Liverpool Waters - Heritage impact assessment by Future Liverpool

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment Assessment of Potential Effects on the Liverpool World Heritage Site November 2011

www.liverpoolwaters.com

CONTENTS

1.0

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY………………………………..……… 1

2.0

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………17

3.0

METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………….82

4.0

SITE HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION……………………………… 33

5.0

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT………………...77

6.0

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON EACH ATTRIBUTE OF OUV…………………………………….. 80

7.0

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS…………………………………………...365

8.0

MEASURES TO AVOID, TO REDUCE OR TO COMPENSATE FOR IMPACTS………………………………………………………………370

9.0

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS………………………………….380

BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………….. 381

PLANS………………………………………………………………….384

1.0

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

1.1

INTRODUCTION

1.1.1

An outline planning application was submitted in October 2010 by Peel Land and Property (Ports) Ltd for development involving the regeneration of a 60 hectare historic dockland site at Liverpool Waters. Following detailed consultation, the development proposals were substantially amended. This report provides an assessment of the potential impact of the revised development proposals on the Liverpool World Heritage Site (WHS).

1.1.2

The Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) has been carried out in strict accordance with the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Guidance on Heritage Impact

Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties (2011), a methodology which was prepared at the request of the World Heritage Committee. The report focuses solely on heritage issues, and does not take account of wider benefits, which are addressed in other application documents. 1.1.3

The assessment has been undertaken by Peter de Figueiredo, architect, architectural historian and historic environment consultant, with over 35 years experience of conservation and regeneration in the public and private sectors. As Historic Buildings Inspector for English Heritage, he was involved in securing the inscription of the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site, and served on the Liverpool World Heritage Site Steering Committee. His publications include books and articles on Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historic architecture, and he serves as a member of the NW Design Review Panel.

1.1.4

The assessment relies on the understanding of heritage significance set out in the Baseline Archaeological and Cultural Heritage report on the Liverpool Waters site and its setting. The Baseline report was subsequently developed in more detail in the Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Chapter of the Environmental Statement and in the preparation of an Archaeological Deposit Model for the site. These technical reports are included in the planning application submission.

1.1.5

World Heritage Sites are recognised under the World Heritage Convention to be of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) through inscription on the World Heritage List. The concept of OUV is encapsulated at the time of inscription in a Statement of OUV, which clearly defines its

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 1

international value. Applications for consent within a WHS or its Buffer Zone are assessed for their potential impact on OUV, as well as the aspects of integrity and authenticity which are also defined in the Statement of OUV. 1.2

SCOPE AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

1.2.1

The ICOMOS methodology used in this report states that assessments should provide the evidence on which decisions can be made in a clear, transparent and practicable way, and states that ‘the assessment process is in essence very simple: 1. What is the heritage at risk and why is it important – how does it contribute to OUV? 2. How will change or a development proposal impact on OUV? 3. How can these effects be avoided, reduced, rehabilitated or compensated?’

1.2.2

In order to reach such decisions, the potential impact of development on aspects of the historic environment that convey OUV has been assessed under the following six categories: 

Direct impacts on a schedule of heritage assets identified as reflecting OUV



Impact on key views of and from the Liverpool Waters site identified in pre-application discussions



Impact on views and setting of strategic landmark buildings within the WHS and buffer zone



Impact on townscape characteristics and setting of the six defined Character Areas that make up the WHS



Compliance with guidance in Liverpool City Council’s WHS Supplementary Planning Document (which sets out detailed policy and design guidance for protecting the OUV of the Liverpool WHS)

 1.2.3

Cumulative Impact Assessment on OUV

In the methodology used, heritage resources are evaluated in accordance with statutory designations, and assessed for their contribution to OUV. The assessment draws on the English Heritage Conservation Principles, 2008 for guidance on evaluation of significance, and the English Heritage guidance Seeing the History in the View, 2011 for views analysis.

1.2.4

The scale or severity of impacts are judged taking account of both direct and indirect effects and then weighted in accordance with the value ascribed to the heritage asset or view. In evaluating

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 2

the overall impact on OUV, careful consideration has been give to the balance of benefits and disbenefits, and in order to reach a balanced judgement consideration has also been given to who will benefit. 1.3

DESCRIPTION OF THE LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE

1.3.1

The Liverpool Waters development proposes regeneration of 60 hectares of mostly redundant former dockland to the north of the Pier Head and south of the operational docks. The site is bounded by the River Mersey to the west, and the dock boundary wall to the east. Virtually all the land was reclaimed from the river in order to create the docks, and over one third consists of open water spaces. Most of the docks were historically surrounded by single storey transit sheds of varying dates, all but one of which have been cleared. A number of docks were infilled in the mid to late 20th century, including the Clarence Dock, which was used for construction of a coalfired power station (demolished in the 1990s). Immediately to the west of that area, a canal acting as an extension of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal has recently been constructed.

1.3.2

As well as the area of obsolete docklands from West Waterloo Dock north to Bramley-Moore Dock which consists of wholly infilled docks, partially infilled docks, graving docks and water-filled docks, the site also includes Princes Dock, which has been partly developed since the late 1990s, and King Edward Industrial Estate, which consists of single storey industrial units from the late 20th century.

1.4

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE

1.4.1

40% of the Liverpool Waters site is within the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site, and makes up about 22% of the whole inscribed Site. It is of special value for the group of surviving historic docks, the dock boundary wall and the general dockland landscape. As well as the dock basins, within the site there are historic buildings and structures including the Victoria Clock Tower and the Dock Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office, as well as original dockyard surfaces incorporating capstans, bollards and rail tracks. Just outside the development site are important structures such as the Stanley Dock with its massive Tobacco Warehouse, the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, and the Waterloo Warehouse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 3

1.4.2

The Liverpool World Heritage Site was designated as “the supreme example of a commercial port

at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence”. Its outstanding universal value stems from three factors: 

Liverpool played a leading role in the development of dock construction, port management and international trading systems in the 18th and 19th centuries;



Buildings and structures of the port and the city are an exceptional representation of mercantile culture;



The city had a major influence on the worldwide movement of population and change in the 18th and 19th centuries through its involvement in the transatlantic slave trade, and as the leading port of mass European immigration to the New World.

1.4.3

The Liverpool WHS therefore represents the mercantile and maritime history of Liverpool. The Liverpool Waters site lies within one of six areas of distinct character which together comprise the WHS, each reflecting different patterns of historic growth.

1.5

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1.5.1

The Liverpool Waters site is in need of economic and environmental regeneration, and the development is intended to create a high quality mixed-use waterfront quarter in the city centre. This will allow for substantial growth of the city’s economy and residential numbers based on a 30 year development programme.

1.5.2

The purpose of the outline planning application is to allow Liverpool City Council to make a decision on the general principles of how the site can be developed acceptably. Such an application allows for agreement to be reached on the amount and nature of development that can take place on the site prior to preparing detailed proposals.

1.5.3

The master plan creates a number of distinct neighbourhoods each with its own character, related to the existing pattern of dock water spaces and land form, with its own grain, network of public spaces, and connecting pedestrian and vehicular routes. It will provide ease of movement and connections between Northshore, its hinterland and the city centre.

It is intended to

accommodate new and existing residents, attract national and international businesses and encourage a significant increase in the number of visitors to the city.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 4

1.5.4

The application sets parameters (measurable factors that together define the development in principle) for the height of buildings, floor areas and the amount of each proposed land use. At the south east corner of the site, it is proposed to reinforce the existing cluster of tall buildings in the commercial district, including the Shanghai Tower, which would occupy a site on the eastern side of Princes Dock, with a new public space linking the building across the dock to the waterfront. To the north of Princes Dock it is proposed to introduce a new cruise ship facility and a cultural venue. A secondary cluster of tall buildings is proposed in the area of the former Clarence Dock power station, set between a central public space and the existing canal link. The area north of the Clarence Graving Docks is proposed to be developed with medium rise blocks occupying the sites of former transit sheds around the perimeter of the large water spaces.

1.5.5

The application includes a programme for the repair, refurbishment and reuse of all the historic structures on the site in accordance with a conservation management plan. The movement strategy has been developed to take advantage of existing openings through the dock wall and proposes one new vehicular opening opposite Dublin Street, to the south of the Stanley Dock, and one pedestrian opening at Princes Dock to provide direct connectivity between the site of the Shanghai Tower and the existing commercial district.

1.6

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSMENT

1.6.1

Summary of Direct and Indirect Impacts on Heritage Assets Assessment of the revised proposals shows that the impact on the physical fabric and the setting

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 5

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

of heritage assets (scored on a 1:1 basis) will be as follows:

The assessment demonstrates overwhelming benefits for OUV in terms of impacts on fabric and setting of heritage assets. The application provides a commitment to a programme of conservation to all above-ground heritage assets, which will halt their continued decline and restore them to beneficial use. The impact on below-ground remains will be neutral, although the programme of archaeological evaluation/mitigation has the capacity to provide slight/moderate benefits in terms of the archaeological resource and understanding of the history of the docks. Any adverse impacts identified in the assessment will be due to changes in the setting of heritage assets arising from the proximity of new development. Such impacts, which are generally assessed as minor, are inevitable since the existing setting is artificially open and uncontained. The one case of moderate adverse impact â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to the West Waterloo Dock â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is as a result of partially building over the 1949 river entrance, and partial infilling the water body for the construction of the cruise liner terminal. Mitigation as proposed would reduce the impact to slight adverse. 1.6.2

Summary of Impacts on Key Views

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

Assessment of the revised proposals shows that the impact on key views will be as follows:

The assessment finds that adverse and beneficial impacts are evenly balanced. Where negative impacts have been identified, there are three principal causes: ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of tall buildings in the commercial district cluster on the silhouette of the Three Graces when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay. In

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 6

these views, the tall buildings appear behind the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. Foreground and skyline buildings have been added to this view in recent years but the Three Graces remain prominent by virtue of their colour, position and composition as a group. Liverpool Waters will add to the skyline views in line with Council guidance in the WHS SPD. 

The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wallasey Town Hall. This, however, is a consequence of the location of these warehouses several blocks back from the riverfront, and mitigation comes in the form of kinetic views from the Wirral promenade, where the Stanley Dock will be gradually revealed, and will be more effective as a conveyor of OUV, than the present largely featureless prospect.



The change in long views of the site from the Victoria Clock Tower and Regent Road as a result of development on the site of the Clarence Dock. The change in these views will be considerable, but largely as a result of the current artificial openness of the site. Public access to the site and the waterfront views is a crucial mitigating factor.

Beneficial impacts are identified in kinetic views from the Wirral Promenade, and significantly along the Canal Corridor, passing through the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, where the transformation from an abandoned dockland site to a place of activity and vibrancy will recall the past history of busy quayside activity that characterised the docks until their closure in the 20th century. Positive effects will also result in views from a number of locations due to the additional tall buildings in the central commercial district, which will enhance the city’s identity as a global maritime mercantile centre. 1.6.3

Summary of Impacts on Views and Settings of the Landmark Buildings of the World Heritage Site and Buffer Zone Assessment of the revised proposals shows that the impacts on views and settings of landmark buildings of the Liverpool WHS and Buffer Zone will be as follows:

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 7

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Slight adverse

Large adverse

Neutral

Slight beneficial

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

The majority of landmark buildings will remain unaffected by development. The three that are affected are the Stanley Dock complex, where the impact is assessed as moderate adverse, the Pier Head complex and the Waterloo warehouse, where impact will be slight adverse. 1.6.4

Summary of Impacts on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of Character Areas Assessment of the revised proposals shows that the impacts on the Townscape Characteristics

Slight adverse

Very large adverse

Neutral

Large adverse

Slight beneficial

Moderate adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

and Setting of Character Areas will be as follows:

Page 8

1.6.5

Summary of Compliance with Guidance in the Liverpool WHS SPD Assessment of the revised proposals shows that compliance with the guidance set out in the

non-compliance

significance

Low

High

Neutral

non-compliance

Low compliance

Medium significance

Medium compliance

non-compliance

Full compliance

significance

Liverpool World Heritage Site SPD is as follows:

The development complies with the SPD in almost all respects. The exceptions are the policies relating to Impacts on Views, and the policies relating to Building Heights in the WHS. The views analysis finds a potential for adverse impacts in three instances: 

The effect of tall buildings in the commercial district cluster on the silhouette of the Three Graces when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Bridge



The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wirral



The change in long views of the site from the Victoria Clock Tower and Regent Road as a result of development on the site of the Clarence Dock

These have already been commented upon (para 1.6.2). The single factor relating to Building Heights in the WHS is the effect on visibility of the Stanley Dock and Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wirral (also commented upon at para 1.6.2 above).

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 9

1.6.6

Summary of Cumulative Impact Assessment on Outstanding Universal Value

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Slight beneficial

Large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

Assessment of the revised proposals shows that the cumulative impact on OUV will be as follows:

The assessment of cumulative impacts takes into account intangible as well as tangible attributes of OUV, and also assesses the way in which the development might actively develop the criteria for which the WHS was inscribed. It focuses on how aspects of OUV are transmitted and understood. In this respect the gift of public access to the site which the development will bring offers the opportunity for the public to experience the heritage assets and attributes for the first time in their history. As stated in the introduction to this report, transmission of OUV relies not only on visual receptors, but also on an appreciation of the sense of place. The assessment of cumulative impacts, which is informed by intangible factors, demonstrates a strongly beneficial outcome. 1.7

Mitigation Measures

1.7.1

The ICOMOS guidance on HIA for Cultural World Heritage Properties states that every reasonable effort should be made to eliminate or minimise adverse impacts on significant places. Ultimately, however, it is suggested that it may be necessary to balance the public benefits of the proposed changes against the harm to the place, and that in the case of WH properties this balance is crucial.

1.7.2

Impact assessment is an iterative process, and since the planning application was submitted it has been possible to make a number of changes to the proposals that would avoid potentially

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 10

harmful consequences. Nonetheless, a small number of adverse effects have still been identified in the final assessment, for which mitigating measures are suggested. Where such measures are proposed, it is intended that they will be secured through appropriate planning conditions. 1.7.3

The potential adverse effects can be summarised as follows, together with mitigating factors: ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of tall buildings in the commercial district cluster on the silhouette of the Three Graces when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay. In these views, the tall buildings appear behind the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. Seen in 3D, however, the effect will be mitigated, whilst a kinetic treatment of views, which are not restricted to fixed points, will avoid harmful impact. In other views that include the Pier Head complex, for example from the Strand and from Woodside on the opposite side of the river, the additional tall buildings enhance OUV by strengthening the identity of the commercial centre.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wallasey Town Hall. This effect is an inevitable consequence of the location of these warehouses which are, unusually, several blocks back from the riverfront. If their all round visibility were to be maintained, it would sterilise much of the site, and unacceptably reduce the sense of enclosure to the central docks. Mitigation comes in the form of kinetic views from the Wirral promenade, where the Stanley Dock will be gradually revealed, and will be an effective as a conveyor of OUV.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Changes to the setting of heritage assets and visual connectivity across the site. The change in views across the site will be considerable, particularly in the central area of the site, where development is most concentrated. It must be understood, however, that the current openness of the site is wholly artificial, and alien to its authenticity as a working dockyard. Prior to the clearance of transit sheds, no connecting views between the docks and the city centre would have existed. The views modelled, where changes are most acute, are not public views, and public access to the site and the waterfront views is a crucial mitigating factor.

1.7.4

It is relevant to observe that all three of these changes are inevitable consequences of realising the development opportunities identified by the Council for the Liverpool Waters site in the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 11

policies and guidance set out in the Liverpool WHS Supplementary Planning Document. All three also fall to be considered in the context of the overwhelming balance of positive effects of the Liverpool waters proposals identified in this assessment. 1.7.5

Further measures that will reduce and compensate for the potential adverse impacts of proposed development on aspects of OUV as identified are numerous and these are listed below. 

Archaeology Whilst the assessment does not identify any potential harm to below ground archaeology, it is clear that without adequate safeguards, there could be significant risk of damage. As a result, mitigation measures have been clearly set out. The result of detailed archaeological evaluation at the reserved matters stages will greatly increase knowledge of the site and its public dissemination.



Conservation of Heritage Assets The future monitoring, maintenance and repair of all heritage assets in the ownership of the applicant will be a major benefit of the project, and will mitigate any adverse effects on the setting of individual heritage assets.



Interpretation The OUV will be actively transmitted through a WHS Interpretation Strategy on which the applicant is committed to work with the Council and other agencies at the reserved matters (detailed design) stages. In terms of presenting the outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site, public access to the Liverpool Waters site will bring huge benefits in terms of understanding the role of the docks in the history of the city and its global reach.



Riverside Promenade and Cycle/Pedestrian Routes connecting the City Centre with the Leeds and Liverpool Canal and the Northshore area The proposed promenade and cycle routes will open up more of the waterfront and create improved connections between the different character areas of the WHS.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 12

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Active Dockland Uses The dock water spaces will be reinstated and returned to active use, together with their lock gates where reasonably feasible, quayside artefacts and historic surfaces; historic buildings will be restored; and the dock boundary wall will be kept as a symbol of dock management and operation.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Urban Plan The proposed grain of the site reinforces the historic urban form to create a new grid of streets, squares, parks and promenades that will help to transmit understanding of the dock layout that is a key attribute of OUV. The historic gateways through the dock wall will be restored and used to enhance the legibility of the dockland estate.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Legibility Liverpool is a highly legible city, and legibility is acknowledged to be a critical conveyor of OUV. At present, however, the site is not capable of being easily understood because of the lack of public access, and nor can the layout and management of the docks be appreciated from distant viewpoints such as the Wirral. Following development, the current flatness of the site will be changed, and legibility will rely on new codes to transmit meaning about the landform, such as the horizontal strip of waterfront development, drawing on urban references from the Albert Dock. The visibility of the river wall and the entrances will continue to convey messages about the dockland beyond, and likewise the dock boundary wall will not be obscured. Loss of visibility of the warehouses from across the river is an adverse, yet inevitable, consequence of waterfront development, but mitigation is offered in the form of kinetic views. The relationship between the commercial centre and the docks will remain understandable, and once the concept of the secondary cluster populating the site of the former power station is grasped as part of the evolving commercial city, the contribution to legibility will be enhanced and not diminished. Legibility within and throughout the extent of the site will be enhanced by the creation of an urban grid that follows the form of the existing and infilled docks, which will lead to a better understanding of the original layout, and act as an aid to orientation in what is currently a confusing environment.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 13



High Density Development and Tall Buildings Tall buildings are included in the scheme to create a new international business destination that will attract investment from around the world. Research confirms that positive economic impacts can accrue from the development of tall buildings. Furthermore, central waterfront locations are a finite and scarce resource, and are highly valued as commercial locations in cities across the world. Therefore, given the difficulties faced by Liverpool in attracting commercial investment and jobs since the demise of the old docks, it is crucial to make the most efficient use of the land through high density development and tall buildings. By using this finite resource carefully, tall buildings also provide more space for creation of high quality public realm.

1.7.6

The scheme also offers mitigation in terms of intangible attributes identified as essential to understanding Liverpool’s genius loci, and which are relevant to the scale and ambition of the proposal: 

Vision and Determination: Liverpool’s economic success was built on a spirit of optimism and innovation, and being bold has been a tradition for the city, willing to test new ideas and pioneer new technology. Liverpool was a pioneer of tall buildings in the 19th and 20th centuries, influencing the use of cast iron for prefabricated construction in Chicago and New York, and adapting North American building technology in the construction of buildings such as the White Star Line offices, the Dock Offices, Tower Buildings and the Royal Liver Building. The further development of tall building technology is therefore part of Liverpool’s contribution to planning and an aspect of OUV. That underlying spirit remains, despite the massive difficulties of economic restructuring that have had to be faced in recent years, and is central to the Liverpool Waters project.



