SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 155 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
745 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Kings Waterfront - The Destination

Kings Waterfront is the single largest development site in Liverpool City Centre. A partnership of Liverpool Vision, English Partnerships, Northwest Regional Development Agency and Liverpool City Council is jointly promoting its development.



The aim is to create a visitor destination of international quality combining arena, conference and exhibition facilities - a centrepiece for Capital of Culture celebrations in 2008 - with a development of residential, hotel, office, retail, leisure, community and open space uses.





 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
maggie said:
The aim is to create a visitor destination of international quality combining arena, conference and exhibition facilities
That is their aim. It may happen, or not. But the cost wasn't worth it. Imagine all that at the Baltic Triangle opposite with its own rail station at the Wapping tunnel and a larger arena too. Now that would be fabulous indeed.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
Look at this artists impression. Look at all the buildings at the top of the picture. They do take the piss don't they - oh that is artistic licence.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,269 Posts
There are many pluses and minuses to all these 'solutions'

As I mentioned I think that of all the differnt dock systems the Kings was the most appropriate to partially fill, as they have done. My problem is that what is is going up there is mainly 'tat'. I hate those hotels... exactly the same as the friggin crowne plaza... shite. I would have liked the arena to be bigger, but they are building the one they are.

To build such a complex, even one of limited size would mean obliterating whole swathes of streetscape and historic buildings if they did indeed move it across to the Baltic. The baltic Triangle IS being redeveloped, but it is utilising, and helping to reanimate the traditional streetscape... one of its attractions. Martin mentioned this some days ago. The streetscape is as important as the former dock basins.

Those buildings at the top end of the images are pretty woeful, but the principle is sound.

The biggest problem in the area is the failure to address the Strand's current configuration as a massive urban clearway.

Enough water has been retained in the Kings Dock to provide the waterbased environment that is attractive in the docks, perhaps one of the slips could have been re-excavated down the middle of the site, but there is no reason for a 'no surrender' policy of any part of any basin... this is pointless.

Development on the site should be intensified, with no reference what so ever to Albert Dock (19th century warehouses) as they are not building warehouses... horses for courses?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
Tony Sebo said:
There are many pluses and minuses to all these 'solutions'

As I mentioned I think that of all the differnt dock systems the Kings was the most appropriate to partially fill, as they have done.
Quite the opposite. The Kings and Queens Docks were the only docks to have causeways emerge from the river wall. These formed the base of the sheds between the branch docks. See the picture below as some of the sheds are still there - two sheds per causeway. These could have buildings on them right on the quayside and at the end of the causeways that jut into the dock basins, distinctive buildings (maybe round towers to give panoramic restaurant views , ect) with restaurants, etc. Viewed from the land side these would look very attractive projecting into the basin water all lit up. So easy to do, yet another opportunity lost.



My problem is that what is is going up there is mainly 'tat'. I hate those hotels... exactly the same as the friggin crowne plaza... shite. I would have liked the arena to be bigger, but they are building the one they are.
Yes, tat is emerging. A larger arena would have to be opposite on the Baltic Triangle.

To build such a complex, even one of limited size would mean obliterating whole swathes of streetscape and historic buildings if they did indeed move it across to the Baltic. The baltic Triangle IS being redeveloped, but it is utilising, and helping to reanimate the traditional streetscape... one of its attractions. Martin mentioned this some days ago. The streetscape is as important as the former dock basins.
I think you mean the street pattern not the streetscapes, and most is being demolished if not already. There is enough space on the Baltic to accommodate a larger arena and the Wapping tunnel adds value by giving a dedicated rail station.

The biggest problem in the area is the failure to address the Strand's current configuration as a massive urban clearway.
It should largely be obliterated as it is now redundant. It only became a throughway after they built the connection through Jericho to Aigburth Vale. Prior to that it was not, just being an industrial service road for the docks. It acts as a barrier to the waterways.

Enough water has been retained in the Kings Dock to provide the waterbased environment that is attractive in the docks,
The Kings Dock is no longer – all of it has been filled in, along with one of the Queens branch docks and the Dukes Dock which were filled to put pollution machines on. People mistake Wapping Dock for Kings Dock.

perhaps one of the slips could have been re-excavated down the middle of the site, but there is no reason for a 'no surrender' policy of any part of any basin... this is pointless.
You mean no surrender back to us of a 1700s dock waterways that would add value.

Development on the site should be intensified, with no reference what so ever to Albert Dock (19th century warehouses) as they are not building warehouses... horses for courses?
The site, Kings Dock, is already intensely being built on with tat, on in-filled 1700s docks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,269 Posts
Thanks, that is exactly what I meant.. street pattern. I think it is vital to keep as close to the original layout as possible.. I dispise superblocks. Most of the streets in the Baltic are not being destroyed, quite the contrary, with new development we are getting interconnected streets back for the first time in many years/decades.


The pictures of the Kings Docks are of the redesigned 20th Century ones... the 1700's ones where destroyed then, we cannot reinstate 10700s' docks as they where eliminated?

