been a desolate wasteland for years and I think it's important that they finish particular parts of this scheme before they start others.

[Wallasey Dave]

Originally Posted by design_man

I think Peel have now compromised sufficiently for this to be a real winner for them and the city. A bigger concern I have is about phasing - Princes Dock has been a desolate wasteland for years and I think it's important that they finish particular parts of this scheme before they start others.

Compromise is good and will enable us to retain WHS. There's not enough ammunition for the Heritage brigade or reason now for it to go.

Compromise has arguably given us much more parkland than we might have previously expected.

My preference (and I stress this is just my want) would be for there to be no buildings taller than the Tobbacco house at central docks and further north (but have them be really interesting innovative design, Mann Island type quality), but for there to be mega-talls in Princes Dock and the King Edward area. That makes sense to me as an extension of the business district. Pushing skyscrapers further north does not make much sense to me. Expand the cluster already forming around the Beethams and Alexander towers.

Bare in mind that this is what English Heritage have said all along. The place for skyscrapers is within the business district and they have no real objection to them there.

I'd have those towers much taller though and the reason being that skyscrapers are a sign of a cities ambition. The taller you have these 'signature' building the more impressive and better.

Fewer....but taller, would be my preference.

As it happens they've compromised somewhat and the scheme is no longer a sea of uninterupted dildoes lined up against the river wall. I think the redesigns are better for it.

[HollyBlack]

Originally Posted by yoshef

Big picture! ....

I'm a bit puzzled about all these sailboats. I can certainly see how apartments overlooking sailboats have a certain charm.
But how will they get access to the river?
Wouldn't a launching ramp for trailered boats make more sense?

Or will there be a half-tide dock? And wouldn't a half-tide dock interfere with the canal longboats?

[yoshef]

I'd imagine the marina is just a bit of garnish for the picture, but there is an old river entrance just to the north, in the Sandon Half Tide dock, which could be brought back into use? http://binged.it/yjfKlX

[yoshef]

Here are a set of massing renders from the Heritage Impact Assessment documents, thought they might be of interest.

[Joe the red]

They're all a bit bland!!!!

I think there are elements of artistic licence at play here as well. I recently saw a render of a refurb of some industrial buildings in the very working class suburb of Pantin with a gondola on the Canal de l'Ourcq.

[aek-94]

Looking at the bottom picture of the Dock Road, you can see why people would want to remove the Dock Wall.

[joshwebb]

Any confirmed heights?

[Paul D]

Originally Posted by joshwebb

Any confirmed heights?

No it's way too early for that.

[joshwebb]

Ahh okay looks good

[HollyBlack]

Originally Posted by yoshef

I'd imagine the marina is just a bit of garnish for the picture, but there is an old river entrance just to the north, in the Sandon Half Tide dock, which could be brought back into use?

Ah, OK, as long as the dock used as a Half Tide dock is North of Salisbury dock then that should not interfere with the canal barges.

[Chris B]

As expected this is being recommended for approval (outline) subject to a legal agreement at next week's Planning Committee meeting.

The link to the Planning Manager's report is below - all 513 pages of it.

http://councillors.liverpool.gov.uk/....aspx?ID=91569

[Awayo]

Mr Colquhoun submitted an objection in a letter dated 23rd January 2012 in the
name of the Liverpool Preservation Trust. The Head of Planning accepts the right of
Mr Colquhoun to make representations but he considers that the objection should be
viewed as being from him as an individual, as there is no evidence that the LPT is a
legal trust or has any members other than him.

Oh Wayne...

[yoshef]

What is development parcel 4b?

Dublin Gate shall be provided at the commencement of any construction work with development Parcel 4b

that's pretty fast, Wayne's take...

Peel Holdings Submit Planning Application To Smash Open Historic Dock Wall.
Planning application no 12L/0428
Proposal To alter dock boundary wall. To enlarge existing opening of dock boundary wall at Princess Dock.
Create new opening at Junction of Dublin Street and Regent Road. Installation of new gate piers.

[buggedboy]

The frequency of Wayne's postings show he's getting a bit of a sweat on about next week's committee meeting. He's certainly rattled as it seems the decision is likely to go against him. Good stuff.

[Wallasey Dave]

Interestin developments in terms of the city now demanding that the scheme begin within 5 years.

Could it be that they don't believe Peel are that serious about actually seriously developing the land and are just looking to sell it on, plot by plot, once overall planning permission is in place?

[Dane_e]

Originally Posted by Wallasey Dave

Interestin developments in terms of the city now demanding that the scheme begin within 5 years.

Could it be that they don't believe Peel are that serious about actually seriously developing the land and are just looking to sell it on, plot by plot, once overall planning permission is in place?

Would it really matter if the scheme was sold plot by plot though? As long as it was delivered?

[Wallasey Dave]

Originally Posted by Dane_e

Would it really matter if the scheme was sold plot by plot though? As long as it was delivered?

Well that would depend on what the new land owners did with it.

It they sat on it for another decade/20 years doing bugger all, thats a big problem.