Commercial Astuteness: The development of the city was driven by astute commercial decisions. The process of making use of redundant docks for commercial expansion is similarly well-established. It was carried out first in 1828 with infilling the Old Dock for a new Custom House, then the city’s tallest building. The redevelopment of the George’s Dock from 1899 for the prestigious Pier Head offices involved the erection of the UK’s ‘first skyscraper’, the tallest commercial building in the country. More recently the partial infilling of Princes Dock as an extension of the commercial district is part of Liverpool’s history of economic growth. The Clarence Dock was used from 1929 as the site for the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 14

city’s major coal-fired power station, with three tall chimneys. Re-using the docks as statements of regeneration is therefore a tradition. Peel similarly has a significant track record in entrepreneurial success. 

Internationalism: The city has looked outwards to Ireland, to America and to the Far East and continues to do so. It has welcomed migration and is one of the country’s most cosmopolitan cities with a legacy of buildings that express cultural diversity. Peel’s current programme for securing inward investment from China, the Far East and other rising economies continues that spirit of internationalism.

1.7.7

In addition to the heritage benefits set out above, there are other benefits that should be considered in accordance with the ICOMOS methodology. These include the delivery of strategic planning

objectives;

physical

regeneration;

socio-economic

development;

environmental

enhancement; and new leisure and tourism resources. 1.8

Conclusions

1.8.1

Whilst it is difficult to weigh the positive and negative impacts identified in the HIA precisely, it is clear that the opportunities presented by the scheme for protecting, conserving and promoting the OUV of the WHS, its integrity and authenticity are very considerable. Amongst the opportunities and threats identified in the WHS Management Plan were inappropriate new development and preservation in ‘aspic’. These polarities often typify the popular debate about regeneration of historic areas, and Liverpool Waters is no exception.

1.8.2

On this immense site, however, preservation in aspic is not an option, for without substantial public funding, the cost of retaining, conserving and maintaining the heritage assets, including the water bodies, the sea wall and the dock boundary wall, can only be secured as an integral element of large scale development. The site is not only of outstanding value in heritage terms, but as a city centre waterfront location it is a finite resource in global terms. It is therefore vital that the opportunity is grasped for the benefit of the whole community.

1.8.3

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 15

adverse effects remain, these are almost wholly concerned with the setting of heritage assets and attributes of OUV, rather than physical (and therefore irreversible) damage. Seen in the long term, this is important, since the core values of WHSs are intended to be timeless. The density of development has been considerably reduced, heights of blocks have been lowered, and the layout has been amended to improve legibility and mitigate any dominance of new buildings. Underground structures have been removed or restructured to avoid any conflict with belowground remains. There is now a danger that further reductions in the extent of development could make the scheme unviable and threaten the wider benefits. 1.8.4

Whilst some limited harmful impacts remain, this assessment has demonstrated that these are greatly outweighed by the benefits offered, and that overall there is no risk to the inscription of the Liverpool World Heritage property.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 16

2.0

INTRODUCTION

2.1

THE PLANNING APPLICATION AND REVISED HISTORIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.1.1

An outline planning application was submitted in October 2010 by Peel Land and Property (Ports) Ltd for development involving the regeneration of a 60 hectare historic dockland site at Liverpool Waters. Following detailed public consultation with national and local statutory organisations and local stakeholders, the development proposals have been substantially amended. This report provides a detailed assessment of the potential impact of the revised development proposals on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the Liverpool World Heritage Site (WHS).

2.1.2

When originally submitted, the planning application was accompanied by a heritage impact assessment carried out in accordance with a methodology specified by Liverpool City Council (LCC), and drawn up in conjunction with English Heritage (EH). Since the application was submitted, the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) has published Guidance

on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties (2011), a document which was prepared at the request of the World Heritage Committee (WHC). The document sets out a methodology â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;to allow Heritage Impact Assessments (HIAs) to respond to the needs of World Heritage sites, through considering them as discrete entities and evaluating impact on the attributes of OUV in a systematic and coherent wayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.1 Accepting the international status of this new document, it was decided by the development team that the heritage impact assessment should be considered afresh. This report replaces the previous assessment and has been carried out in accordance with the ICOMOS methodology for heritage impact assessments affecting World Heritage Sites. 2.1.3

The assessment focuses solely on heritage issues, and does not take account of wider benefits, which are addressed in other planning application documents.

2.2

AUTHORSHIP

2.2.1

The assessment has been undertaken by Peter de Figueiredo, architect, architectural historian and historic environment consultant, with over 35 years experience of conservation and

ICOMOS, Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties (2011)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 17

regeneration in the public and private sectors. Brought up in Liverpool, the author carried out the first comprehensive survey of Liverpool warehouses in the late 1970s whilst working for the City Council. He was later Head of Conservation and Design for Chester City Council. As Historic Buildings Inspector for English Heritage, he was involved in securing the inscription of the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site, and served on the Liverpool World Heritage Site Steering Committee. He is co-author of books on Liverpool’s historic places of worship and on the River Mersey, and has published articles on St George’s Hall and the Pier Head Buildings.2 He serves as a member of the NW Design Review Panel, and represents English Heritage on the Historic Churches Committee for the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Lancaster, Liverpool, Salford and Shrewsbury. 2.2.2

In conjunction with Caron Newman, Egerton Lea Consultancy, who also has an English Heritage background, the author was responsible for the preparation of the Baseline Archaeological and Cultural Heritage report on the Liverpool Waters site, which is included as an appendix to this HIA. The Baseline report was subsequently developed in more detail by Oxford Archaeology North in the Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Chapter of the Environmental Statement, and by CgMs Heritage Consultancy in the preparation of an Archaeological Deposit Model for the site, which are also included as application documents.

2.3

INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT AFFECTING A WHS

2.3.1

The World Heritage Convention for the protection of the World’s Cultural and Natural Heritage recognises properties of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), which are part of the ‘world heritage of mankind as a whole’, and deserve ‘protection and transmission to future generations’. Such properties are recognised through inscription on the World Heritage List by the World Heritage Committee.

2.3.2

The concept of OUV underpins the whole World Heritage Convention and activities connected with properties inscribed on the List. OUV is encapsulated at the time of inscription in a Statement of OUV, which clearly defines its international value.

Sarah Brown and Peter de Figueiredo, Religion and Place: Liverpool’s Historic Places of Worship, 2008; Ian Wray (ed), Mersey, the river that changed the world, 2008; Frank Salmon and Peter de Figueiredo, The South Front of St George’s Hall, Liverpool, Architectural History, vol. 43: 2000; Peter de Figueiredo, Symbols of Empire: the buildings of the Liverpool waterfront, Architectural History, vol. 46: 2003. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 18

2.3.3

The World Heritage Convention is ratified by State Parties, which agree to conserve properties that are inscribed on the List and are seen to be of OUV. This requires that OUV must be sustained over time through the protection of attributes that convey OUV. Not everything within a World Heritage Sites (WHS) and its Buffer Zone contributes to OUV, but those assets and attributes that do must be appropriately protected.

2.3.4

As stated in the ICOMOS Guidance, applications for consent within a WHS or its Buffer Zone are assessed for their potential impact on OUV, as well as the aspects of integrity and authenticity which are defined in the Statement of OUV. The level of detail required should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage attributes affected, and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal. Whilst the process is similar to conventional EIA, the difference in the case of World Heritage Sites is that it needs to respond to the overall ensemble of attributes that make up the expression of the Site’s OUV. Thus the assessment must consider the impact of any proposed development or change on those attributes both individually and collectively, rather than on a standard range of receptors as is the case for example in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA).

2.4

CHANGING ATTITUDES TO DEVELOPMENT IN HISTORIC URBAN WHS

2.4.1

In recent years there has been a shift in perceptions relating to socio-economic and environmental values when considering the nature of OUV in urban World Heritage Sites. This has led to a greater appreciation of intangible as well as tangible cultural values, and seen a progressive shift away from protecting monuments and groups of historic buildings as isolated objects to a broader understanding of historic cities as places of habitation, where cultural objects are seen as elements of a wider human context that is constantly changing.

2.4.2

This is demonstrated most clearly by considering the nature of ‘urban landscapes’. Landscape as a concept has its roots in artistic representation and has until recently been seen essentially in visual terms. Hence in historic cities, landscape identity is traditionally explored on the basis of panoramas and views from agreed positions. In Liverpool’s case, this tradition is illustrated by 18th and 19th century views of the city as seen from the river, continued by means of photography into the 20th and 21st centuries.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 19

2.4.3

Presentations made to the UNESCO St Petersburg and Olinda World Heritage Conferences in 2007 introduced other ways of understanding landscape that depend not only on observation, but also on experience. This can best be characterised by the notion of ‘spirit of place’, which embraces tangible and intangible cultural heritage aspects, together with related natural elements, as expressed in the definition in the UNESCO 2008 Operational Guidelines ‘the combined works of nature and man’3. This requires an understanding of the multi-layered development of the city’s urban plan, addressing its physical form, land and building utilisation, and patterns of human activity from a historical point of view. An over-reliance on visual analysis from single points at a set moment in time creates a danger that the wider understanding of OUV will be misinterpreted.

2.4.4

Furthermore, for WHS designations such as Liverpool that extend to heterogeneous urban areas within a historic city, ‘spirit of place’ depends on multi-dimensional factors that extend beyond cultural to include socio-economic and environmental factors.

2.4.5

Seen in this wider context, where significance cannot be so readily objectified, there will inevitably be differing interpretations of heritage values. The question of authenticity, for example can be problematic4. Does Liverpool’s tradition of architectural and technological innovation in the period to which the criteria for WHS inscription relate leave a legacy warranting strict preservation, or does it legitimise future bold innovation? Does the outward-looking attitude in the early 20th century that produced buildings such as the Royal Liver Building, Martin’s Bank and the Cunard Building and which is part of the city’s maritime mercantile culture give credence to a continuing spirit of internationalism in architecture as well as a respect for protecting local distinctiveness?

2.4.6

The need for urban areas to evolve and change as part of a process of urban management is recognised in the Nara Document on Authenticity, 19945, and in the Vienna Memorandum, 20056. In both these documents there is an acceptance that authenticity cannot just rest on the integrity of individual buildings and monuments, whilst subsequent work within UNESCO has stressed the need to think of cities not as monuments, but as places where people live, work and interact over

UNESCO Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, 2008 J Pendlebury, M Short, A While, Urban World Heritage Sites and the Problem of Authenticity, International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, vol. 26, December, 2009 5 ICOMOS The Nara Document on Authenticity, 1994 6 UNESCO Vienna Memorandum on ‘World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture – Managing the Historic Urban Landscape, 2005 Liverpool Waters 4

Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 20

time and space. Thus visual analysis must be supplemented by analysis of urban morphology, genius loci and other intangible values7. 2.4.7

In Liverpool, the major challenge is to sustain the authenticity and integrity of the WHS within a context of constant urban transformation and change. Since the extensive Liverpool Waters site is made up of diverse elements of urban landscape, with differing levels of significance, where a continuous process of evolution has occurred over time, the totality, which is the object of conservation, requires judgments about ‘spirit of place’ as a living identity. This ‘spirit of place’ must encompass the past, present and future, and in the context of regeneration must include a fundamental acceptance of the need for change.

2.4.8

The process of preparing the planning application and its context in relation to World Heritage issues has been carried out in close collaboration with Liverpool City Council and English Heritage. More particularly, the scheme has been drawn up in the light of the Council’s detailed guidance as set out in the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document (October 2009).

ICOMOS Quebec Declaration on the Preservation of the Spirit of Place, 2008

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 21

3.0

METHODOLOGY

3.1

DATA SOURCES

3.1.1

The assessment has been prepared on the basis of policies and guidance set out in the following international, national and local planning documents: International 

UNESCO Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention 2008



Vienna Memorandum of the World Heritage Convention 2005



Burra Charter (Australia ICOMOS) 1999



Xian Declaration on the Conservation and Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas (ICOMOS) 2005



Nara Document on Authenticity (ICOMOS) 1994

National Planning Policies are set out in the following documents: 

PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development



PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment



PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment : Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide



Circular 07/2009: The Protection of World Heritage Sites



The Protection and Management of World Heritage Sites in England (English Heritage) 2009



Conservation Principles (English Heritage) 2008



Tall Buildings Guidance (English Heritage/CABE) 2007



Seeing the History in the View: a method for assessing heritage significance within views (English Heritage) 2011



The Setting of Heritage Assets (English Heritage) consultation document 2010

The detailed Development Plan Policies and Guidance are set out by Liverpool City Council in the following documents: 

Liverpool City Council: Strategic Regeneration Framework 2001



Liverpool City Council: Unitary Development Plan 2002

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 22

3.1.2



Liverpool City Council: Liverpool WHS Supplementary Planning Document 2009



Liverpool City Council: Draft LDF Core Strategy 2009



Liverpool City Council: Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City Management Plan 2003

The Liverpool Waters Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Baseline Study (July 2009), produced by Peter de Figueiredo, Historic Buildings Consultant, and Caron Newman of Egerton Lea Consultancy Ltd, Archaeological Consultants, has been used to identify the attributes of OUV that may be affected by the proposed development. This has been supplemented by additional information collected by Oxford Archaeology North in connection with the Environmental Statement, and by CgMs Heritage Consultancy, which has carried out map regression and further desk top archaeological evaluation of the site and its surroundings since the planning application was submitted in 2010. This extensive work is described in Chapter 3 of the document.

3.1.3

The principal sources of information consulted in the baseline preparation and the OUV impact assessment were manuscript and published maps, original construction drawings and archives of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, aerial photographs, and other selected documents, along with published and unpublished secondary sources. The Merseyside Historic Environment Record has been consulted, together with the Merseyside Characterisation Project, and information gathered from the National Monument Record, listed building records, and archive collections at the Merseyside Maritime Museum and the Liverpool Record Office. The Liverpool World Heritage

Site Nomination Document (2003 Liverpool City Council) and the Liverpool World Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document (2009 Liverpool City Council and Atkins Heritage), together with the supporting Evidential Report have informed the process of assessment and evaluation of OUV. Attention has also been given to the Assessment of Heritage Merit and Heritage Need (2005, Architectural Heritage Partnership). 3.1.4

Detailed topographical and condition surveys have been carried out by Bingham Davis, consulting engineers, relating to all listed structures within the site, including the river wall, the dock walls, entrances and passages, historic buildings and the dock boundary wall. In the topographical surveys, the accurate positions of all quayside artefacts such as capstans, bollards, mooring posts, as well as surviving lock gates and recesses for swing bridges have been recorded. An additional survey has been undertaken by Bingham Davis to determine the location, extent and condition of all historic surfacing throughout the site, including setts, cobbles, stone pavings and

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 23

rail tracks. This information has been used in the assessment of physical impacts on heritage assets both above and below ground. 3.1.5

Detailed walkovers of the site were made by the author both at the baseline stage and during the impact assessment process.

3.1.6

An Inventory containing GIS-based map regression, archaeological evaluation, survey plans, photographs and other documents has been compiled for submission with the amended planning application documents

3.2

IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

3.2.1

The methodology adopted is the ICOMOS Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural

World Heritage Properties. The ICOMOS guidance document requires that the HIA report should provide the evidence on which decisions can be made in a clear, transparent and practicable way, and sets out a well-structured methodology for evaluating impact on the attributes of OUV. As stated in the guidance, this is different in emphasis from the EIA process, which normally disaggregates all the possible cultural heritage attributes and assesses impact on them separately, through discrete receptors such as protected buildings, archaeological sites, and specified viewpoints with their view cones, without applying the lens of OUV to the overall ensemble of attributes. For this reason, the WHC commissioned from ICOMOS a methodology that is more directly linked to the expression of the site’s OUV. 3.2.2

ICOMOS states that ‘the assessment process is in essence very simple: o

What is the heritage at risk and why is it important – how does it contribute to OUV?

3.2.3

How will change or a development proposal impact on OUV?

How can these effects be avoided, reduced, rehabilitated or compensated?’

This process, which is expanded in Appendices 1-4 of the ICOMOS guidance document, has been followed in this assessment, and comprises: o

Establishment of study area

Establishment of scope of work

Collection of data

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 24

Collation of data

Characterisation of heritage resource, focussing on identifying attributes that convey OUV

Assessment of direct and indirect impacts

Identification of mitigation through avoidance, reduction, rehabilitation or compensation

Draft report

Consultation

Moderation of assessment results and mitigation

Final reporting and illustration to inform decisions

3.3

SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT

3.3.1

The scope of the initial HIA was specified by LCC following consultation with EH, using a methodology that was devised specifically for the Liverpool WHS and the development proposal. In accordance with the brief, separate assessments were undertaken independently by Peter de Figueiredo as commissioned by the planning applicant, and by John Hinchlifffe, the World Heritage Officer for Liverpool City Council. In subsequent pre-application consultations with EH, two specific points were raised by EH on the draft assessments as carried out – the evaluation scale used in the scoring system and the relative importance of different matters in coming to an overall conclusion. Both these points have been addressed in this revised assessment following the ICOMOS model, and are reflected in the Summary Matrices included within the document.

3.3.2

The attributes of OUV which are assessed in terms of impact of development are listed in Section 3 of this report.

3.3.3

The potential impact of development on aspects of the historic environment that convey OUV is assessed under the following six categories: 

Direct impacts on a schedule of heritage assets that have been identified as reflecting OUV (section 5.1)



Impact on Key Views of and from the Liverpool Waters site identified in pre-application discussions (section 5.2)



Impact on Views and Setting of strategic Landmark Buildings within the WHS and Buffer Zone (section 5.3)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 25



Impact on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of the six defined Character Areas that make up the WHS (section 5.4)



Compliance with Guidance in WHS SPD (section 5.5)



Cumulative Impact Assessment on OUV (section 5.6)

3.4

EVALUATION OF HERITAGE RESOURCES

3.4.1

The evaluation method used is that set out in Appendix 3a of the ICOMOS guidance. In this system, the value of heritage resources is assessed in relation to statutory designations, international, national and local, but linked clearly and objectively to the components identified in the Statement of OUV, integrity and authenticity. Where necessary, qualitative assessments have been made using professional judgement to determine the importance of the resource. The values of the assets and attributes are defined using the following graded scale, in accordance with the table below: o

Very High

High

Medium

Low

Negligible

Unknown

Level of Significance

Heritage Attributes

Very high

Sites, structures or landscapes of acknowledged international importance inscribed as WHS Assets that contribute significantly to acknowledged international research objectives Urban

landscapes

recognised

international

importance Associations

with

particular

innovations

developments of global significance Associations with individuals of global importance High

Scheduled monuments and undesignated assets of such importance to be scheduled Grade I and II* listed buildings, and Grade II

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 26

buildings with exceptional qualities Conservation

Areas

containing

very

important

clear

national

buildings Undesignated

structures

importance Urban landscapes of exceptional importance Associations

with

particular

innovations

developments of national significance Associations with individuals of national importance Medium

Designated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional research objectives Grade II listed buildings and undesignated buildings that

have

exceptional

qualities

historical

associations Conservation Areas that contain buildings that contribute significantly to its historic character Historic townscapes with important integrity in their buildings or built settings Associations

with

particular

innovations

developments of regional or local significance Associations with individuals of regional importance Low

Designated

undesignated

assets

local

importance Assets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations Assets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local research objectives Locally listed buildings Assets of modest quality in their fabric or historical associations Historic townscapes with limited integrity in their buildings or built settings Associations with individuals of local importance Poor survival of physical areas in which activities Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 27

occur or are associated Negligible

Assets with little or no surviving archaeological interest Buildings or urban landscapes of no architectural or historical merit and buildings of an intrusive character

3.4.2

The report includes comprehensive text descriptions of heritage attributes, both individual and groups, setting out their condition, importance, inter-relationships and sensitivity, and also assessing their capacity for change. Whilst the emphasis of the assessment is on the components that contribute to OUV, all heritage elements both within and adjoining the Liverpool Waters site are evaluated, and all are included in the Baseline Archaeology and Cultural Heritage report which includes additional data.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 28

3.5

ASSESSMENT OF SCALE OF SPECIFIC IMPACT

3.5.1

The scale/severity of impacts (adverse or beneficial) are judged taking account of their direct and indirect effects, without regard to the value of the asset as follows:

3.5.2

No impact

Negligible impact

Minor impact

Moderate impact

Major impact

The significance of the effect of change or impact on an attribute is a function of the importance of the attribute and the scale of impact, thus reflecting the weighting of significance in the assessment of impact. As impacts can be adverse or beneficial, there is a nine-point scale with â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;neutralâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as its centre point:

3.5.3

Very large beneficial

large beneficial

moderate beneficial

slight beneficial

Neutral

slight adverse

moderate adverse

large adverse

very large adverse

The scale and severity of change or impact (either adverse or beneficial) is identified by considering the direct and indirect effects against the value of the heritage asset as set out in the table below:

Value

Scale and Severity of Change/Impact

Heritage Asset No Change

Negligible

Minor Change

Change Very High

Neutral

Slight

Major Change

Change Moderate/Large

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Moderate

Page 29

Large/Very

Very Large

Large High

Neutral

Slight

Moderate/Slight

Moderate/Large

Large/Very Large

Medium

Neutral

Neutral/Slight

Slight

Moderate

Moderate/Large

Low

Neutral

Neutral/Slight

Slight

Slight/Moderate

Negligible

Neutral

Neutral/Slight

Slight

3.5.4

Impacts also take into account the baseline statements on integrity and authenticity, and the relationship between attributes of OUV, integrity and authenticity.