As I say a 'no surrender' policy is not needed for the docks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
Tony Sebo said:
Thanks, that is exactly what I meant.. street pattern. I think it is vital to keep as close to the original layout as possible.. I dispise superblocks. Most of the streets in the Baltic are not being destroyed, quite the contrary, with new development we are getting interconnected streets back for the first time in many years/decades.
If the old buildings are not there I see no need to keep the street pattern. The only place there is to put parkland in the city centre is on the Baltic triangle and across Canning Place. Another opportunity lost.

The pictures of the Kings Docks are of the redesigned 20th Century ones... the 1700's ones where destroyed then, we cannot reinstate 10700s' docks as they where eliminated?
Look at the picture. The square expanse of water in front of the Wapping warehouse (now flats) is the Wapping Dock - which became a transit dock to move from Canning, Albert and Salthouse docks to Kings, Queens and Coburg. The small dock which the Dukes entrance passage connects to is Wapping Basin (the white ticky-tacky buildings are now here).

The branches that spur off the Wapping are the Kings Dock branch docks. The Kings Dock has no basin as the Queens does next to it (the newish yellow warehouses are on Queens basin), as Wapping provides that – essentially Wapping and Kings were merged into one water mass.

Originally Kings Dock was in front of Wapping Dock with a wall between the two. They redesigned the Kings and Queens Dock in the very late 1890s, which means the Kings dock was split into branches which opened up into Wapping Dock. Kings is still there in the picture it was not obliterated just reshaped, some of the original quays at the edges were used. Nevertheless the remodel is still over 100 years old – which is old enough for anyone.

The Kings and Queens untouched with buildings upon would have been highly attractive – far better than the current screw-up and to add insult to injury they built tat on the in-filled waterways too.
 

·
European Champion
Joined
·
442 Posts
Conferences bonanza for Kings Dock arenaMay 26 2006
By Jessica Shaughnessy Daily Post Staff

LIVERPOOL'S economy will receive a boost of tens of millions when professionals descend on the King's Dock Arena and Convention Centre in 2008.

Three of the country's leading groups have already booked conferences before the centre is even built, with 70 more in detailed talks with managers.

A number of music's biggest promoters, including Clear Channel, the world's largest, and SJM, are also in talks to add the venue to the touring schedule for their artists, finally allowing the city to compete with Birmingham's NEC and Manchester's MEN arena.

The news came as a huge 200-ton girder, which will form the spine of the arena, was winched into place at the Kings Dock yesterday.

Last night it was also announced that the arena will definitely host the Summer Pops in its opening year in 2008, along with Classical Spectacular and the European Amateur Boxing Championships.

Speaking about the demand for the Kings Dock's conference facilities, chief executive Bob Prattey said last night: "These are prestigious associations who only go to the best centres in the country.

"They bring with them hundreds of well-paid professionals, possibly accompanied by their spouses, who at the end of the day are going to spend, adding tens of millions of pounds to the local economy every year."

Once complete the Kings Waterfront will include a 9,180 seat arena, a 7,500 sq m exhibition facility and a 1,350-seat auditorium and two hotels.

It will also have 1,800 residential units, commercial leisure and retail space as well as car parking and public open space.

Kings Dock officials revealed that national conferences already booked for 2008 include the British Equine Veterinary Association, the British Association of Dermatologists, and the British Society of Interventional Radiology.

Mr Prattey said: "The fact these organisations have already signed on the dotted line, before there is even a building to look around is a fantastic vote of confidence.

"We are very excited by the interest that has been shown.

"Many of the organisations we are in talks with are considering three and five year deals."

He continued: "We are confident the arena will attract big names for concerts and we are already in talks with major promoters.

"This is fantastic for Merseysiders. They won't have to go up or down the M62, because all their favourite bands and acts will want to come here."

Jim Gill, chief executive of urban regeneration company, Liverpool Vision, said: "Today's construction milestone is a further step in our ambition to transform Kings Waterfront into a destination of international importance.

"It is also confirmation that we are on track for the arena and convention centre to be a centrepiece of Capital of Culture celebrations."

The arena and convention centre is expected to make an exciting addition to the Liverpool skyline.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
Red scouser said:
A number of music's biggest promoters, including Clear Channel, the world's largest, and SJM, are also in talks to add the venue to the touring schedule for their artists, finally allowing the city to compete with Birmingham's NEC and Manchester's MEN arena.
It is just too small to compete with these places in events. As a few have already seen, it is a compromise - compromises rarely work. The wrong size in the wrong place. We have been sold short. I am dissapointed, as the best bang-your-head-against-the-wall bands will not be coming to Liverpool. The Stones in front of 9,000? nah!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,318 Posts
As i've said elsewhere, I like the design of the building and I think as arenas go it looks state of the art and quite wonderful.

I also believe and hope that the Arena, public plaza and hotel/residential areas will increase trade in the surrounding areas, making the Albert buzzing again (it always feels quite dead during the days in comparison to the nightlife as almost every unit in the Albert is eitehr a resturant or bar).

I believe and hope that that whole waterside/dockside area will be a lovely place to take friends and girlfriend for a day or evening and that this investment will produce profits for the local businesses.

