Liverpool site with permission for 16-storey resi hits market

Originally planned for a 40 storey mixed use tower in a Tall building zone, but the Whacky Planning department voted against it, great advertisement for investors.

This should be a 40 storey plus tower, not this, have some vision please

The design is terrible. Looks like something harking back to the 80s. What are architects thinking. I hope it doesn’t get built.

2nd tier city architecture. A disaster.

The main issues relate to bad practices by developers who do not follow necessary guidelines for planning. This makes it difficult for planning department and makes other stake hodlers such as architects, surveyors look unprofessional when they are not. Its not about high rises its about quality accomodation. Liverpool despite the claims is one of the slowest growth in population sizes comparatively to other cities. Focus on quality, livability, economy, environmental strategies that work and the econmy will grow

Why not just settle for a 4 storey instead? God help anyone with a vision to break the status quo. Sigh

What on earth. Sad to see no provision 🙁

@John, that’s the old design…

Typical Liverpool planning keep it as low key as possible , it’s an insult to the city and it’s people, but come May they get voted back in because no one has the slightest idea of politics .

Fugly building, lacking imagination, and not a great addition to the city. Studio Apartments a.k.a. bedsits are not good for one’s mental health. 42 stories, with the bottom two floors dedicated to bikes, general storage lockers and a laundry service. Plus a concierge in reception. And let’s be honest more underground parking!

Wow. A floor scraper.

To those criticising the modern design, are you actually being serious or have you not noticed how modern design and materials have evolved over the years
You are not going get buildings made of granite or marble anymore it’s just not the current vernacular, so you need to get used to it.
The developers may have abandoned this because it’s just not financially attractive to throw up a 16 storey stump.

File under ‘will not be lamented’.

16 floors? Groundbreaking. Maybe put an observation deck on the top, you’ll be able to see Bootle on a clear day. If Liverpool Council’s planning department ever saw a skyscraper they’d get a nosebleed

I’ve seen worse , I’ve seen better. Meh just about describes it. As for the balcony guy turning up again, who cares? , developer will build what will sell as proven a million times before.

I agree with John, cheap 1980s design, embarrassing.

Well, just saying, the new design looks just like the old design!

when you think of the great municipal buildings of Liverpool and then you get this. It’s tragic. Liverpool deserves better.

I’m afraid this is the standard now up and down the country and has been for decades. Architects simply don’t have the training anymore and the materials standardised in the construction industry are to a cost not an aesthetic. Welcome to modernism or as it’s known by most people low rent urban dross with all of the enlightened and soul lifting impact a 5 year old with an Etch a sketch can muster. How utterly depressing.

What on Earth are Liverpool planning actually doing ? why are they scaling down developments . Please go and run a village.

@Mike, you say it’s tragic and Liverpool deserves better, but this area once had old sheds and dereliction, so in effect it is better. People on here lamenting great municipal buildings but that won’t be happening anymore, it’s the private sector who will be providing the buildings but we are throwing barriers up to deter them.

Not to single out this design, there are a million worse around Britain but since the point has been made on this article then yes there may be a happy medium between good development and ugly. but it seems British architects now can only do ugly. It’s everywhere. Nobody wants it except when it’s ‘better than that old car park that was there’ . It is universally derided and unfavourably compared to the beautiful old towns and buildings that people generally agree are wanted and loved. Yet here we are, the whole of the Uk, plastered in ugly shoddy horrors that architects will tell you with a straight face are what’s wanted now , and ‘no point in looking back’ .Architects are like politicians, they will tell you what they think you should like, fail to understand why they are derided and most of all are hopelessly equipped for a job that has such a significant and long term impact on the general public. A whole generation of buildings designed firmly under the banner of ‘well ..could be worse….’ Nobody expects Versailles or the hanging gardens of Babylon on every corner but the principles of beauty and design are well known and understood. It seems the ability to express them is not.

Wow beautiful

@Renzo, the irony is that British architects, like Foster and Roger’s, are globally respected, meanwhile Hadid Architects are UK based. As regards Liverpool we dismissed Alsop’s Cloud and lopped the apartment block on Liverppol One, so disrespectful.
It may be just that modern Britain is ugly, we can’t even do basic urban landscaping like the Europeans, our eating culture is mainly ugly as is our drinking culture, maybe it’s in our DNA.

Looks like an ugly building. You have to welcome development on land that isn’t currently anything special, but they should take a look at some of the other developments nearby on Pall Mall and Princes Dock. Doesn’t inspire this one.