3.6

EVALUATION OF OVERALL IMPACT

3.6.1

In evaluating the overall impact on OUV, careful consideration has been given to the balance of benefits and disbenefits in the concluding section of the report. In order to form a balanced judgement, the question of who will benefit and who may not has been explored. This takes account of local communities and the consultation process carried out both before and after the application was made, as set out in the Statement of Community Involvement submitted with the application. The applicant has engaged throughout the process with the Eldonian Organisation, a group created to provide a delivery vehicle for the social, physical and economic regeneration for the area of Vauxhall North Liverpool, with a particular emphasis on health, education and employment, and also with the Vauxhall Residents Group. Both the applicant and the Eldonian Organisation have agreed to work closely together to support the wider regeneration of North Liverpool.

3.6.2

The contribution to conservation of the historic environment has been fully taken into account in the evaluation of overall impact.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 30

3.7

DEFINITION OF THE ASSESSMENT AREA

3.7.1

The assessment area has been drawn widely. It includes the whole of the WHS and the Buffer Zone as shown in Figure 1. Also included is the river estuary, the Wirral shoreline and the higher ground on the Wirral peninsula from which the Liverpool waterfront is visible. Key heritage assets that contribute to OUV, both within the LW site and outside, are identified on Figure 2, and described in Section 3.5.2 of the report.

3.7.2

Whilst all key viewpoints identified in the WHS SPD have been assessed for their impact on OUV, a number of additional views were established by English Heritage (EH) in conjunction with Liverpool City Council (LCC) at the pre-application stage and these have also been individually assessed. Furthermore, consideration has been given in the text to kinetic views, for example along the Wirral esplanade stretching from New Brighton to Seacombe to give a more comprehensive overview of the impact on OUV. The views are identified on Figure 3.

3.7.3

Other drawings are illustrated within the document as follows: Development Parcel Phasing Diagram – Figure 5 Indicative Building Plots – Figure 6 Indicative Underground Plans – Figure 7 Building Block Heights – Figure 8 Axonometrics – Figure 9

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 31

Liverpool Waters site

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 32

4.0

SITE HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION

4.1

SITE HISTORY

Background 4.1.1

This section of the document deals with the historic development of the dock complex and includes references to many heritage assets that are identified as conveying OUV. Some information about the early development of the docks, including those that exist outside the 250m buffer zone, has been included in order to provide a historic context for the study area: explaining why such a large number of docks were constructed within Liverpool, and the significant advances in maritime engineering that accompanied each phase of expansion along the waterfront.

4.1.2

The development of Liverpool from small fishing port to a city of massive international significance was largely prompted by the construction of the docks. Initially, Liverpool failed to develop significantly between the 12th and seventeenth centuries as there was no established safe way of negotiating the river and putting into port. Liverpool Castle (former site now occupied by the Liverpool Crown Courts) stood on a promontory overlooking the river and guarding the entrance to a sea-lake known as the pool. However, few ships ever put into port as the tidal range and currents were treacherous and the river itself was strewn with hidden obstacles such as Pluckington Bank. Nevertheless in 1700 the construction of a wet dock within the confines of ‘the pool’ was proposed. Thomas Steers, an engineer with previous experience of dock construction at Rotherhithe on the Thames was contracted to design and oversee the construction. The city was effectively mortgaged to provide the £6000 required to fund the project. This was a high risk investment but the returns if the dock proved successful would potentially be vast. The Dock was built directly on the bedrock of the pool (where the bedrock was too deep, it is likely that a series of timber piles were erected to support the wall). The walls were constructed of hand-made red brick and capped with yellow sandstone coping stones. Following the successful construction and opening of Thomas Steers Old Dock in 1715, there quickly followed a programme of land reclamation, sea wall and dock construction. This was to set a precedent for the continuous expansion and development of Liverpool’s waterfront through a series of ingenious engineering feats which would radically alter the face of Liverpool and its place on the world stage in the nineteenth century.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 33

4.1.3

Following the construction of the Old Dock, further modifications were made including the addition of a one and a half acre octagonal tidal entrance basin, a graving dock off the north side and a landing stage projecting from the south side of the entrance to the basin; the basin provided short term-berthing and access to the dock. In 1714, a graving dock had been built by Alderman Norris and partners, which was superseded by the construction of the Dry Dock (later Canning Dock) in 1740, which was designed by Thomas Steers but completed by his successor Henry Berry. This large basin also featured two graving docks which provided space for building and repairing ships. At this time the first sea wall was constructed to define the new shoreline, the line of the sea wall was later adopted as part of Georges Dock Passage. At the same time an ambitious programme of land reclamation was conducted as the citizens of Liverpool gradually began to shape the waterfront and create the area known today as Pier Head. Land was reclaimed using waste material obtained from local industry including, but not limited to, pottery production, quarry waste and organic waste generated by butchers, tanners etc who operated along the waterfront in areas such as Bird Street and Strand Street. By 1750 the land reclamation had successfully created a new strip of land known as Nova Scotia. This was quickly built upon and contained a variety of buildings including single room dwellings for the workforce, and pubs and hostelries, along with two slip ways; one constructed around 1750 to provide access to Bird Street and a later slip way in 1765 to provide access from the water to Nova Scotia. Accounts suggest that there may have been 38 dwelling houses of various sizes, accommodating 212 people in about 1770. In 1790 records (Gore map 1790) show that in Nova Scotia there were 17 houses and 15 cellars, occupied by 183 people and in Mann Island there were four houses and three cellars occupied by 30 people. Further land reclamation in a westwards direction between 1771 and 1785 necessitated the construction of two further sea walls and the Old Quay which was later superseded by the Manchester Basin (latterly the Manchester Dock).

4.1.4

The Pier Head, in its present formation, did not exist until 1771. Excavation and cartographic evidence supports the fact that the development of the Pier Head followed on from the development of Mann Island and Nova Scotia with a succession of sea walls preceding the reclamation of land into useful waterside properties. The majority of land in this area was constructed from quarry waste, including crushed pink and yellow sandstone material interspersed with discrete dumps of pottery and other cultural material representing industry occurring elsewhere in the city centre. Temporary retaining walls were found during the excavation for section LCL5 and LCL6 of the new Liverpool Canal Link in 2007. These structures comprised massive hewn blocks of sandstone (frequently recycled from other sources as

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 34

evidenced by architectural components present in the walls) with dry stone wall-style construction. None of the temporary works walls were ever found to contain evidence of a mortar bond, and both stood to a height in excess of 6m. It is likely that the recycled masonry in the wall identified within LCL5 (adjacent to Georges Sluice) originally came from the second Town Hall which was built in 1673 but began to subside and so was demolished in 1750 to make way for the existing Town Hall. 4.1.5

From 1771 the central area of Pier Head was occupied by Georges Dock, one of the largest in the area with an internal space of 3 acres. Georges Dock was linked to the Canning Dock via Georges Dock Passage to the south. Also built at the same time, Georges Dock Basin and Georges Ferry basin radically altered the shape and function of the Pier Head effectively creating a small series of islands linked by swing bridges. The Pier Head area around Georges Dock remained relatively free of structures as most of the warehouses and transit sheds were located on the east side of the docks around Strand Street and the Goree Piazza. The name Goree is a direct reminder of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement in slave trade; Goree is the prison island located off the coast of Senegal where slaves were held until the ships were ready to set sail for the Americas (this site is now a WHS). By 1829 a long linear transit shed had been constructed on the west side of Georges Dock and this was matched by the construction of a corresponding transit shed on the east side of the dock in 1836 (Austin map 1836).

4.1.6

The construction of the Manchester Dock swiftly followed in 1785. Although it had previously existed as a sandstone basin as early as 1772 the new closed dock was markedly different in size. Constructed of slightly more durable pink sandstone rather than the typically friable yellow sandstone, this dock was modified again with the establishment of entrance gates, between 1804- 1807 by John Foster and then finally double gates were added in 1816. In 1795 the Chester Basin was constructed in the same style as the Manchester Dock, although without the addition of dock gates. Both docks were used by flats and lighteners participating in the coastal rather than international trade.

4.1.7

The Pier Head was also the location of the mooring place of Private Floating Bath which was launched in 1816. This was replaced in 1828 by the establishment of Georges Baths which appear on Dwires map of 1823 (presumably representing the foundations), and is labelled on maps dating to 1829 and 1836 (Section 4.3.5). The foundations of Georges Baths, including sunken tiled areas thought to be part of the pool, and deep rectangular shafts still containing water, with

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 35

cast iron pipes and possible pump mechanism were identified and recorded by Oxford Archaeology North during the reduction of the land to the west side of the canal link as part of the public realm work in 2007 and 2008. 4.1.8

By the 1900s Georges Dock was drained and the construction of the Three Graces was underway, starting with the construction of the Port of Liverpool Building which was designed to house the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board Offices. This was followed by the construction of the Liver Building and finally the Cunard Building. The closure of Georges Dock rendered the associated docks in the network redundant. Georges Dock Basin, the ferry terminal and Georges Dock Passage were all closed at the same time. The extant remains of Georges Dock Passage are still visible today at Mann Island; however the basin and ferry terminal were filled in order to maximise the space at the Pier Head. Manchester Dock and Chester Basin were both affected by the change in transport from canals to railways and then roads, which made them redundant. Both were closed in the late 1920s and infilled c1936. The backfilling of the docks coincided with the excavation of the Mersey Road Tunnels, and both were filled using the pink crushed sterile sandstone tunnel risings. This was confirmed by archaeological excavation in 2007 where both docks were re-exposed as part of the work for section LCL4 of the new Liverpool Canal Link. Both docks were found to be in excellent condition, surviving less than 0.3m beneath the 1930s cobble surface in some places. The Chester Basin even had extant dock furniture.

4.1.9

By the late 1920s and early 1930s the Pier Head area had become a wide open plaza area with three circular brick structures in place which were used as tram turning circles. Later during World War II the structures were used as temporary air raid shelters. Pier Head has more recently served as a point of embarkation and arrival for passenger vessels. The most frequent of those vessels have been ferries crossing the Mersey, but it has also been a terminal for ferries to the Isle of Mann and Ireland and the point of emigration for millions of Europeans on their way to the New World. It thus has a special place in the hearts of those emigrants, as possibly the last time they and their ancestors stood on European soil. Of the 5.5 million emigrants who crossed the Atlantic between 1860 and 1900, 4.75 million sailed from Liverpool.

Princes Dock 4.1.10

Following the development of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s closed dock system in the late eighteenth century; the construction of Princes Dock was the first substantial increase in the size of the docks. It was also the first nineteenth century dock built in the town, with initial designs drawn up in 1800 by

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 36

William Jessop and in 1810 by John Rennie, and was remarkable for the use of steam power and an iron railway to help remove spoil. Jessop commented on the silting of those older dock entrances with tidal basins, and proposed the installation of proper locks as a solution, together with improvements to the construction of the retaining walls. By this time it has also been recognised that there were structural flaws to the use of sandstone walls set into the made ground, as it had been observed that the sheer weight of the walls made them prone to subsidence which left cracks and gaps in the dry bond. Problems with raising funds and securing land for the development, as part of the site encroached on the redundant fort and battery which had to be acquired as part of the site, meant that work did not commence until 1810, a full ten years after the original Act to construct the dock had been passed in parliament. The problems of funding and labour were compounded by the Napoleonic Wars which limited the supply of men and horses for moving materials. By 1810, the full complement of land was still not available so work began on the construction of a dock which was now much reduced in size from the original proposal. At the same time, the sea wall that now forms the boundary of the current marine parade was also being built. Stone for the works was shipped across the river from quarries at Runcorn. By July 1811, the name of Princes Dock had been bestowed by the Dock Committee.

Swire 1823-4

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 37

4.1.11

The Dock was officially completed in 1821 by the Dock Engineer John Foster. Until 1832, it was the largest dock in Liverpool, and was intended to be a flagship for Liverpool’s trade with North America, for imported cotton and emigrating people. The dock covered an area of 4.6 hectares, with a lock at the southern end connecting it to Georges Dock. At the north end was a second lock leading through to Princes Dock Basin, which provided access to the Mersey. It was intended originally to build another dock on the north side of Princes Basin (maps: Kaye 1816; Swire 18234; Walker 1823), but this area was not developed until the 1830s when the land was reclaimed. A swing bridge provided access to the island forming the western side of the dock and a series of transit sheds, as well as the Dock Master’s and Pier Master’s offices (OS 1851). Further transit sheds and offices, such as a police station were on the east side of the dock.

4.1.12

Although as expensive to construct as an enclosed dock, the uses for Princes Dock Basin were limited. It could only be used by the smallest vessels, for landing fish and small coastal cargoes. It was primarily used to provide access to Princes Dock, and later for movements of materials for improvements to Princes Dock, and the construction of Waterloo and Clarence Dock.

4.1.13

Access to Princes Dock from the town was controlled by a dock boundary wall, the first to be built in Liverpool, begun in 1816 and completed in 1821 when the dock opened. Also built by John Foster, the wall was of red brick, four courses thick, with sandstone copings and a gateway built with sandstone piers in the Greek Revival style. Originally the wall extended around the dock but only the east side survives in situ. The buildings around Princes Dock were also characteristic of this phase of building as the newly constructed transit sheds were built to be easily constructed and dismantled. Archaeological excavation by Oxford Archaeology North in 2007-08 in the area of Princes Dock showed that despite the transitory nature of these structures, they were furnished with substantial foundations and associated crane bases.

Dock Extensions in the 1830s 4.1.14

The next phase of docks to open within the central docks area was built by Foster’s successor, Jesse Hartley. Hartley is considered Liverpool’s most eminent dock engineer, and between 1824 and 1860 he more than doubled the dock accommodation. His prolific building campaign and distinctive cyclopean granite architecture style meant that his docks are probably the most easily recognisable. The need for a rapidly expanding dock system was the result of Liverpool’s expansion in trade arising from the growth in the textile industry and the opening up of markets

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 38

in India and China, following the end of the East India Company’s monopolies, and in South America. The tonnage of shipping doubled between 1815 and 1830, and again by 1845. 4.1.15

One of Hartley’s main achievements was the improvement made to the design of the dock retaining walls. His early docks were built from sandstone, but from the construction of Clarence Dock in 1830, he replaced this with granite (though shortages ensured some sandstone continued to be used into the 1880s). Hartley ensured that the quality of masonry work was very high, allowing him to build using relatively thin walls with only a slight batter. Straighter walls were essential to accommodate deep, square-hulled steamships. Hartley’s construction method involved taking piers down to the level of the general foundations, leaving in masses of bedrock, and then building flat relieving arches. The walls were supported by counterforts, 6 feet square and 12 feet apart, which were cruciform buttresses set into the rear of the walls. The walls themselves were 12 feet thick at the base, 6 feet thick at the capping and 36 feet high, with a batter of only 1 inch to the vertical. They were built using his distinctive ‘cyclopean’ construction technique, using massive bonding headers, with small irregular pieces of rubble in between, fitted together precisely with very thin mortar joints.

Bennison 1841 Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 39

4.1.16

Some distance to the north of Princes Dock and tidal basin, he built Clarence Dock and Clarence Graving Dock, which opened in 1830. Clarence was a dock specialising in steamships, and it was sited well away from the existing docks to reduce the fire risk to other shipping. It comprised two enclosed dock basins, parallel to each other and the river. Access to the sea from the inner basin was through an outer, half tide dock. The half tide dock allowed water to be impounded at high tide. Once the gates were shut, ships could then pass through to the fully impounded dock system beyond.

4.1.17

On the north side of the half tide dock was a passage with lock giving access to Clarence Gridiron Basin, which led onto Clarence Graving Docks. Dug partly from rock, the fine masonry work of the graving dock has stepped side and granite barrel runs, and the southern dock has two chambers. The graving docks were only just large enough to accommodate one or two vessels at a time. After the vessels were floated in, water was removed either by pumps or drains, in order to allow repairs. In the case of Clarence Graving Docks, water was removed by pumps.

4.1.18

The mid-1830s saw a rapid expansion in Liverpool Docks, and the area between Princes Half Tide Dock and Clarence Dock was soon infilled with new dock facilities. Although John Foster had already begun work on a new dock to the immediate north of Princes Dock before its completion, it was his replacement, Jesse Hartley who built and completed Waterloo Dock between 1831 and 1834. It was a rectangular basin, orientated east/west, with its short side to the river providing five acres of enclosed water space. Waterloo Dock was chosen as the site of a number of significant buildings for the period, indicating that it was already assumed that this area of the docks would play a key role in international trade. A Northern Custom House, much smaller than the one at Canning Place, was established on the south side of the dock, along with the new fish market. In addition, the second observatory to be constructed in Liverpool was built there in 1844. This structure superseded the smaller observatory on St James Mount and played a central role in helping to fix the longitude of Liverpool in relation to that of Greenwich in London. The observatory was relocated to Bidston Hill in the 1860s, as the requirement for grain storage prompted a redesign of the Waterloo Dock. The dock was used for general cargo.

4.1.19

By 1836, Hartley had built Victoria (NMR no SJ 39 SW1063) and Trafalgar Docks (NMR no SJ 39 SW1062) in the remaining space between Clarence and Waterloo Docks. Victoria Dock, Trafalgar Dock and Waterloo Dock formed a uniform multi-functional triumvirate of dock and quay space.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 40

Each dock covered 5 acres of enclosed water. Access from the river could be gained initially through the Victoria Dock lock gate entrance, however the Victoria Dock river access was closed after only ten years meaning that access could only be gained through the dock network, either to the north or south. This alteration made the Victoria, Trafalgar and Waterloo system ‘the first real examples of spine and branch dock’. These docks were aligned east/west, parallel with Waterloo Dock and with their short ends to the river. Transit sheds surrounded each of the docks on each side (OS 1851). Hartley reduced both construction and operating costs by using interconnecting docks, limiting the number of river entrances. 4.1.20

Trafalgar Dock joined Clarence Dock to the north and Victoria Dock to the south. Victoria was connected to Waterloo, which had access to the river via a lock leading to Princes Dock tidal basin. This enclosed system of interconnecting docks also had the advantage of allowing ships to move around the dock system without having to wait for appropriate tides. All were built out into the river, with reclaimed land forming the islands for the outer dock walls. Recent archaeological excavations demonstrated that the majority of reclaimed land around the Trafalgar and Victoria Dock comprised quarry waste and beach sand mixed with cultural material; presumably waste brought from the city for the purpose of helping to increase the bulk of the reclamation material. Parts of the Victoria Dock and the early original Trafalgar Dock walls were recently partially demolished in order to accommodate a section of the new Liverpool Canal Link. A 15m section of each wall was demolished. However, the rest of the original dock walls survive buried beneath a series of nineteenth and twentieth century backfills.