HOWEVER! lol!

Having looked into it as objectively as I can....and read everyone's thoughts....I still feel it's been built in the wrong place and have to agree with John.

Let me explain why.

I think the location ITSELF has directly limited it to a severely compromised project. I'm convinced if it was in a place with a bigger "footprint", they'd have built a 20,000+ seater.

Now, if you look at Everton's original 3 tier, 55,000 seater plans which were accepted in (I think) 2002 or 2003 (a year before WHS status) the arena was going to be much bigger....but at the same time much taller. The plans were for a stadium similar to the Ajax stadium where the tiers are quite steep and go up quite high, with the seats quite close to the pitch.

If you look at the pics......


(you might have to look very keenly on this tiny pic!)

....it would have completely dominated the Albert Dock and would tower over it. The pics show a stadium almost 2 and half times the height of the Albert Dock buildings. As for the view of the Wapping Dock 'warehouses'....well it would have been completely wiped out.


Well since then we've had WHS and EH breathing down every plan put forward. Now I have no direct evidence of this but i'm convinced WHS/EH/NIMBY brigade have insisted that anything built next to the Albert MUST not under any circumstances be taller than it and any support, residential, retail, hotel and other buildings MUST be on the same level and must blend in with the Albert.

Hence the new low builds (no other reason I can think of why the Kings Arena couldn't have been 2 or even 3 tiers high) and hence the ugly brown brick hotels and brown cladding on every other building to be "sympathetic" to the Albert and Wapping.

What we are now left with is a low level one tier Area that seats only 9,500 people

I was down there today and when we parked in the King's carpark today (sorry I don't own a camera or i'd have took some pics for you's) and I told my Girlfriend about the arena her exact words were "That's crap! How come everyone else gets bigger and better?"

Sorry about the negativity but it severely disapoints me and almost everyone i've spoken to about the arena is disapointed with the size of it.
 

·
Just something
Joined
·
8,885 Posts
I think it has been mentioned several times elsewhere that whilst the size of the Liverpool Arena isn`t vast it is most likely to be full to capacity on a very regular basis than trying to fill a 20,000 capacity arena only occasionally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
scouserdave said:
Why are there now two King Dock threads? Apologies if I've missed something which will explain.
i thought the new one was to talk about the new developments, whilst the old one was to talk about the horrors of filling in docks. but this topic has merged into both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,870 Posts
Louis1986 said:
i thought the new one was to talk about the new developments, whilst the old one was to talk about the horrors of filling in docks. but this topic has merged into both.
I thought you realised Louis that every single thread on this forum gives certain people the urge to go on about everything under the sun apart from the content of the threads title.

You may as well open a thread entitled 'Jam Butty Mines' and very soon we will be discussing Nuclear warfare or infilling of Docks etc... :)
 

·
Liverpool, England.
Joined
·
12,595 Posts
Evertonian said:
As i've said elsewhere, I like the design of the building and I think as arenas go it looks state of the art and quite wonderful.

HOWEVER! lol!

Having looked into it as objectively as I can....and read everyone's thoughts....I still feel it's been built in the wrong place.

Let me explain why.

I think the location ITSELF has directly limited it to a severely compromised project. I'm convinced if it was in a place with a bigger "footprint", they'd have built a 20,000+ seater.

Now, if you look at Everton's original 3 tier, 55,000 seater plans which were accepted in (I think) 2002 or 2003 (a year before WHS status) the arena was going to be much bigger....but at the same time much taller. The plans were for a stadium similar to the Ajax stadium where the tiers are quite steep and go up quite high, with the seats quite close to the pitch.

Sorry about the negativity but it severely disapoints me and almost everyone i've spoken to about the arena is disapointed with the size of it.
There was a lot of discussion about this on the other thread some months ago. I don't think that the size of the stadium is in any way related to the size of the footprint, which on Kings Dock is massive. It is possible that height restrictions may have affected it but I doubt it.

Don't forget that Everton were primarily building a football stadium which would have a much larger capacity than an arena.

The problem with an arena is that it needs to be filled at or near capacity on practically every night of the year to be economic. Building a 20,000 capacity structure might attract top name acts but the figures just don't add up.

As arenas go, the Manchester Evening News arena at 25,000 capacity is huge. However, it serves a far larger catchment area than the Liverpool Arena will and the mere fact that such a large arena exists only 35 miles from Kings Dock is bound to reduce the effective catchment.

I don't think there is much reason to be disappointed. 9,500 is over three times the capacity of the Summer Pops tent, which has attracted some big name acts. Only the biggest acts are going to be wary of playing Kings Dock but then, if ticket prices are higher, they might well think twice, as Elton John did when he played Kings Dock Summer Pops a few years ago.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,318 Posts
I think you make some good arguements mate actually, thinking about it. I think it probably will be successful in terms of being able to attract the medium to large bands and maybe every now and then a really big act.

I'm not arsed since all the bands I like are pretty underground and unless Cream/Chibuku/Circus do a big event there I doubt i'd go that often.

If Ric Flair comes to town though......




worth every million!
 
1 - 20 of 155 Posts
Top