4.1.21

With the construction of new docks, the dock boundary wall was extended to control access. Hartley’s boundary wall of the 1830s continued in the style of Foster’s dock wall of 1821, being in red brick with sandstone copings. Hartley’s gateways were all in the classical style, with square section piers in buff sandstone, with pitted rusticated bases, ashlar shafts and gabled caps with acroteria. Although the slots for the original gates survive in all the gateways, the gates themselves have been replaced by modern fencing. By Clarence Dock is a cast-iron drinking fountain, one of 33 inserted into the dock wall in 1859, in an effort to provide drinking water and keep dock workers out of the pubs. Originally the only source of drinking water on Waterloo Road was two horse troughs filled with fresh water that were located around the Princes Dock. Charles Pierre Melly was the driving force behind the installation of the drinking fountains, who undertook a study of the value of such fountains after bringing the idea back from Europe where public

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 41

fountains were common place and much used. His work was published as a Treatise on Public Drinking Fountain in 1858.

Dock Extensions in 1848 4.1.22

Following the Dock Act of 1844, work began on a total of eight new docks for Liverpool, illustrating the demand for port facilities in the town and the confidence in its continuing growth. South of the central docks, Albert Dock was built, and to the north Wellington and Sandon Dock were built and opened by 1848. Between, in the central docks area, five docks were planned and built by Jesse Hartley as part of a single construction programme. These were Salisbury, Collingwood, Stanley, Nelson and Bramley Moore Docks, and they were completed and opened in 1848, on land already reclaimed by the early 1840s, and where a fort known as the North Battery had been built (Bennison map 1841).

4.1.23

As with the 1830s docks, they formed an enclosed, interconnecting system, with Salisbury Dock the link to the river with a double half tide entrance separated by an island. Bramley Moore Dock linked to Nelson Dock, which was linked to Salisbury Dock from the north. From the east, Stanley Dock led to Collingwood Dock, which linked to Salisbury Dock. The passages linking the docks were crossed by means of double leaf, iron swing bridges. Separate barge passages were provided for canal boats using the Leeds and Liverpool Canal to pass between the Stanley Dock, Collingwood Dock, Salisbury Dock and the river. Only Stanley Dock was excavated from existing dry land, with the others built out into the river as the other central docks had been. The river wall which enclosed the docks was considered at the time to be a major feat. It was built in the same manner as the dock walls, using the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cyclopeanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; granite technique.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 42

OS 1851 4.1.24

Salisbury Dock, named after the 2nd Marquis of Salisbury, a major landowner in Liverpool, was small, covering only 3 acres, as its prime function was to provide access to the other docks in the system. It did, however, take small coastal vessels, and sheds were built on the south side of the dock in 1849. Salisbury Dock does demonstrate that this period of dock construction is considered to be the culmination of Hartley’s dock design. At the entrance to Salisbury Dock, Victoria Tower was built on the central island between the two dock gates. This is a clock- and bell-tower, which was not only a landmark building at the entrance to the northern complex of docks, but provided the time to ships and neighbouring docks, and rang out the high tide and other warnings. The building contained a Pier Master’s flat, whilst nearby stands the Dock Master’s office, a two-storey granite building with battlements.

4.1.25

Like Salisbury Dock, Collingwood Dock was also small, and served coasters and other small vessels. It was also the home to Liverpool Corporation’s refuse boats. It had open goods sheds built on its north and south sides in 1849. The dock was named after Baron Cuthbert Collingwood, Nelson’s right-hand man. At the east end of Collingwood Dock is the passage through to Stanley Dock, crossed initially by a swing bridge and, later, a lifting bridge that carried Regent Road. The Bascule Bridge, which is currently closed on health and safety grounds, dates from 1932 and was constructed by Dorman Long. It is one of five that were built in that year

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 43

within the dock estate. The bridge is formed from two main steel trusses which support cross girders and a road deck. The rolling bascule consists of an arc section with a large steel ballast box which acts as the balance for lifting the bridge. A separate engine room is supported on a steel deck spanning the carriageway and was originally operated by hydraulic power. 4.1.26

Stanley Dock was named after the Lord Stanley, the 13th Earl of Derby, who was major landowners in the area, and who had sold the land on which the dock was built to the Liverpool Dock Trust. The dock provided a link to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal though a canal spur with a series of four locks, enabling goods to be transferred directly from the canal to ships. These goods were mainly low-cost or bulky items, such as coal for export and cotton and wool imports for the Lancashire and Yorkshire mills. The dock also connected with both the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway and the Docks Railway, allowing more expensive goods to be transhipped directly to the towns of northern England, or to other docks for links to railways to the rest of the country.

4.1.27

On the north and south sides of the Stanley Dock, two warehouses of similar design to those at the Albert Dock were built in 1852-56 for bonded storage of high value goods. They were the first dock warehouses designed for rail and hydraulic power; the hydraulic power centre on the north side of the dock providing the power for hoists, capstans and tobacco presses. By the end of the nineteenth century, the warehouses were no longer in great demand, and half the dock was infilled to construct the vast Tobacco Warehouse in 1900-01. This purpose designed structure, 14 storeys high, with a floor area of 1.3 million square feet could accommodate 70,000 hogsheads of tobacco and is said to be the largest brick-built warehouse in the world.

4.1.28

It was consistently the most profitable of the Board’s warehouses. From this period, Hartley’s south warehouse was used in conjunction with the Tobacco Warehouse for storage of tobacco, and the north warehouse was used for rum. In the south-east corner of the dock is the King’s Pipe, the chimney to the furnace, built c.1900, used to burn tobacco scraps. Part of the north warehouse was destroyed in the blitz and was replaced with a single storey structure. The Tobacco Warehouse remained in use until 1980, but since then the whole complex has been vacant, apart from the use of the ground floor as a Sunday market. Despite lying derelict, the warehouses surrounding the Stanley Dock still retain a large number of original fixings and machinery including the lift mechanisms. The bascule bridge which provides access over the entrance to the Stanley Dock is currently undergoing major restoration and repair.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 44

4.1.29

Nelson Dock, which lay to the north of Salisbury and Collingwood Docks, was named after Admiral Nelson. It served a variety of ships, including the largest steamships of the time, and its principal trade was with the livestock markets of Scotland and Ireland. It had transit sheds on all sides by 1850, including a secure brick-built shed on the west. The last regular trade was in bulk rum, which was piped to the North Stanley Dock Warehouse.

4.1.30

Bramley Moore Dock is the largest of the five docks, at a little under 10 acres, and was named after the chairman of the Dock Committee and mayor of Liverpool. Like Nelson Dock, it too was built to take the largest steamships, and its gates were thus built wider than those of Clarence Docks. The rapidly increasing size of ships, however, meant that it was soon found to be inadequate, and the dock specialised in coal export. It did not have any sheds until 1856, when a high level coal railway was built by the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, which allowed wagons of coal to be taken by wagons directly to ships and dumped into the holds.

4.1.31

The dock boundary wall, which Hartley built to enclose this set of new docks differed from the earlier walls. Instead of using brick, Hartley employed the same â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cyclopeanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; granite style of building used in the dock walls, with finely jointed stones brought to a fair face, with rounded coping stones. This is now recognised as his signature style and was later copied by successive Dock Engineers, including Lyster. Set into the walls at intervals are granite plaques bearing the name of each dock and the date of construction, 1848. Within the wall at Nelson Dock is one of the surviving cast-iron drinking fountains. The gateways through the wall were also different in character from those in the earlier dock wall. The 1848 gateways are all similar in design, with double entrances with round tapering towers as gate piers. The central round towers are larger with slit windows as they also functioned as offices for the dock policemen. At the entrance to Salisbury and Collingwood Docks, the central turret also has a granite letter box. Gates slid out on rollers, operated by counterweights, from slits in the side gate piers, closing into slitted recesses in the central towers. Although no longer functional, the gates to all the 1848 entrances are still extant.

Later nineteenth Century Dock Alterations 4.1.32

Princes Half Tide Dock: Princes Basin was modernised and rebuilt around 1868 by GF Lyster, the successor to Jesse Hartley. The original basin was inefficient and could only handle the smallest vessels. Lyster created a half tide dock, sub-rectangular in shape with dock retaining

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 45

walls built in the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cyclopeanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; granite style of Hartley, that is of granite rubble brought to a fair face laid in blocks of differing sizes with fine mortar joints. Additional emphasis was placed on the Hartley style by incorporating it into the surface of the quayside in place of the traditional rectangular granite setts. The reworking of the dock also retained the traditional style Hartley Dock furniture.

OS 1894 4.1.33

The dock also included steps laid diagonally. The half tide dock operated through a triple entrance to the river, with two passages for half tide use, and a barge lock which could be used at almost any state of the tide. The new dock was attractive to small vessels, particularly coastal traffic. The goods brought in were transferred to a specially built railway shed on the east quay, built in 1875. The success of Princes Half Tide Dock is reflected in the development of transit sheds around it. The 1875 shed was extended by 129 feet in 1877, at the same time as a new wooden shed was built on the south-east quay.

4.1.34

In 1873 Lyster infilled the Georges Dock Basin that previously gave access to the southern end of the Princes Dock. This allowed construction of a long floating roadway that led down to the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 46

Liverpool Landing Stage, a wood and iron pontoon that served the ferries and cross river traffic. Eventually, the landing stage was extended to 2,500 feet, running from the Pier Head northwards the full length of the Princes Dock, becoming the principal point of embarkation for transatlantic passenger liners. To cater for travellers, the landing stage was equipped with waiting rooms, customs points and baggage handling facilities. 4.1.35

In 1895 Riverside Station was opened on the west side of Princes Dock, bringing main line passengers right down to the riverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge, with covered bridges leading directly to the floating landing stage at two levels. The rail link to Riverside Station came in from the Waterloo Dock Goods Yard, only a short distance away.

4.1.36

At the north end of the Liverpool Landing Stage, Princes Jetty was built in 1899-1900. Designed by AG Lyster, in association with Gustave Mouchel, it was the first reinforced concrete structure in the docks and is one of the earliest examples of the use of the Hennebique system in Britain. Princes Jetty incorporates two substantial components, which appear to be constructed of timber with a concrete deck, and following the removal of the original iron and timber structure in 1975, it is the only surviving element of the Liverpool Landing Stage. It incorporates the former firedamaged remains of a timber shelter and a moveable bridge.

4.1.37

Waterloo Dock: the development of Princes Half Tide Dock was partly tied in to redevelopment of the neighbouring Waterloo Dock, also carried out by GF Lyster in 1868. The impetus for the rebuilding of Waterloo Dock was the repeal of the Corn Laws, when the MDHB saw the opportunity for importing grain from North America, using Waterloo Dock as a specialist bulk grain dock, the first in the world. The new dock comprised two basins orientated east/west, with sandstone block walls constructed across the site of the former single north/south aligned basin.

4.1.38

East Waterloo Dock was the specialist grain dock, with massive brick warehouses with open colonnades on the ground floor. Originally there were three warehouses, matching long warehouses on the west and east quays and a shorter warehouse on the north quay. The long warehouses stood on a granite base with a limestone floor. There were five working floors plus a basement and a mezzanine level on the top floor. The surviving warehouse is 43 bays long and 5 bays wide (LB no 359705). The basement and mezzanine levels held machinery and conveyor belts, which were operated in all the warehouses by one hydraulically driven system, in a

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 47

separate engine house. The hydraulic system also operated three moveable bridges, ten ship capstans and 24 gate engines. 4.1.39

West Waterloo Dock provided berths for medium-sized, ocean-going vessels, and provided a passage between Victoria Dock and Princes Half Tide Dock. It had two long sheds on the east and west quays, plus a smaller south shed on the south quay to the west of the passage to Princes Half Tide Dock. On the west quay, between Waterloo and Princes Half Tide Dock, was the Dock Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office with clock tower (OS first edition 1893).

The Docks in the twentieth Century 4.1.40

Trafalgar Docks Development: the central docks soon became inadequate, as the size of ships increased requiring greater harbour depths, and the need for rapid turnarounds and accurate timetables made the half tide dock system inefficient. Trafalgar Dock, for example, had been designed for deep-sea sailing ships, but by 1900 could only take coastal and canal traffic. New docks were built further downstream, where the channel was deeper and the foreshore wider. In 1929, a programme of modernisation was carried out in the central docks, leading to the filling in of Clarence Dock, Clarence Half Tide Dock and Victoria Dock and the reconstruction of Trafalgar Dock (NMR nos SJ 39 SW1054; SJ 39 SW1062; SJ 39 SW1063). The filled in areas of these docks remain largely undeveloped and are now used for business and light industry, although a power station, now demolished, was built on Clarence Dock (NMR no SJ 39 SW1054). The new Trafalgar Dock was a long, narrow basin aligned north/south and parallel to the river wall. At the north end, it incorporated Clarence Gridiron Dock Basin which provided access to Clarence Graving Docks. The south end of the dock had a passage through to West Waterloo Dock. Most of the new Trafalgar Dock has now been filled in, although the walls are still visible and are clearly demarcated by a series of modern extant mooring bollards.

4.1.41

Princes Docks and Waterloo Dock Developments: the grain warehouses on East Waterloo Dock continued to operate into the twentieth century, even though they became inefficient as they failed to keep pace with changing technology. In 1904 part of the warehouses were converted to a mill, and in 1925 they were re-equipped for handling oil seeds. The north warehouse was demolished following bomb damage in 1941, and the west block was demolished in 1969 (NMR no SJ 39 SW1064). Today, only the east warehouse still stands, now converted to apartments. Despite the conversion of the warehouses to residences, the dockside has retained

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 48

much of its character including the original facing, coping stones and quayside surface. Much of the dock furniture is also still extant including mooring rings and bollards. 4.1.42

West Waterloo Dock and Princes Half Tide Dock were altered in 1949. The length of West Waterloo Dock may have been increased at this time, as the surviving north wall of the dock is constructed from finely mortared sandstone blocks, suggesting that it was the original wall to Victoria Dock, part of which may have been incorporated into West Waterloo Dock. The entrance to Princes Half Tide Dock was closed, though retaining the original lock gates in front of the blocking, and a new entrance lock was built into West Waterloo Dock. This provided direct access through the lock system to Trafalgar Dock. In 1969, there were further alterations with the development of a container port at West Waterloo Dock, resulting in the demolition of the west warehouse of East Waterloo Dock. The container terminal was for Irish and coastal container traffic. West Waterloo Dock was lengthened, and the new dock wall was constructed using the recently introduced â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;diaphragmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; wall. The consisted of a row of huge, vertical, semi-cylindrical sections, with a fin extending from the rear of each section. The modern extension to West Waterloo Dock has been mostly filled in at the northern end, as has the 1949 river lock entrance. Despite being infilled the river lock entrance is still partially visible and is one of the most impressive structures in this section of the dock complex. A long linear passage with four extant metal lock gates of huge proportions. The size of this structure and the complexity of the subterranean mechanisms that are still in situ underline the ingenuity of the Liverpool Dock Engineers and also highlight the extreme power of the River Mersey.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 49

Aerial photo 1949 4.1.43

The Princes Dock remained largely unchanged until 1905, by which time its shallow depth combined with the cambered profile of the dock walls made it unsuitable for the deeper, more square-sided steamers, that were liable to suffer damage when mooring alongside the wall. A new quayside structure was therefore built within the dock, complete with sheds and a concrete deck, occupying the whole of the west side of the original water area. This proved a success, and when funds later became available from the proceeds of the sale of the Clarence Dock to Liverpool City Council for the construction of a power station, a similar structure was inserted along the east side of the dock. This established, belatedly, a specialised facility for coastal trade, with an emphasis on Irish traffic. A â&#x20AC;&#x153;roll on/roll offâ&#x20AC;? terminal was installed in 1967 at the southern end of the dock, for the Irish Packet, but continuing declines in passenger numbers and the construction of the new terminal at Victoria Dock made it redundant in 1981. Despite an illustrious and varied history the dock fell into decline until the 1990s when a new phase of regeneration saw the dock placed at the heart of the newly founded waterfront business district.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 50

Princes Dock with QE2 Regeneration 4.1.44

After its closure in 1981, and being close to the central business district, Princes Dock was regarded as a potential area for new office development, and in 1988 its ownership passed to the Merseyside Development Corporation. In 1992, in accordance with a masterplan prepared by Tibbalds Monro, development commenced. The transit sheds and other buildings were cleared, the east quay was widened to create larger development sites, and the dock walls were rebuilt. The first phases included the Crown Plaza Hotel, and a section of Princes Parade extending northwards on the western side.

4.1.45

A revised masterplan was prepared in 1998 by Taylor Young for the Princes Dock Development Company. This provided the framework for the remainder of the site, including access to Waterloo Road/Bath Street, the partial infilling of Princes Dock and the identification of additional parcels of land for development.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 51

4.1.46

With changes in the property market, and differing aspirations since the 1998 masterplan, further revisions were approved in April 2002. The new plan introduced a greater mix of uses, higher densities, and indicative heights for each development plot. Some new plots were allocated for development. Whilst the emphasis of this masterplan was to deliver commercial development, in recognition of changing market demands, and the failure to attract the desired volume of commercial activity, it was agreed with the Princes Dock Development Company that the original aspiration could be relaxed to allow for a greater proportion of new residential development around the dock. This has mostly been in the form of individual tall buildings.

4.1.47

At the south end of the dock, the blocked passage to the former Georges Basin and the original coursed sandstone quay wall survive. Along the riverside, where a set of derelict steps remain, it is possible to see sections of the original river wall.

4.1.48

In 2007 work commenced on the Liverpool Canal Link which directly impacted upon the Princes Dock. In 2008, as part of the bulk excavation, elements of the transit shed foundations and the north wall of the Georges Dock Basin were uncovered. The original sea wall and temporary works wall were also identified during the course of the works. The 1967 roll on-roll off ramp was reexposed and removed in order to allow the construction of a culvert across Plot 7.

Associated Development 4.1.49

Warehouses and other development to the east of the docks: To the east of the docks, between Regent Road and Waterloo Road, and Great Howard Street are a series of workshops and warehouses that developed in the nineteenth century alongside the docks. The most prominent examples are the warehouses around Stanley Dock, which were contained within its boundary wall (see above). One of the earliest known examples in this area was the warehouse of J Bibby and Sons on Galton Street, built in 1826 which, although listed, has since been demolished and the site redeveloped with two large retail units.

4.1.50

Just south of Stanley Dock the bonded tea warehouse at 177 Great Howard Street, known as Clarence Warehouses, is an early example of a fireproof warehouse, and is considered to be the largest group of private warehouses still surviving in the city. It was built by S and J Holme before 1850, and comprises 11 separate stacks of six storeys within a single shell. There is a second early example of a fireproof warehouse at 27 Vulcan Street (listed Grade II in May 2008). Both warehouses had recessed loading bays, and unusual feature for pre-1850s warehouses,

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 52

suggesting that they may date towards 1850. Number 177 Great Howard Street represents a considerable investment, as its size was considerable and it was built with cast-iron columns, brick arches, tile floors and cast- and wrought-iron roof trusses. It is likely that such financial investment was worthwhile as the warehouse was intended to store valuable bonded goods, even though the first recorded use was for grain. Mid to late-nineteenth century and early twentieth century examples are more common in this area to the east of the docks, with surviving examples opposite the north end of Bramley Moore Dock, between Regent Road and Fulton Street, and on Vulcan Street and Porter Street. 4.1.51

As well as the warehouses, there was a tobacco works at 2-4 Roberts Street from the middle of the nineteenth century, comprising a series of warehouses with an office block (NMR no SJ 39 SW574). This became an engineering works in the 1960s. The area developed for mixed commercial and residential use, and one of the earliest houses was nearby the tobacco works on Roberts Street. It was a brick-built house with stone dressings of around 1800, and which was later used as part of St Paulâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Eye Hospital (NMR no SJ 39 SW453), although the site has now been redeveloped. The area continued to see some residential development throughout the nineteenth century, such as the three storey brick terrace on Regents Road (NMR no SJ 39 SW1037), built amongst warehouses on Regent Road and Fulton Street. In general, by the late nineteenth century it remains a very mixed area. The OS map of 1890 (Section 4.3.5) shows numerous small works relating to the docks, including cooperages, iron works, repair depots, etc, amongst warehouses, pubs, hotels and domestic houses. A few of these buildings, including some historic pubs survive and provide context to the dock boundary wall.

4.1.52

Railways: With dock development came the development of a railway system to transport goods to and from and between docks. In 1849, the Waterloo Dock Branch Railway opened, with a massive goods station to the east of Victoria and Waterloo Docks. Further north, Stanley Dock had links to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, and in 1855 the Sandhill and North Docks Branch Railway goods line opened, with a goods station just to the north of Stanley Dock. The Waterloo Goods Station, in particular, increased in size, doubling in area by the end of the nineteenth century (OS 1894).

4.1.53

Within the docks, most goods were carried around by horse and cart, and it was not until the end of the nineteenth century that an internal railway system was built, the tracks for which can still be seen in many areas of the docks. The railway lines and associated granite setts surrounding

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 53

them survive remarkably well within the central dock complex and the complexity of the lines indicate the busy and substantial nature of this internal railway. At the north end of the docks, a high level railway line was constructed at Bramley Moore Dock to bring in coal for loading directly onto ships. This served the east and north quays of the dock, and linked to the Sandhills and North Docks Branch Line (OS 1893). 4.1.54

The most famous railway line associated with the docks was the Liverpool Overhead Railway, the first train ran in 1892, and it was officially opened in 1893. It was mainly a commuter line, and was affectionately known as the Dockers’ Umbrella. To reduce the risk of fire to the surrounding sheds, warehouses, goods yards and ships, it was run as an electric railway at the outset. It was the world’s first elevated electric railway. The railway was incredibly popular, and became a tourist attraction and provided good views over the docks. The line ran along the inside of the dock walls, supported by cast iron stanchions which still survive, along with one of the signal posts at Princes Dock. Within the central docks area there were stations at Princes Dock, Clarence Dock and Nelson Dock. All the stations were reached by a stairway from street level with ticket facilities on the platforms (NMR nos SJ 39 SW702; SJ 39 SW703; SJ 39 SW742). The line was closed in 1956, because of severe corrosion, and it was demolished in 1957. There are only a limited number of extant features which indicate the location of the Overhead Railway, most of which are evident along the top of the dock boundary wall. These include cast iron girders, vertical supports built into the wall and adjacent to the Wellington Dock, and a substantial stone buttress built in cyclopean granite style. The most substantial remains are associated with the bascule bridge at Stanley Dock complex.

4.1.55

Leeds and Liverpool Canal: The Leeds and Liverpool Canal, which opened from Liverpool to Wigan in 1774, provided Liverpool with access to manufacturing districts of Lancashire, Yorkshire and Staffordshire. The original terminus was at Old Hall Street, and by 1803, when Horwood’s map (Section 4.3.5) was published, an additional linked basin had been installed running parallel to the western side of Ladies Walk. This basin provided access to the canal system in association with activity related to the adjacent coal yards. In 1846 Jesse Hartley created a branch with four locks down to the Stanley Dock and thence into the dock system and the River Mersey via the Salisbury Dock passage. This removed the need for transhipment of goods between the canal and the docks by horse drawn vehicles. The canal was used to transport a wide range of goods to and from the port, including coal cotton, wool, stone, grain, pottery and general goods. The fine set of locks is constructed in granite.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 54

4.1.56

Recent construction work carried out under the auspices of British Waterways between 2007 2009 has provided a new final section of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, ensuring that over 230 years since it was first constructed, it is now possible to bring a boat down the lock flight and through the central docks all the way to the Albert Dock. The work for the new canal required the re-opening of several previously closed dock passages including the passage between Princes Dock and Princes Dock Half Tide Basin. The culvert for the new section of canal lies within the modern infill of the Princes Half Tide Basin passage and so did not alter the original buried fabric of the dock entrance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 55

4.2

SITE DESCRIPTION

4.2.1

The site of Liverpool Waters occupies some 60 hectares to the north of Liverpool’s Pier Head, and runs from Princes Dock to the south and to Bramley Moore dock to the north. The site extends 2km along the waterfront and also includes the King Edward Industrial Estate. It extends eastwards as far as the dock boundary wall that runs along Bath Street and Waterloo Road. The eastern boundary of the site is defined by the north-south axis of the A5036 carriageway, and the River Mersey defines the site’s western boundary. With the exception of the Princes Dock and the King Edward Industrial Site, the Liverpool Waters site is publicly inaccessible. A small portion of the A5046 (at St Nicholas Place) abuts the site to its south, whilst the dock system continues to the site’s north towards the boundary with Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council.

4.2.2

Over a third of the site consists of docks with open water, comprising Bramley Moore Dock, Nelson Dock, Salisbury Dock, Collingwood Dock, Princes Dock, Princes Half-Tide dock, and East Waterloo Dock. The other former dock areas of West Waterloo Dock and Trafalgar Dock have been subject to earlier in-filling, and now accommodate a canal link to Pier Head from Stanley Dock. Earlier in-filling of other docks within the site has been extensive, including Clarence Dock that was closed in 1928 and became the site for a coal-fired power station, which was enlarged in the 1950’s and included three tall chimneys.

The last remnants of the power station were

removed in 1994, and the site has remained redundant since then. 4.2.3

With the exception of King Edward Industrial Estate, the site consists of land reclaimed from the River Mersey. The site originally incorporated a series of single storey linear transit sheds on the quaysides, with ancillary facilities such as entrance lodges, cranes and an elevated railway together with an at-grade system of rail and tram lines. The site historically had the character of a utilitarian and industrial area. This was emphasised still further by the grade II listed Jesse Hartley designed Dock Boundary Wall that separated the site from the hinterland to the east and limited access to the docks, and which forms the major part of the site’s eastern boundary. Although the dock boundary wall still remains a commanding feature, the transit sheds have been demolished over a period of time, and only the quaysides remain.

4.2.4

The quaysides still have associated elements such as mooring facilities and limited surfacing materials, some of which have associated railway lines. The remaining docks, including the two Clarence Graving Docks, retain special interest through their monumental construction and

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 56

materials of granite and sandstone, as does the river wall that marks the western boundary of the site. 4.2.5

The main features of the site are the dock boundary wall and the open dock spaces. As a result of the site for the most part being void of development there are extensive views, both from within the site across the river to Wirral landmarks such as Wallasey Town Hall and Woodside tunnel ventilation shaft, and to the south towards the city centre including both Pier Head and the cluster of tall buildings within the commercial quarter. There are also key views into the site and beyond from the Wirral (west) side of the Mersey that allow for distant views of the Stanley Dock warehouse from the Wallasey shoreline, as well as the Victoria Clock Tower on the river’s edge and the panorama of Liverpool’s sandstone ridge to the east.

4.2.6

The eastern part of the site is dominated by one of its most distinctive features, the dock boundary wall. This varies in quality, and whilst the major part of the wall is constructed in brick, there are sections to the northern part of the site in cyclopean granite. Most of the original entrances have associated entrance lodges, built of brick and granite, and monumental entrances, whilst later openings are simple functional breaches of the wall of varied dimensions.

4.2.7

Whilst the site is largely unutilised, the southern portion has witnessed development activity in recent years. High-rise residential apartments, office blocks, hotel development, a multi-storey car park and other commercial and ancillary uses are now accommodated at Princes Dock, although parts of this dock remain to be developed. In addition, more low-rise residential accommodation is contained at East Waterloo Dock (to the west of the site).

The site also includes a small

industrial estate in the vicinity of King Edward Street at its south eastern corner. 4.2.8

The site’s surroundings contain a variety of land-uses. The main commercial core of Liverpool city centre is located adjacent to the south-east corner of the site, on the opposite eastern side of the A5036 carriageway. Directly to the south, beyond St Nicholas Place, is Liverpool’s historic Pier Head with the Liver Building, the Cunard Building and the Port of Liverpool Building, together with a ferry landing platform. To the north of the site is the Sandon Dock Water Treatment Works, whilst industrial and employment uses predominate to the site’s east and north east. The Wirral coastline, stretching from New Brighton to Birkenhead, on the western bank of the Mersey estuary, is located 1.3km to the west of the site, and provides expansive views of the site.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 57

4.3

DESIGNATIONS World Heritage Site

4.3.1

The Liverpool Mercantile City World Heritage Site (WHS) was inscribed by the World Heritage Committee in 2004. A Statement of OUV was approved by the WH Committee in 2010 and a full copy of the Statement including integrity and authenticity is included in Section 3.4 below.

4.3.2

The WHS comprises six Character Areas, as identified in Figure 1.

4.3.3

The Liverpool Waters site is partly within the WHS, and partly in the Buffer Zone that surrounds the WHS. The part that is in the WHS, falls within the Stanley Dock Character Area. Stanley Dock Conservation Area

4.3.4

The Stanley Dock Conservation Area was designated in 2003. It includes the integrated complex of northern docks, including the Stanley Dock, the full length of the dock wall, and the East Waterloo and Princes Half-Tide Docks.

4.3.5

The Liverpool Waters site adjoins the Pier Head Conservation Area to the south, and the Castle Street Conservation Area to the south east.

Listed Buildings 4.3.6

A range of listed buildings are located within or adjacent to the development site. Many of these are identified as attributes of OUV of the WHS and included in the Statement of OUV. These include the important group of warehouses at the Stanley Dock, comprising the north warehouse (G II*), the south warehouse (GII), the engine house (GII), the boundary wall (GII), all by Jesse Hartley, and the Tobacco warehouse by GF Lyster (GII); the Waterloo warehouse, also by Lyster (GII); the dock boundary wall, built in separate sections (GII); the Victoria Clock Tower (GII); the Dock Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office (GII); and the Hydraulic Engine House at Bramley Moore Dock (GII). The dock walls of the Bramley Moore Dock, the Nelson Dock, the Collingwood Dock, the Salisbury Dock, the Stanley Dock, the Clarence Graving Docks, the East Waterloo Dock and the Princes Half Tide Dock are also listed GII, together with the river entrance and a stretch of the river wall at

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 58

the Salisbury Dock. A small number of surviving warehouses to the east of the site are listed GII, and to the south of the Princes Dock are the important complex of buildings at the Pier Head. 4.4

STATEMENT OF OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSAL

4.4.1

This section provides a definition the OUV of the WHS as approved by the World Heritage Committee in 2010: Brief Description

4.4.2

The Maritime Mercantile City of Liverpool became one of the centres of world trade in the 18th and 19th centuries. It had an important role in the growth of the British Empire and became the major port for the mass movement of people, especially enslaved Africans and European emigrants. Liverpool pioneered the development of modern dock technology, transport systems, port management, and building construction. A series of significant commercial, civic and public buildings lie within selected areas in the historic docklands and the centre of the city. These areas include: the Pier Head, with its three principal waterfront buildings – the Royal Liver Building, the Cunard Building and the Port of Liverpool Building; the Dock area with their warehouses, dock walls, docks and other facilities related to port activities from the 18th and 19th centuries; the mercantile area, with its shipping offices, produce exchanges, marine insurance offices, banks, inland warehouses and merchants houses; and the William Brown Street Cultural Quarter, including St George’s Plateau, with its monumental cultural and civic buildings. Statement of Significance

4.4.3

Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City reflects the role of Liverpool as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence. Liverpool grew into a major commercial port in the 18th century, when it was also crucial for the organisation of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. In the 19th century, Liverpool became a world mercantile centre for general cargo and mass European emigration to the New World. It had major significance on world trade being one of

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 59

the principal ports of the British Commonwealth. Its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities became an important reference worldwide. Liverpool also became instrumental in the development of industrial canals in the British Isles in the 18th century, as well as of railway transport in the 19th century. All through this period, and particularly in the 19th and early 20th centuries, Liverpool gave attention to the quality and innovation of its architecture and cultural activities. To this stand as testimony its outstanding public buildings, such as St Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Hall and its museums. Even in the 20th century, Liverpool has given a lasting contribution, which is remembered in the success of The Beatles. Criteria for Inscription 4.4.4

Criterion (ii): Liverpool was a major centre generating innovative technologies and methods in dock construction and port management in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. It thus contributed to the building up of the international mercantile systems throughout the British Commonwealth.

4.4.5

Criterion (iii): the city and the port of Liverpool are an exceptional testimony to the development of maritime mercantile culture in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries, contributing to the building up of the British Empire. It was a centre for the slave trade, until its abolition in 1807, and for emigration from northern Europe to America.

4.4.6

Criterion (iv): Liverpool is an outstanding example of a world mercantile port city, which represents the early development of global trading and cultural connections throughout the British Empire. Assessment of the Conditions of Authenticity and Integrity, and of the Requirements for Protection and Management in Force

Integrity 4.4.7

The existing urban fabric of the World Heritage Site dates from the 18th to the 20th centuries, with an emphasis on the 19th and early 20th centuries. The city has suffered

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 60

from the Second World War destruction as well as from the long economic decline after the war. The historic evolution of the Liverpool street pattern is still readable representing the different periods. There have been some alterations after the war destruction in 1941. Judging in the overall, though, the protected area has well retained its historic integrity. Not only are the buildings in good state but every effort has been made to preserve the minor detailing of architecture such as the original pulleys of the docks and various other cast iron features. Authenticity 4.4.8

In the World Heritage property, the main historic buildings have retained their authenticity to a high degree. There are a small number of areas, especially in the buffer zone, where the damages from the war period still exist. There are also new constructions from the second half of the 20th century, of which not all are to high standard. The main docks survive as water-filled basins within the World Heritage property and the buffer zone. They are not any more operational, though one dock area is operated by Merseyside Maritime Museum, and another is used for ship repairs. The warehouses are being converted to new uses. Here attention is given to keep changes to the minimum. Protection and Management

4.4.9

The World Heritage Site is within the boundary of Liverpool City Council. The property is protected through the planning system and through the designation of over 260 buildings. The whole property is protected by Conservation Areas. The World Heritage Site is subject to different plans and policies, including the Liverpool Unitary Development Plan (2002), the Strategic Regeneration Framework (July 2001) and the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site SPD (2009). There are several detailed master plans for specified areas, and conservation plans for the individual buildings. A full Management Plan has been prepared for the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 61

World Heritage Site. Its implementation is overseen by a Liverpool World Heritage Site Steering Group, which includes most public bodies involved in the property.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 62

4.5

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF HERITAGE ASSETS AND ATTRIBUTES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO AND CONVEY OUV

Heritage Assets 4.5.1

The Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Baseline Study includes a gazetteer of Key Features of

Archaeological and Historical Interest in Liverpool Waters and its Environs. The gazetteer draws and expands on the list of heritage assets included in the WHS Nomination Document, and complements the key features identified in the WHS SPD. The baseline study is supplemented by further archaeological evaluation. 4.5.2

The key tangible heritage assets within and outside the site drawn from the gazetteer and archaeological evaluation that contribute to OUV are as follows (and identified geographically on Figure 2): A. Within Liverpool Waters Site 

Hydraulic Engine House, Bramley-Moore Dock. Engine house, accumulator tower and truncated octagonal chimney, 1884. Listed Grade II. Situated at the north east corner of the site. It provided the power to operate many of the dock features such as swing bridges, capstans, lock gates and cranes.



Bramley-Moore Dock and retaining dock walls built by J Hartley. Grade II Listed retaining walls of fairfaced granite rubble, and includes entrances to Sandon Half Tide and Nelson Docks. At around 10 acres, it is the largest of the five northern docks built by Hartley in 1848. Originally it handled the larger steamers, but later became the centre of Liverpool’s coal export, with an overhead coal railway.



Nelson Dock and retaining dock walls built by J Hartley. Grade II Listed retaining walls of fairfaced granite rubble, and includes entrances to Bramley-Moore and Salisbury Docks. Originally used by screw steamers, by the late 19th century the dock was mainly used by the coastal trade.



Dock Boundary Wall and Entrances from opposite Sandhills Lane to Collingwood Dock. Grade II listed wall c.5.5 metres high, built by J Hartley of large irregular shaped blocks of granite, and with large carved plaques e.g.: ‘Collingwood Dock’. Entrances at north end of Bramley-Moore Dock, north of Nelson Dock and north of

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 63

Collingwood Dock have round tapering towers, the central one taller and larger. Wooden gates survive in one of the gateways, though now out of use. The wall incorporates cast iron stanchions remaining from the Liverpool overhead railway, designed by James Greathead and Sir Douglas Fox for the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board in 1888, and a cast iron drinking fountain, one of a series of 33 that were installed in 1859 in an attempt to keep the dock workers out of the pubs. 

Collingwood Dock and retaining dock walls built by J Hartley. Grade II Listed retaining walls of fairfaced granite rubble, and includes entrances to Stanley and Salisbury Docks. The dock was used by coasters, and was the home of the Liverpool Corporation refuse boats.



Salisbury Dock and retaining dock walls built by J Hartley. Grade II Listed retaining walls of fairfaced granite rubble, and includes entrances to Stanley and Salisbury Docks. It was built essentially as an entrance dock to the other docks, though was also used for coastal and barge traffic. The entrance to the Mersey has been blocked.



Sea Wall to the islands at entrance of Salisbury Dock, and south of the entrance for a length of approx. 117m. Grade II Listed retaining walls of fairfaced granite rubble with raised lip to coping.



Victoria Tower by J Hartley, Listed Grade II. The tower is of fairfaced granite rubble with a round battered base and octagonal upper part. It was designed as a clock and bell tower to give time to neighbouring docks and arriving and departing ships in addition to ringing out high tide and warning notes; there was also a Pier Master’s flat within the building.



Dock Master’s Office, Salisbury Dock by J Hartley, on sea wall south of Victoria Tower. Listed Grade II. Battered walls of fairfaced granite rubble, with bracketed parapet and battlements. Attached is a section of the original brick dock boundary wall, with a lean-to police hut on the outer seaward face.



Former Police Station and Cells, Clarence Graving Dock, probably c.1848. Attached is a section of the original brick dock boundary wall.



Clarence Graving Docks, built by J Hartley, Listed Grade II. They were modernised in 1928-33, and have stepped sides and granite barrel runs. The southern graving dock has two chambers.



Group of small buildings around the Clarence Graving Docks, comprising a late 19th century brick warehouse set between the two graving docks, two early 20th century

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 64

brick office buildings, an open storage shelter and three brick and concrete air raid shelters dating from the Second World War. 

Dock Boundary Wall and Entrances from Collingwood Dock to Waterloo Dock. The wall extends along Regent Road and Waterloo Road and has entrances to Clarence Graving Docks, Clarence Dock, Victoria Dock, Trafalgar Dock, Waterloo Docks and Princes Dock. The wall is of brick and the entrances, which are Listed Grade II are of sandstone. It dates from the period between 1836 and 1841 when the docks were extended. The wall incorporates cast iron stanchions remaining from the Liverpool overhead railway, and drinking fountains.



Clarence Dock, Liverpool’s first steamship dock, designed by J Hartley. In 1929 the dock was sold to Liverpool City Council and developed as a coal-fired power station. Substantial sections of the dock retaining walls remain below ground, though part was removed for the 1950s extension of the power station.



Trafalgar Dock (new) was built in 1929 as part of a programme of modernisation following the infilling of the Clarence Dock and Clarence Graving Dock Basin. Clarence Half Tide and the outer end of Trafalgar Dock were reworked take in the area previously occupied by the Clarence Half Tide Dock and Clarence Graving Dock Basin, and the truncation of the Graving Docks. It was largely infilled c.2000. Sections of earlier dock retaining walls are likely to survive below ground.



Trafalgar Dock (old) was originally built in 1836 by J Hartley and comprised a rectangular basin with access via the Victoria entrance to the south or Clarence Half Tide Dock to the north. In 1929 the dock was re-formed as above. It was infilled in the 1970s, but substantial sections of the original dock retaining walls are likely to survive below ground.



Victoria Dock was constructed as part of the dock expansion programme in 1836, and was designed by J Hartley. In 1929 the dock was connected with the reconfigured West Waterloo Dock, and modified again in 1949. It was infilled in the 1970s, but substantial sections of the original dock retaining walls are likely to survive below ground.



Waterloo Dock, originally constructed in 1834 by J Hartley, comprising a single basin orientated east-west. It was rebuilt in 1863-68 as the East Waterloo and West Waterloo Docks. Sections of the original dock retaining walls are likely to survive below ground.



Waterloo West Dock, was one of two branch docks aligned north-south, part of a rebuilding of the original 1834 Waterloo Dock in 1863-68 by G Lyster. The dock provided berths for medium sized ocean-going vessels and provided a passage between Victoria

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 65

Dock and Prince’s Half Tide Dock. A new river entrance with locks was built in 1949 at the south end of the dock, removing the Dock Master’s Office and West Shed, and blocking the entrance to Princes’ Half Tide Dock. 

Princes Half Tide Dock and retaining walls began as a tidal basin, built at the same time as Princes Dock in 1821 by J Foster. It was modernised and rebuilt around 1968 by G Lyster, with dock retaining walls in the style of Hartley, and two passages and a barge lock were built at the river entrance. The retaining walls are Listed Grade II and are of fairfaced granite rubble. The dock includes entrances to West Waterloo and East Waterloo Docks, where recesses survive for swing bridges that no longer exist.



Princes Dock and retaining dock walls. Liverpool’s first 19th century dock, opened in 1821, was built by J Foster to the designs of J Rennie. It was built for ships operating on the North American trade routes, the Far East trade and by the 20th century coastal and Irish traffic. It was altered during the early 20th century and comprised single storey transit sheds and a passenger railway station. The dock was the first in Liverpool to have a boundary wall. It was partially infilled in 1999-2000 and redeveloped.



Princes Dock Boundary Wall and Entrances. The wall originally extended around all sides of the dock, but survives only on the east side. It was begun in 1816 and completed by 1821, and includes two Grade II Listed entrances.



Princes Pier, built at the northern end of the Liverpool Landing Stage in 1899-1900 by AG Lyster, in association with Gustave Mouchel. It was the first reinforced concrete structure in the docks and one of the earliest examples of the use of the Hennebique system in Britain. The landing stage was the embarkation point for emigrants and travellers by ship and was connected to Riverside Railway Station by covered bridges at two levels.

Outside Liverpool Waters Site 

Leeds and Liverpool Canal, the longest single canal in Britain built by a single company, begun in 1770 and completed in 1816. It is crossed at the head of Stanley Dock by a bridge built by J Hartley of granite rubble in 1848, listed Grade II.



Stanley Dock built by J Hartley, and the only dock east of Regent Road, providing a link between the dock system and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. It had been envisaged from the outset as a fully enclosed dock like Albert, with warehouses within a boundary wall, to provide secure storage for high value or bonded goods. Connection with the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway enabled direct dispatch of bonded goods from the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 66

warehouses to most of the key towns of the Lancashire hinterland and beyond. There was also a connection to the Dock Railway connecting Stanley to other docks, and the lines of the London and North Western Railway. Stanley Dock was partly infilled in 1900 when the massive Tobacco Warehouse was erected between Hartley’s warehouses. The north Hartley warehouse is listed Grade II*, the south warehouse and the Tobacco Warehouse are both Grade II. Also Grade II listed are the four entrances to the dock with their characteristic granite rubble built gate piers and gate watchman’s huts, and also the hydraulic tower to the west of the north warehouse. 

Bascule Bridge, an hydraulically-operated rolling bascule bridge carrying Regent Road across the entrance to the Stanley Dock from Collingwood Dock, built in 1932.



Bonded Tea Warehouse, 177 Great Howard Street, Listed Grade II. Built of brick to the design of S and J Holme, it is of six storeys and a basement, presenting a regular front to Great Howard Street, and stretches from Dublin Street to Dickenson Street. The listed building entry gives a date of around 1880, but it is more likely to date from the 1840s following the introduction of fireproofing regulations in the Building Act of 1843.



Warehouse, 27 Vulcan Street, six storey brick warehouse from the mid 19th century, Listed Grade II. Other 19th and early 20th century warehouses are at 17 Porter Street, 1315 Porter Street, 8 Vulcan Street, 9 Vulcan Street and 10 Vulcan Street.



Waterloo East Dock was one of two branch docks aligned north-south, part of a rebuilding of the original 1834 Waterloo Dock in 1863-68 by G Lyster. It was the world’s first specialist bulk grain dock, with three blocks of warehouses equipped for the handling and storage of grain on the north, west and east sides of the dock. In 1904 parts of the warehouses were turned into a mill and by 1925 the warehouses were re-equipped to handle oil seeds. Two of the warehouse blocks have been demolished; one following war damage in 1941, and the other in 1969 to make way for a container terminal.



Waterloo Grain Warehouse, West Waterloo Dock. Built by G Lyster, with granite base and limestone lower floor, 6 storeys and 43 x 5 bays. Listed Grade II. It is the only one to survive of the three original warehouses that surrounded the West Waterloo Dock, and has been converted to apartments.



Port of Liverpool Building, built as the offices of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board in 1903-07, and designed by Briggs and Wolstenholme with Hobbs and Thornely. It was the first of the trio of buildings to be erected on the site of the obsolete George’s Dock as part of a municipally planned development of the Pier Head. The three buildings were conceived as landmarks to act as a symbol of maritime Liverpool at the height of its

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 67

prosperity and influence. The dock office building is a large rectangular block in English Baroque style of impressive grandeur with turrets at the four corners and a high coppercovered dome at the centre. 

Royal Liver Building by Aubrey Thomas and built 1908-11 for the Royal Liver Friendly Society. It was part of a planned development of the site previously occupied by the George’s Dock. Notable as one of the earliest multi-storey reinforced concrete framed buildings in Britain designed on the Hennedique system, it is wholly faced in granite. In developing the eclectic design, Thomas drew on influences from North American commercial architecture, mixed with Byzantine motifs and echoes of Hawksmoor’s London churches. With its eye-catching roofline of domes and towers topped by the two liver birds with outspread wings, the building was hailed as the first UK skyscraper, and was a blatant advertisement to a worldwide public. It is Listed Grade I.



Cunard Building by Willink and Thicknesse, was built in 1914-16 for the Cunard Steamship Company to an original design by Arthur J Davis of Mewes and Davis. By comparison to the other two buildings it shuns bombast in favour of refinement, and is emphatically horizontal to contrast with the discordant buildings on either side. The Italian Renaissance palazzo style is derived from American architects such as Mc Kim Mead and White.

Aspects of OUV 4.5.3

The Statement of OUV for the WHS as a whole is set out in Section 3.4. It is derived from the three Criteria for Inscription of the WHS. The Statement of Significance refers to the following Values relating to the WHS as a whole: 

The role of Liverpool as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence



A major commercial port in the 18th century when it was also crucial for the organisation of the trans-Atlantic slave trade



A world mercantile centre for general cargo and mass European emigration to the New World in the 19th century



Major influence on world trade being one of the principal ports of the British Commonwealth



Its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities became an important reference worldwide

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 68



Liverpool also became instrumental in the development of industrial canals in the British Isles in the 18th century, as well as rail transport in the 19th century Throughout the period, and particularly in the 19th and early 20th centuries, Liverpool



gave attention to the quality and innovation of its architecture and cultural activities 

The testimony of cultural achievement is seen in its outstanding public buildings such as St George’s Hall and its museums Even in the 20th century, Liverpool has given a lasting contribution, which is remembered



in the success of The Beatles 4.5.4

The following physical attributes of the city as related in the Liverpool Waters site and its wider setting are crucial to understanding the Values set out above: 

Landform – the topography of Liverpool is influenced by a steep sandstone escarpment which frames the city centre and allows for views on the open side facing the Mersey.



Varied skyline with buildings rising up the sloping ground and landmark buildings on the ridge.



Landmark buildings – these are key reference points across the city and part of its visual structure. They are identified within the Evidential Report that accompanies the WHS SPD, and include the Pier Head group, Waterloo Warehouse, Stanley Dock and Victoria Clock Tower.



Waterfront – the dockyards formed a broad band along the river front, insular in design with dock walls forming a protective ring around them and separating them from the rest of the city.



Relationship between river and WHS.



Views across the River Mersey – these are fundamental to the character of the WHS and are also part of the setting of listed buildings such as the Pier Head, the Victoria Clock Tower and the Albert Dock.



Large expanses of water, including the Mersey and the dock spaces.



Warehouses and their settings.



The Pier Head as a principal focal point on the riverfront.



The city centre as the heart of a wider urban area



Varied nature of urban grain and street form, and lack of uniformity in height of buildings and architectural treatment.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 69



Juxtaposition of buildings of different periods along waterfront that demonstrate the evolution of the mercantile city.



The increasing size and scale of engineering structures and buildings taking advantage of innovation and advances in technology to meet the demands of economic growth.



Architectural excellence, reflecting the wealth, aspiration and civic pride of the merchant class and civic leaders.



High quality and durability of materials and construction techniques in engineering and architecture.



Hard surfaces and edges reflecting the functional nature of the dockland estate.

Heritage Attributes that contribute to OUV 4.5.5

Considered in terms of the three criteria of inscription as a WHS, the following cumulative list of tangible and intangible heritage attributes have been identified as contributing to the understanding of OUV: Criterion (ii): Innovative techniques and methods of construction 

Layout and planning of docks in relation to each other, to the river, to the city and to other transport modes



Dock structures including dock gates



Warehouses



Technical buildings



Dock wall and security



Innovative port management



Spirit of innovation



International mercantile systems

Criterion (iii): Maritime Mercantile Culture 

Dock structures, Victoria Clock Tower, boundary wall



Commercial offices and banks



Prestigious display buildings



Lives of merchants



Lives of dock workers



Lives of sailors

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 70



Role in the slave trade



Role in emigration

Criterion (iv): Outstanding Example of World Mercantile City

4.6



Dock landscape



Docks and urban plan



Relationship of commercial centre, docks, river and sea



Civic pride manifested in grand architecture



Commercial offices, shipping offices and banks



Cultural display

CLARIFICATION OF THE LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTEGRITY AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE WHS

Integrity 4.6.1

Integrity relates to whether all the attributes that convey OUV are extant within the property, and the degree of wholeness and intactness in which they exist. In assessing the impact of development, it is necessary to consider whether the proposals would lead to their erosion or cause them to be threatened.

4.6.2

The integrity of the Liverpool Waters site as working docks has been lost, and cannot be reclaimed. Yet the survival of original dock structures contributes to the wider urban landscape which retains a high degree of intactness. In the part of the site that is within the WHS, the docks survive largely intact, together with operational buildings such as the Clock Tower, the hydraulic engine house and the dockmaster’s office, and historic surfaces and dock furniture. Whilst most of the docks in the Buffer Zone have been infilled or altered, substantial sections of dock wall remain below ground, and have the potential to inform the nature of future development, and thus the understanding of OUV.

3.6.3

The surviving dockland buildings within and surrounding the site, such as the Stanley Dock, the Waterloo Warehouse and the Victoria Clock Tower are prominent in the urban landscape and have strong visual links with the river.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 71

4.6.4

It is important to understand, however, that the visual relationships that exist between the buildings and structures today are quite different to those when the docks were in active use. For the clearance of transit sheds and other buildings, and the absence of vessels, cranes and gantries give the area a sense of openness that reflects a gradual erosion of integrity. Whilst the transit sheds were relatively low and horizontal in outline, they contained the dock water spaces and prevented long views across the site. Furthermore, for over 50 years during the 20th century, the Clarence Dock Power Station was a dominant structure, as were the two other Waterloo Warehouses that were demolished after the Second World War.

Artificial sense of openness across the site 4.6.5

The part of the Stanley Dock Conservation Area with the highest level of integrity is the Stanley Dock itself, which is not in the ownership of the planning applicant, and is therefore not in the Liverpool Waters site. This complex is in very poor condition, and is unlikely to be restored unless land values rise to overcome the huge funding deficit that currently exists for the approved conversion scheme. This upturn will almost certainly depend on development taking place at Liverpool Waters.

4.6.6

The principal historic structures within the site all require conservation and regular maintenance. A condition survey carried out in 2009 identified the need for urgent repairs to some of the structures. These works have been carried out to all but the hydraulic engine house, which has more fundamental structural problems. A conservation management plan has been prepared which sets out a comprehensive programme of repair and maintenance over future years.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 72

Authenticity 4.6.7

Authenticity relates to the way attributes convey OUV. This depends upon the use and function of the area, its layout and design, the way it is perceived and its sense of place, together with the management systems. In assessing the impact of development, it is therefore necessary to consider whether the proposals will damage or enhance the ability to understand the WHS’s OUV.

4.6.8

Paragraph 3.1.9 of the WHS SPD describes the historical development of the docks:

Throughout the 19th century the docks continued to develop and eventually they stretched seven miles along the river front. Canning Dock was opened in 1832, with Canning Half-Tide Dock being added in the 1840s. The landing stage at the Pier Head was added in 1833 with a replacement being added in 1845. Other major docks added in the early 19th century include Princes Dock (1821), Waterloo Dock (1834) and Clarence Dock (1830). The 1840s saw the largest dock building programme, with the construction of Albert Dock and the large scale extension of the docks northwards, with the construction of Salisbury Dock, Collingwood Dock, Stanley Dock, Nelson Dock, Bramley-Moore Dock , Wellington Dock and Sandon Dock. Wapping Basin and Wapping Dock at the south end of the WHS were added in the 1850s. The early 20th century saw the continued expansion of the docks, with the construction of the massive tobacco warehouse in Stanley Dock, dated 1901, as well as the redevelopment of the Pier Head. 4.6.9

Today the Albert Dock character area and the Stanley Dock character area combine to convey the importance of the docks to Liverpool’s mercantile status, and exist as a legible dockland landscape.

4.6.10

Whilst Liverpool Waters site is wholly disused and derelict at present, the part that is within the WHS has not been adapted to alternative uses, and retains much evidence of its original function. Significant changes were made to the part that is within the buffer zone during the second half of the 20th century, as a result of which it lacks the degree of authenticity seen in the WHS. Even in its present state, however, it retains something of its original spatial form and relationship with the river.

4.6.11

The main attributes of authenticity are the inter-linked historic docks, the river wall, the dock boundary wall and the warehousing at the Stanley Dock and the Waterloo East Dock, together with the Victoria Clock Tower, the Dock Master’s Office and the Hydraulic Engine House. Whilst

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 73

these are authentic structures, all need conservation and effective management to ensure their long term survival. The surviving historic surfaces, rail tracks and quayside furniture also have the power to convey OUV.

Lower level of authenticity in the part of the Liverpool Waters site within the Buffer Zone 4.6.12

When in use as docks, the areas would have been active with vessels, transport, goods and people. Loading and unloading of ships, coming and going of barges, trains, carts and wagons would have filled the area with noise and bustle. Outside the Liverpool Waters site were warehouses, works, pubs and shops (only a few of which survive) that served the working population in the service of commerce and leisure.

4.6.13

In the quietude that now characterises the site, the level of authenticity has been significantly affected. This is further denied by the absence of public access to an area that is hidden behind a high boundary wall, and wholly on private land. However, the purpose of the enclosing wall was to separate the dockyards from the rest of the city, and by opening the site up, authenticity will inevitably be further eroded. Development nonetheless offers an opportunity to enhance the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 74

understanding of OUV through reinforcing and interpreting the attributes of authenticity that have been affected by loss and decay. 4.7

THE CHARACTERISTICS ESSENTIAL TO LIVERPOOL

4.7.1

A number of special factors that make the city unique and distinctive have been identified by the Liverpool Waters team in conjunction with Liverpool City Council, and endorsed by English Heritage. These overlap with the defined intangible attributes of OUV, but also take account of the topography, the genius loci, the unique sense of place, the local culture and community. The characteristics are as follows: 

The Special Location: By virtue of its particular Merseyside location in the north-west of England, Liverpool is one of the UK’s major ocean gateways to the world. In turn this has made Liverpool a major focus nationally and regionally. This has had a fundamental influence on the city’s appearance – its buildings, features and transport networks.



The Importance of Water: Water-based connections are crucial and they are numerous. They include the Atlantic and Far East maritime routes and those to Ireland, routes within the Mersey Estuary, along the Manchester Ship Canal and along the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. In the past these provided the basis for a revolution in industry, trade and society – and the beginnings of globalisation. They are of continuing importance. The water-based business which was central to Liverpool’s development focussed on the docks. Water is also the basis of the important characteristics of openness and enclosure. The waterfront is harsh and exposes to the elements. It contrasts sharply with the docks that shelter and enclose – a response to adversity and an elegant mix.



The Iconic Skyline: The land on which the City is built rises from the Mersey shore in the west to a ridge in the east. Liverpool rises from the Mersey, as seen from the Wirral. The topography highlights the renowned, strong waterfront skyline, its buildings seen to advantage in tiers. The reverse view – from the crest and key viewpoints elsewhere – comprises long vistas across the river and out to the open sea.



Prominent, Distinctive Architectural Set Pieces: Liverpool’s characteristic buildings are robust demonstrations of prosperity and wealth, heroic in scale, forceful in outline, grand and rugged. Such qualities express not only the past wealth of the city, but also its self-confidence. Importantly, many were commissioned by Liverpool businesses

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 75

successful on the world stage – and were directed to that stage. The major public sector buildings were conceived in a similar light. All of these set pieces define Liverpool’s appearance and are essential to its character. 

Legibility: Liverpool is a city that is easy to read. Its topography, its landmarks, its views and vistas, and its strong sense of connectivity encourage exploration and bring delight.



Vision and Determination: Liverpool was built on a spirit of optimism and innovation, which is still reflected in its buildings. Being bold is a tradition for the city, willing to test new ideas and pioneer new technology. That underlying spirit remains, despite the massive difficulties of economic restructuring that have been faced.



Commercial Astuteness: The development of the city was driven by astute commercial decisions. The banks, exchanges and office buildings were the product of the hugely successful trade which resulted. These great, characteristic buildings celebrate the power and value of commerce.



Internationalism: The city has looked outwards to Ireland, to America and to the Far East and continues to do so. It has welcomed migration and is one of the country’s most cosmopolitan cities with a legacy of buildings that express cultural diversity. Today it is twinned with both Shanghai and San Francisco.



The People and their Culture: Cosmopolitan, outward-looking, pragmatic, bold, openminded people with a typically sardonic sense of humour. Music specifically – and a strong, highly-regarded artistic sector generally – put Liverpool on the world stage...and two pre-eminent football teams! There is a strong sense of belonging and of Liverpool’s role as the UK’s second city in the recent past. Artefacts and social remnants of that past remain a vital part of today’s identity for residents and visitors.



Human Activity: Liverpool, particularly the central parts, is characterised by bustling activity. In their heyday, the docks, the Pier Head and the waterfront were intensely active places, thronging with movement and the scene of constant movement. Now the focus of activity is the commercial core, the shopping area and tourist destinations. Without human activity these urban places are dead places.

4.7.2

These characteristics are referred to where relevant in the assessment, and the proposed scheme is also considered for how it represents these essential factors about Liverpool’s distinctiveness.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 76

5.0

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

5.1

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL

5.1.1

The outline application proposal for Liverpool Waters involves regenerating a 60 hectare historic dockland site to create a high quality, mixed use waterfront quarter in central Liverpool. It is proposed to accommodate substantial growth of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy and residential numbers based on a 30 year development programme.

5.1.2

5.1.3

The application is accompanied by a masterplan, informed by baseline research and analysis, and by the policies and guidance included in the WHS SPD (see Figures 4-7). The Governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s adviser on architecture and urban design, CABE, advises that masterplans are valuable and that they can be helpful in three specific urban contexts, one of which is regeneration, to evaluate the current context and propose physical change. The closure of an industry that results in large areas of brownfield and redundant land being available for development in docks is one such example of regeneration cited by CABE - precisely as at Liverpool Waters.

5.1.4

During the development of the masterplan, extensive consultations, carried out over four years, were held on heritage and urban design matters with Liverpool City Council, English Heritage and CABE. At the broadest level a vision for Liverpool Waters was agreed with officers of the City Council, which is quoted in full at paragraph 3.5.1 of the Design and Access Statement. Following the preparation of a draft masterplan layout by Peel, continuing consultations with the Council, English Heritage and CABE resulted in successive refinement of the layout proposals. The Liverpool Waters planning application was submitted when substantial agreement had been reached on most aspects of the masterplan.

5.1.5

The Liverpool Waters master plan creates a number of distinct neighbourhoods each with its own character, related to the existing pattern of dock water spaces and land form, with its own grain, network of public spaces, and connecting pedestrian and vehicular routes. It will provide ease of

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 77

movement and connections between Northshore, its hinterland and the city centre. It is intended to accommodate new and existing residents, attract national and international businesses and encourage a significant increase in the number of visitors to the city, adding to Liverpool’s cultural offer and providing a new and complementary destination. 5.1.6

The application sets parameters for the height of buildings, floor areas and volumes of proposed uses. At the south east corner of the site, it is proposed to reinforce the existing cluster of tall buildings in the commercial district, including the Shanghai Tower, which would occupy a site on the eastern side of Princes Dock, with a new public space linking the building across the dock to the waterfront. To the north of Princes Dock it is proposed to introduce a new cruise ship facility and a cultural venue. A secondary cluster of tall buildings is proposed in the area of the former Clarence Dock, set between a central public space and the existing canal link which passes through the site. The area north of the Victoria Clock Tower and Clarence Graving Docks is proposed to be developed with medium rise blocks occupying the sites of former transit sheds around the perimeter of the large water spaces.

5.1.7

5.2

RELEVANT SPECIFICATION AND DRAWINGS

5.2.1

Documents comprise: •

Baseline Report

•

Design and Access Statement

•

Parameter Plans – Site Location; Neighbourhood Plans; Phasing Plan; Development Parcels; Development Plots; Building Heights; Access and Movement Plan; Car Parking Plan; Buildings to be Demolished and Areas of High Potential for Underground Archaeology

•

Area schedule

•

Fixed schedule of accommodation

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 78

•

Indicative movement plan and public open space

•

Fixed movement plan and open space

•

Massing model

•

Views and montages

•

Aerial views

•

Cumulative impact data

•

Public Realm Charaterisation

•

Environmental Statement

•

Energy Statement

•

Flood Risk Assessment

•

Planning and Regeneration Statement

•

Retail, Leisure and Office Statement

•

Sustainability Appraisal

•

Destination Strategy

•

Masterplan and Key Principles Document

•

Statement of Community Involvement

•

Transport Statement

•

Conservation Management Plan

Liverpool Waters Site in 1865

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 79

6.0

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON EACH ATTRIBUTE OF OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE

6. 1

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

6.1.1

As stated in paragraph 2.3.3, the potential impact of development on aspects of the historic environment that convey OUV is assessed under the following six categories: 

Direct and indirect impacts on a schedule of heritage assets that have been identified as reflecting OUV (section 5.1)



Impact on Key Views of and from the Liverpool Waters site identified in pre-application discussions (section 5.2)



Impact on Views and Setting of strategic Landmark Buildings within the WHS and Buffer Zone (section 5.3)



Impact on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of the six defined Character Areas that make up the WHS (section 5.4)

6.1.2



Compliance with Guidance in WHS SPD (section 5.5)



Cumulative Impact Assessment on OUV (section 5.6)

The impact is assessed in: 

A text description that outlines the heritage asset or attribute of OUV and its setting, referring to the impact of proposed development by way of plans, massing studies and photomontages as appropriate.



A matrix/spreadsheet summary of assessment to enable rapid analysis of results.



Conclusions and summary

6.1.3

The assessment takes account of international, national and local planning policies and guidance.

6.1.4

The assessment considers how the opportunities for interpretation, presentation and transmission of the OUV of the WHS are being used as an integral part of the development proposals.

6.1.5

A concluding statement considers the balance of benefits of the scheme against negative impacts, with any mitigating measures. This takes account of the positive contribution that the Liverpool Waters scheme will bring to the repair and protection of heritage assets, as well as the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 80

opportunities offered by public access, interpretation and active use of the area. The conclusion is based on an assessment of impacts on each attribute and cumulative impacts. 6.2

DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACT ON HERITAGE ASSETS Introduction This section considers the impact both on historic fabric and on the setting of the principal heritage assets in and surrounding the development site and their contribution to OUV. The location of each of the heritage assets is shown on Figure 2. The methodology produced by LCC in conjunction with EH in 2010 for the Liverpool Waters scheme specified that the assessment of impact on heritage assets should consider the effect on historic fabric alone. After completion of the initial assessment, EH recommended that the effect on the setting of heritage assets should also be assessed, and in the brief produced for their own HIA (carried out by Heritage Places), they called for a combined single impact rating based on a 1:1 mathematical ratio for fabric and setting. This was based on the assumption that impacts on fabric and impacts on setting are of equal significance. For the sake of consistency, and to follow EHâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s guidance, this revised report assesses the impact on both fabric and setting, and adopts the same 1:1 ratio. The assessment of impact on fabric takes account of the Conservation Management Plan (CMP) that has been prepared since the planning application was submitted. This clarifies the future commitment to preservation and enhancement of heritage assets. The CMP sets out a management framework, quality standards, and a programme of repair and maintenance. High standards of conservation have already been demonstrated in the first phase of repair to the dock wall that was carried out in 2009 and the restoration of the Bascule Bridge in 2010. These works have been acknowledged as examples of good conservation practice by Liverpool City Council and English Heritage. The programme of conservation will be secured by means of a Section 106 Agreement. The assessment of impact on setting follows the definition in national policy guidance PPS5 as: the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed, and may

change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. It is stated that elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of a heritage asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance, or may be neutral. The Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide that accompanies PPS5 provides additional definitions and points out that whilst the extent and Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 81

importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations, the way in which we experience an asset in its setting is also influenced by other environmental considerations such as noise, dust and vibration; by spatial associations; and by our understanding of the historic relationship between places. Impacts may be temporary or permanent, direct or indirect.

In autumn 2010 English Heritage issued a draft consultation document The Setting of Heritage Assets, which provides detailed guidance on understanding the setting of heritage assets and assessing the impact of any changes affecting them. Whilst the guidance remains in draft, it offers helpful advice, and provides a checklist to help understand how setting contributes to significance: 

What does the location of the asset within its setting (including its topography) contribute to the asset’s significance?



What does the asset’s functional relationship with its setting contribute to its significance?



What does the asset’s aesthetic relationship with its setting (including artistic representations of that relationship) contribute to its significance?



How does the landscape character of the asset’s setting contribute to its significance?



How does the extent, history and speed of change within the setting contribute to the asset’s significance?



How do views of the asset within its setting contribute to its significance?



What non-visual sensory influences within the setting contribute to the asset’s significance?



How do the asset’s intellectual and associative relationships with its setting add to its significance?



How rare are similar relationships between other assets and their settings and how does this rarity contribute to the asset’s significance?

The EH guidance recommends that any assessment of impact should sequentially address three questions: 1. Is the development of a particular type, scale, massing or prominence within the setting of an asset likely to be acceptable or unacceptable in terms of the degree of harm to its significance? Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 82

2. Is the precise location of the development likely to be a critical factor in determining whether the degree of harm to significance is acceptable or unacceptable? 3. Are more detailed aspects of the development’s design likely to be a critical factor in determining whether the degree of harm to significance is acceptable or unacceptable? Attention is also drawn by EH to ways in which change affecting the setting of a heritage asset can enhance as well as diminish its significance, for example by: 

Removing or re-shaping an intrusive building or feature



Restoring or revealing a lost historic feature



Introducing a new feature which adds to the heritage significance of the asset



Replacement of a detrimental feature by a new more harmonious one



Improving public access to the setting and thereby increasing public understanding or enjoyment of the asset

In determining the scale or severity of impact on setting, the aim has been to assess to what degree any changes affect the contribution made by the heritage asset to OUV. 6.2.1

BRAMLEY-MOORE DOCK AND RETAINING WALLS

Bramley-Moore Dock looking north east

View showing Clock Tower concealed

History and Description The Bramley-Moore Dock is the most northerly dock within the Liverpool Waters site, and also the largest. It is one of the group of five docks that were planned and built by Jesse Hartley in 184448 as part of a single construction programme. The five docks formed an enclosed, Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 83

interconnecting system, with the Salisbury Dock providing a link to the river. Along with Nelson Dock, the Bramley-Moore Dock was built with the intention of taking the largest steam ships, and its gates were thus built wider than those of the Clarence Dock, the rapidly increasing size of ships meant that it was soon found to be inadequate, and the dock specialised in coal export. In the later 19th century a high level coal railway was built by the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, which allowed wagons of coal to be taken directly to ships and dumped into the holds. The retaining walls of fair faced granite rubble, constructed of large and small blocks, are listed Grade II and include entrances to Sandon Half-Tide and Nelson Docks. The recesses for a swing bridge survive at the entrance to the Nelson Dock, where a concrete isolation structure has been installed by British Waterways to control the water level in the canal link between the Albert Dock and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. Around the quaysides a number of historic features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards survive. An area of stone setts totalling 3000 sq m survives between the riverfront and the dock. A smaller area of setts in two different sizes totalling 700 sq m survives just inside the gateway south of Bramley-Moore Dock together with some short sections of rail track. Condition The dock is still in use for storage of sand and gravel, with access for vessels via the Sandon Dock to the north. An isolation structure in the passage between the Bramley-Moore and Nelson Docks prevents access to the Nelson Dock. The timber dock gates to the north passage survive in decayed condition. The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the BramleyMoore Dock walls are generally in sound condition, though with some loss of mortar, particularly below copings, vegetal growth, and minor cracks. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The dock is currently open to the river, which is consequently part of its setting. This, however, is artificial, since the dock was flanked by single storey transit sheds on all four sides for most of its operational life. As well as the dock boundary wall on the east side, there was similar security on the river front. The presence of the wall and transits sheds, as well as the overhead coal railway and other dockside structures meant that the dock was not visible either from the river or from the dock road, nor from the Nelson Dock or the other docks to the south. The hydraulic engine house and the boundary wall are other heritage structures that are within the present setting. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 84

Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Bramley-Moore Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out residential development around the perimeter of the dock as part of Phase 5 of the masterplan (2016-2041). This will involve the demolition of the existing 20th century transit shed and two small brick buildings which are of no special significance. Development in the form of apartment blocks rising from 28 m maximum height on the eastern side of the dock to 38 m on the river front are proposed to give enclosure to the water body. Two levels of underground car parking will be constructed below the perimeter blocks, set back from the line of the dock walls to avoid intervention into the below ground structures. A floating walkway will be constructed across the dock with pontoons for mooring sailing vessels. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the retaining walls and copings, historic features including the timber lock gates, capstans, mooring posts and historic surfacing will be retained and restored, and water will be maintained within the basin. The assessment of archaeological potential indicates that the proposed underground car parks will not affect below ground archaeology In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 85

Impact on Setting: The linear layout of the development has been designed to follow the footprint of the former transit sheds enclosing the water body. Whilst the height of the proposed blocks is considerably greater than the single storey transit sheds, the scale is consistent with other dockside development, and the ratio of building height to width of dock basin does not exceed other historic docks. In view of the huge area of water and the robust character of the dock walls, the scale of development would not harm the significance of the dock. The riverside blocks will protect the water space from the harsh climate, but there will be glimpses out to the river at ground and first floor level. This will afford a similar level of visual permeability between the dock and the Mersey as existed historically. The assessment of impact on OUV commissioned by English Heritage from Heritage Places has suggested that the historic relationship between the dock and the Victoria Clock Tower would be destroyed by the height of development. This is incorrect, since the existing single storey transit shed on the south side of the Bramley-Moore Dock prevents the clock tower being visible from any of the quaysides at present (see photograph above). The water space will also benefit from the introduction of a marina, bringing sailing vessels, water sports and other active uses back into the dock. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 86

6.2.2

HYDRAULIC ENGINE HOUSE, BRAMLEY-MOORE DOCK

Hydraulic Tower from east

View from west showing remains of overhead coal railway

History and Description The Hydraulic Engine House stands to the north east of the Bramley-Moore Dock in the far corner of the site. It consists of a brick engine house and accumulator tower with a truncated octagonal chimney and slate roofs. Attached at the rear are remains of the overhead coal railway that led to the Bramley-Moore Dock. The building contains little if any machinery or equipment. The building is not part of Hartley’s development of the group of five northern docks, but was added in 1884 by George Lyster to provide a source of hydraulic power for the operation of the lock gates, capstans and swing bridges for those docks. Hydraulic power relies on a head of water, and is produced by the action of a hydraulic ram, consisting of a hollow cylinder, closed at one end and in the other a sliding piston which is forced to move when water under pressure is admitted into the cylinder. The movement of the cylinder is then transferred to a chain and the piston’s travel is multiplied by the number of pulleys around which the chain passes. The accumulator, into which water was pumped by a steam engine, was developed by W G Armstrong in 1850. It provided a constant supply of high pressure water, and effectively stored power against demand, ironing out cyclical variations in pressure from pumps. Armstrong’s accumulators and associated machinery were widely used throughout the Liverpool Docks.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 87

Initially hydraulic power was used for specific pieces of equipment, such as cranes, but from the late 1850s, the concept of central hydraulic power generating stations was introduced. The first in Liverpool was introduced by Hartley at the Stanley Dock in 1854, followed by Wapping Dock in 1856, Birkenhead Docks 1861, Herculaneum Dock in 1864, Albert Dock in 1878 and BramleyMoore Dock in 1884. The technology was no longer pioneering when the building was erected, and by the 1930s, electric power had replaced hydraulic power throughout the docks. The form of the building is not remarkable in the way that those at the Stanley Dock or Birkenhead Docks are, and was not specifically intended to make an architectural statement. Condition The building is currently in poor condition, and requires major conservation and repair to walls, roof, rainwater goods, floors, windows and doors. Whilst the building has been secured against unauthorised entry, it has not been the subject of emergency repairs. Setting The engine house is now an isolated structure, but formerly it was more enclosed due to its attachment to the coal railway. It currently has a visual relationship with the dock boundary wall and the Bramley-Moore dock basin, but cannot be seen from the other northern docks because of the existing transit shed on the south side of Bramley-Moore Dock. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value Whilst the building was not at the forefront of power technology in the Liverpool Docks, coming considerably later than other hydraulic engine houses, it gains significance by its association with the group of northern docks, and is an important structure within the WHS. Although it is in a dilapidated state and lacks its original machinery and equipment, its contribution to OUV relates to its technological significance and as evidence of an integrated approach to port management.. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Hydraulic Engine House is assessed as Very High value.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 88

Proposed Development In Phase 5 of the masterplan, it is proposed to convert the building as a sustainable energy centre (for example CHP) providing energy for the northern part of the Liverpool Waters development. New development will be situated to the west and south east of the engine house on the quaysides where transit sheds were formerly located. In the revised masterplan, the height of the new development and its distance from the engine house have both been reduced so as to avoid any impact on the listed building. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The hydraulic engine house will not be physically altered by development. The CMP provides a programme for maintenance and repair, and indicates that all necessary structural and fabric repairs will be carried out to the building, historic features will be retained and restored, and the building will be returned to beneficial use. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: Whilst there will be some change in the setting of the engine house, the structure will benefit from regaining a closer relationship with other buildings and activity. The proposed heights of the adjoining new development are subsidiary to the tower, which will continue to read as a local feature within the dock space, and in views from along the dock road from the north, where it will be seen above the boundary wall. Viewed from the south, because of the bend in the road, the tower will be concealed. The use of the building as a sustainable energy centre will provide an opportunity for interpretation of the hydraulic power system that ran throughout the docks, and will contribute to the presentation of OUV. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 89

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.2.3

NELSON DOCK

Nelson Dock from north west History and Description The Nelson Dock is one of the group of five docks that were planned and built by Jesse Hartley in 1844-48 as part of a single construction programme. The five docks formed an enclosed, interconnecting system, with the Salisbury Dock providing a link to the river. The Nelson Dock served a variety of ships, including the largest steam ships of the time and its principal trade was with the livestock markets of Scotland and Ireland. It had transit sheds on all sides by 1850, though none now survive. The last regular trade was in bulk rum, which was piped to the north Stanley Dock warehouse. The retaining walls of fair faced granite rubble, constructed of large and small blocks, are listed Grade II and include entrances to Bramley-Moore and Salisbury Docks. The recesses for a swing bridge survive at the entrance to the Bramley-Moore Dock, where a concrete isolation structure has been installed by British Waterways to control the water level in the canal link between the Albert Dock and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. Around the quaysides a number of historic features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards survive. A patchy area of stone setts totalling 3000 sq m survives between the riverfront and the dock, extending eastwards to the entrance to the Salisbury Dock.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 90

Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the Nelson Dock walls are generally in sound condition, though with some loss of mortar, particularly below copings, vegetal growth, and minor cracks. No urgent repairs were identified. The timber dock gates to the north passage survive in decayed condition. Setting The present open setting of the dock is artificial. For most of its operational life, the dock was flanked by single storey transit sheds on all four sides, with the dock boundary wall on the east side. There was also originally a boundary wall on the river front. The presence of the wall and transits sheds meant that the dock was not visible either from the river or from the dock road, nor from the Nelson Dock or the other docks to the south. Even today, the dock cannot be seen from the river because of the height of the river wall. The dock boundary wall is the only heritage structure that is within the setting. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. According to the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Nelson Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed development It is proposed to carry out development around the perimeter of the dock as part of Phase 5 of the masterplan (2016-2041). Development in the form of apartment blocks rising from 31 m maximum height on the eastern side of the dock to 38 m on the river front are proposed in order to give enclosure to the water body. A four storey school building will be built on the eastern quayside, together with a multi-storey car park. Two levels of underground car parking will be constructed below the perimeter blocks, set back from the line of the dock walls to avoid

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 91

intervention into the below ground structures. A floating walkway will be constructed across the dock with an island at the centre for leisure activities. Impact Assessment

Impact on Setting: The linear blocks layout of development has been designed to follow to footprint of the former transit sheds enclosing the water body. Whilst the height of the proposed blocks is considerably greater than the transit sheds, the scale is consistent with other dockside development, and the ratio of building height to width of dock basin does not exceed other historic docks. In view of the huge area of water and the robust character of the dock walls, the scale of development would not harm the significance of the dock. The riverside blocks will protect the water space from the harsh climate, but there will be glimpses out to the river at ground and first floor level. This will afford a similar level of visual permeability between the dock and the Mersey as existed historically. The assessment of impact on OUV commissioned by English Heritage from Heritage Places has suggested that the historic relationship between the dock and the Victoria Clock Tower would be destroyed by the height of development, but this is incorrect, since the existing single storey transit shed on the south side of the Bramley-Moore Dock shows that the transit sheds would have prevented the clock tower being seen from any of the quaysides. This also shows that historically the dock was enclosed and visual permeability between the docks was very limited. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 92

Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 5.2.4

CAST IRON DRINKING FOUNTAIN, NELSON DOCK PERIMETER WALL

Drinking fountain from Regent Road History and Description Within the dock boundary wall at Nelson Dock is a surviving cast iron drinking fountain, one of a series of 33 that were installed in 1859 in an attempt to keep the dock workers out of the pubs. Condition The drinking fountain is in basically sound physical condition, but is missing the lionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s head and requiring general repairs. Setting The drinking fountain can only be seen from the dock road, and not from within the development site. It forms part of the dock boundary wall.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 93

Designation The drinking fountain is listed by being a fixture of the Grade II listed dock boundary wall, and is within the WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The drinking fountain is part of the Grade II listed wall, and is representative of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s maritime mercantile culture. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the drinking fountain is assessed as High value. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The drinking fountain will be fully restored as part of the programme of repairs to the dock wall, including the replacement of the cast bronze lionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s head in accordance with the first phase of repairs at Princes Dock which have already been executed. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The setting of the drinking fountain will be unaffected by the development. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 94

6.2.5

DOCK BOUNDARY WALL AND ENTRANCES FROM OPPOSITE SANDHILLS LANE TO COLLINGWOOD DOCK

Dock wall looking south from Bramley-Moore Dock History and Description The dock wall which Hartley built to enclose the set of five northern docks differed from the earlier walls. Instead of using brick, Hartley employed the same â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Cyclopeanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; granite style of construction used in the dock walls, with finely jointed stones brought to a fair face, and with rounded copings. Set into the wall at intervals are granite plaques bearing the name of each dock and the date of construction, 1848. The gateways through the wall were also different in character to the earlier ones. The 1848 gateways are all similar in design, with double entrances with round tapering towers as gate piers. The central round towers are larger with slit windows as they also functioned as offices for the dock policemen. At the entrance to the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks, the central turret also has a granite letter box. Gates slid out on rollers, operated by counterweights, from slits in the side gate piers, closing into slitted recesses in the central towers. Although no longer functional, one set of gates is still extant. The wall also incorporates cast iron stanchions remaining from the Liverpool overhead railway, designed by James Greathead and Sir Douglas Fox for the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board in 1888. This section of the boundary wall is 5.5 metres tall. It is listed Grade II together with the three original gateways that led into the Bramley-Moore, Nelson and Collingwood Docks. There are two further existing entrances, one modern gateway opening to Nelson Dock and one late 19th century entrance to Collingwood Dock formed for rail access, neither of which are in current use.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 95

The dock boundary wall, which was built to provide security to the dock estate, is one of the defining features of the Liverpool docks. Until the programme of dock closure in the second half of the 20th century, and the subsequent redevelopment of the dock estate, the wall stretched for five miles north and south of the city centre. With the wholesale removal of the wall in the historic south docks, the townscape impact of this fortress-like feature can only now be appreciated in the central and north docks. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this section of the dock boundary wall is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Some remains of wooden gates survive and are capable of repair. Setting The setting of the wall encompasses the buildings on the east side of Regent Road, and the area of open land between the wall and the Bramley-Moore and Nelson Docks on the west side. The wall has lost its role as a security barrier, though now acts to exclude the public from what is a derelict area of open land. The removal of the overhead railway changed the nature of the wall, and returned it to its original state, although it now bounds an area of low activity and openness. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock wall is high, in spite of the fact that it no longer serves its original use, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Dock Boundary Wall is assessed as Very High value.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 96

Development Proposal Development will be carried out on the land between the dock boundary wall and the BramleyMoore and Nelson Docks. This is set at least 9 m back from the wall, and will roughly occupy the footprint of former transit sheds. The height of development varies from 14 m to 31 m. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock boundary wall will not be physically altered by the development. Any necessary repairs will be carried out to the structure as set out in the CMP, and following the standard set in the first phase of repairs carried out in 2009 at the Princes Dock. Historic features such as the drinking fountain, police huts, timber gates and overhead railway stanchions will be retained and restored. The existing gateways, both historic and modern will be used for vehicular and pedestrian access, and no new entrances through the way are required for functional reasons. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The development to the west of the wall will conceal the wall from the dock water spaces, but this was historically the case with the former transit sheds and the overhead railway. The new buildings will be visible above the dock wall from Regent Road, although they are not dominant in height and will not harm the setting of the wall or reduce its capacity to transmit understanding of the dock management system. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 97

6.2.6

SALISBURY DOCK AND RETAINING DOCK WALLS

Salisbury Dock looking east to Collingwood Dock Salisbury Dock looking south History and Description The Salisbury Dock is one of the group of five docks that were planned and built by Jesse Hartley in 1844-48 as part of a single construction programme. The five docks formed an enclosed, interconnecting system, with the Salisbury Dock providing a link to the river. The Salisbury Dock was small, covering only three acres, since its prime function was to provide access to the other docks in the system. It did, however, take small coastal vessels and sheds were built on the south side of the dock in 1849. At the river entrance the Victoria Tower was built on the central island between the two dock gates. The retaining walls to the dock basin are of fair faced granite rubble, constructed of large and small blocks. There are entrances to the Nelson and Salisbury Docks. Around the quaysides a number of historic features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards survive. A stretch of stone setts totalling 2200 sq m survives on the south quay together with a set of rail tracks. Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the Salisbury Dock walls are generally in sound condition, though with considerable loss of mortar, particularly below copings, and some failure of mortar facings and a wide crack in one of the walls. This dock has suffered more concrete repairs than others in the group. Medium term repairs are required to some areas of stonework. Timber lock gates remain in decayed condition.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 98

Setting The quaysides of the Salisbury Dock have been open for more of their operational life than the others in the group of northern docks. A transit shed occupied the southern quay in the mid 19th century, and again in the early 20th century, at which time there was also a transit shed on the northern quay. Both of these were removed in the late 1930s. Nonetheless, the present open setting of the dock is artificial, since the transit sheds around the Nelson Dock, the Collingwood dock and the Clarence Dock would have obscured long views across the dockyards. The dock is visible from the Bascule Bridge on Regent Road, where there is a break in the dock boundary wall. The river forms part of the setting of the dock, whilst the Victoria Clock Tower is the dominant feature of the setting, with the Dockmaster’s office and a remnant of the original riverside security wall forming other heritage features. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Salisbury Dock is assessed as Very High value. Development Proposal It is proposed to carry out development at Salisbury Dock as part of Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-2036). Three residential blocks will be built on the north side of the dock, at a maximum height of 20 m. Two small buildings are proposed on the south side, one of 9 metres in the area of the Dockmaster’s office; the other at 21m. Two levels of underground car parking will be constructed on the north side of the dock. The Victoria Clock Tower and Dock master’s office will be retained and restored for leisure or tourism use.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 99

Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the retaining walls and copings, historic features including the timber lock gates, capstans, mooring posts and historic surfacing will be retained and restored, and water will be maintained within the basin. The area of stone setts on the southern quay together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The linear layout of the development has been designed to follow to footprint of the former transit sheds enclosing the water body. Whilst the height of the proposed blocks is considerably greater than the transit sheds, the scale is consistent with other dockside development, and the ratio of building height to width of dock basin does not exceed other historic docks. In view of the huge area of water and the robust character of the dock walls, the scale of development would not harm the significance of the dock. Visual connectivity with the river entrance and the Clock Tower will be maintained from all areas of the dock, and the view of the Collingwood Dock, Bascule Bridge and Stanley Dock will also be unaffected. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 100

6.2.7

SEA WALL TO NORTH ISLAND AT ENTRANCE TO SALISBURY DOCK AND VICTORIA TOWER

Sea Wall just south of river entrance to Salisbury Dock History and Description The Sea Wall to the north island at the entrance to Salisbury Dock and south of the entrance for a length of approximately 117 m was constructed by Hartley as part of his scheme for the five northern docks. It consists of retaining walls of fair faced granite rubble with a raised lip to the coping. It was considered at the time it was built to be a major feat. Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the Sea Wall appears to have had numerous repairs carried out in the past, most notably at high level where pre-cast concrete elements have been introduced. Although the overall structural stability of the wall appears to be satisfactory, there are areas of weathering where tidal erosion has caused cracking and loss of mortar that will require essential repair and maintenance to prevent further deterioration. Setting The river wall protects the dockland from the river, and is a strong feature of the riverside landscape. The open aspect across the docks is artificial, as the docks were enclosed either by a security wall or transit sheds for most of their operational life. The Victoria Clock Tower at the river entrance is the dominant landmark feature of the setting.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 101

Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the wall is high and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Sea Wall is assessed as Very High value. Development Proposal It is proposed to carry out development along the riverside in Phase 5 of the masterplan (20362041) as described in relation to Bramley-Moore and Nelson Dock above. Two levels of underground car parking will be constructed below the riverfront blocks. The Victoria Clock Tower and Dock masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office will be retained and restored for leisure or tourism use. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The river wall will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the retaining walls and copings, historic features including the timber lock gates at the river entrance, capstans, mooring posts and historic surfacing will be retained. Areas of stone setts will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The linear layout of the development along the sea wall has been designed to follow to footprint of the former transit sheds. Whilst the height of the proposed blocks is considerably greater than the transit sheds, the scale is consistent with other dockside development. Taking account of the great width of the river and the robust character of the dock walls, there would be no loss of significance. The riverside blocks will protect the water space from the harsh climate, but there will be glimpses out to the river at ground and first floor level. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 102

This will afford a similar level of visual permeability between the dock and the Mersey as existed historically. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.2.8

VICTORIA CLOCK TOWER

Victoria Clock Tower from south and west History and Description The Victoria Tower was built by J Hartley in 1848. The tower is of fair-faced granite rubble with a round battered base and an hexagonal upper part. It was designed as a landmark at the entrance Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 103

to the group of dock, providing the time to ships and neighbouring docks and rang out the high tide and other warnings. The building contained a Pier Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s flat. Condition The clock tower is in reasonable condition with no evidence of settlement or structural faults. The roof has recently been secured and made wind and waterproof. The clock mechanism has been inspected and deemed suitable for conservation. The bell has been removed, but most of the bell frame remains. Setting The clock tower is a landmark of the riverfront with an open aspect over the river approaches, and extensive visibility across the Liverpool Waters site. The latter is artificial, since the quayside transit sheds around the docks to the north and south of the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks would have obscured the tower from view. The tower would only have been visible from the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks during its operational life. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the building is high and its contribution to OUV relates to its status as a landmark structure, expressing the role of Liverpool as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative construction. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Victoria Clock Tower is assessed as Very High value. Development Proposal The Salisbury Dock and river entrance will be developed in Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-36). No development will be carried out on the north and central islands of the river entrance, but a small building of 9 m in height is proposed on the south island. It is proposed to remove two early 20th century single storey extensions to restore the clock tower to its original form, including the historic clock machinery. The building will be used for public access. The building stands on an island, which is paved with stone setts that will be retained and restored. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 104

Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the external fabric of the building, and the interior will be refurbished as a visitor facility. This will provide the opportunity for interpretation of the building and surrounding area. The areas of stone setts and pavings on the island, together with mooring posts and capstans will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: There will a small impact on the setting of the clock tower by the construction of the building on the south island. However, this is subsidiary in height to the tower, and will not affect its dominance at the river entrance. The proposed use of the building as a visitor facility will provide an opportunity for interpretation of the dock management system, and will contribute to the presentation of OUV. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be negligible adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 105

6.2.9

DOCK MASTER’S OFFICE, SALISBURY DOCK

Dockmaster’s office from south

View showing remaining section of dock wall

History and Description The Dock Master’s Office was built by Hartley on the sea wall south of Victoria Tower. It has battered walls of fair faced granite rubble, and a battlemented parapet. Attached is a section of the original brick boundary wall, with a lean-to police hut on the outer seaward face. Condition The building is in sound structural condition, and has recently been secured and made wind and waterproof. Setting The Dockmaster’s office has an open aspect over the river approaches, and extensive visibility across the Liverpool Waters site. The latter is artificial, since the quayside transit sheds around the docks to the north and south of the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks would have obscured the office from view. It would only have been visible from the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks during its operational life. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 106

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the building is high and its contribution to OUV relates to the role of Liverpool as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative construction and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The Salisbury Dock and river entrance will be developed in Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-36). It is proposed to repair and convert the building to its original form, together with the fragment of the boundary wall and the police hut. When it becomes safe to admit people to this part of the Liverpool Waters site, it is intended that the building will be used as a publicly accessible venue. The building is surrounded by stone setts that will be retained and restored. A small building will be erected immediately to the east of the listed building. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the external fabric of the building, and the interior will be refurbished as a visitor facility. The areas of stone setts will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: There will some impact on the setting of the dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office by the construction of the building to the east. This building is 10 metres in height and will therefore be higher than the listed building. It will not, however, affect the important visual relationship between the office and the clock tower and river entrance, which is the key element of significance in operational and management terms. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be negligible adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 107

COLLINGWOOD DOCK

View over Collingwood Dock from Victoria Clock Tower History and Description The Collingwood Dock is one of the group of five docks that were planned and built by Jesse Hartley in 1844-48 as part of a single construction programme. The five docks formed an enclosed, interconnecting system, with the Salisbury Dock providing a link to the river. The Collingwood Dock was small and served coasters and other small vessels. It was also the home of Liverpool Corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s refuse boats. Open goods sheds were built on its north and south sides in 1849. The dock is listed Grade II. At the east end of Collingwood Dock is the passage through to Stanley Dock, crossed initially by a swing bridge and later a lifting bridge which carried Regent Road. The Bascule Bridge dates from 1932 and was constructed by Dorman Long. It is one of five that were built in that year within the dock estate. The bridge is formed from two main steel trusses which support cross girders and a road deck. The rolling bascule consists of an arc section with a large steel ballast box which acts as the balance for lifting the bridge. A separate engine room is supported on a steel deck spanning the carriageway and was originally operated by hydraulic power. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 108

The retaining walls to the dock basin are of fair faced granite rubble, constructed of large and small blocks. There are entrances to the Stanley and Salisbury Docks. The Collingwood Dock Office, built in the early 20th century survives at the south east corner of the basin, and originally formed the end of a transit shed that has since been demolished. Around the quaysides a number of historic features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards survive. A stretch of stone setts totalling 2200 sq m survives on the south quay together with a set of rail tracks. Further rail tracks are embedded in a concrete roadway running parallel with the dock wall along part of the eastern quayside. Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the Collingwood Dock walls are generally in sound condition, though with some loss of mortar, particularly below copings, vegetal growth, and minor cracks. Medium term repairs are required to the stonework adjoining the recess that housed a swing bridge alongside the Bascule Bridge. Setting The dock is linked functionally and visually with the Stanley Dock to the east and the Salisbury Dock to the west. The Bascule Bridge and the Victoria Clock Tower, which stand on alignment are both part of the setting, and the Stanley Dock warehouses are the backdrop viewed from the west. The present-day openness to north and south is a consequence of redundancy, since the north and south quaysides were occupied by transit sheds for most of the operational life of the dock. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 109

In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Collingwood Dock is assessed as Very High value. Development Proposal It is proposed to carry out development at Collingwood Dock as part of Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-2036). Narrow depth residential development in the form of apartment blocks is proposed on the north and south quays to provide enclosure to the water body. The maximum height will be 27 m on the north quay and 30 m on the south quay. Two levels of underground car parking will be constructed on the north side of the dock. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the retaining walls and copings, historic features including the timber lock gates, capstans, mooring posts and historic surfacing will be retained and restored, and water will be maintained within the basin. The area of stone setts on the southern quay together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. The Bascule Bridge which was closed for two years on grounds of health and safety, has now been fully renovated and repaired by Peel. Access to the engine room is being made available to the public. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Page 110

CLARENCE GRAVING DOCKS

Graving Dock looking east

View looking north west

History and Description The Graving Docks were built by Hartley in 1830. They are dug partly from the sand stone bedrock. The fine masonry work of the graving dock has stepped sides and granite barrel runs. And the southern dock has two chambers. A pair of lock gates remains at the western end of each of the docks. Around the edges of the docks are a number of small structures of historic interest. These comprise a former police station and cells, a late 19th century brick workshop, three Second World War air raid shelters, two early 20th century brick office buildings and an open storage shelter. An area of stone setts totalling 5,200 m runs along the south edge of the southern dock together with rail tracks.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 111

Condition The Graving Docks are in generally sound condition and were until recently still in use for vessel repairs. The lock gates are in need to repair and no longer contain the water, which means that the graving docks are constantly inundated. The minor buildings around the quaysides have been subject to recent emergency repairs and are in reasonable wind and watertight condition. Setting The setting of the graving docks is open to the north, south and west, but is closed by the dock boundary wall on the east side, beyond which the great bulk of the Stanley Dock tobacco warehouse dominates the scene. Whilst the immediate surrounds to the graving docks were open apart from the scattering of remaining operational buildings, the graving docks were separated visually and functionally from the Collingwood and Clarence Docks by transit sheds, and so formed a stand-alone facility for ship repair. Designation Grade II listed within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Clarence Graving Docks are assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out development at the Graving Docks as part of Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-2036). Narrow plan form residential development in the form of apartment blocks is proposed to the north and south of the graving docks, roughly on the footprint of former transit sheds relating to the Collingwood and Clarence Docks. The heights of the blocks to the north of the graving docks at a maximum of 29 m have been stepped down from the masterplan proposal submitted with the original application, and those to the south are 24 m maximum.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 112

Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The graving docks will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the retaining walls and quays, historic features will be retained and restored, and the docks will be returned to allow active use as appropriate. Emergency repairs have already been carried out to the minor buildings around the dock edges, but these will be included in the ongoing regular maintenance and repair programme. The area of stone setts on the southern quay together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: There will be some effect on the setting of the dock by the construction of linear blocks to the north and south of the dock. The layout of the buildings has been designed to follow to general footprint of the former transit sheds that formerly enclosed the water bodies to north and south, though the block to the north is set slightly closer to the graving dock in order to allow for the access road to run along the edge of the Collingwood Dock. Whilst the transit sheds would have turned their backs on the graving docks, the proposed new buildings will provide active frontages responding the future role of the graving docks as a key area of public realm. This will provide significant opportunities for interpretation of the assetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s OUV. The Heritage Places assessment commissioned by EH has suggested that the historical relationship between the graving docks and the Victoria Clock Tower would be destroyed by the height of development to the north of the graving docks. This opinion rests on a false assumption that the graving docks were visible from and enjoyed a functional relationship with the Clock Tower. That this was not the case is evident from the fact that the graving docks and the group of northern docks were built at different times, and had no relationship in terms of management or function. The clock tower related to the entrance to the northern complex of docks and not to the Clarence Docks which had their own separate entrance. Nor was the clock tower visible from the graving docks above the roofs of the transit sheds as is demonstrated by the existing single storey transit shed on the south side of the Bramley-Moore Dock which prevents the clock tower being visible from the quaysides at present.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 113

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.2.12

BONDED TEA WAREHOUSE, 177 GREAT HOWARD STREET (off site)

Bonded Tea Warehouse from east History and Description The tea warehouse is a large brick structure with a high parapet and a series of double-pitched roofs. Condition The building is currently in use and is in reasonable structural condition. Poor maintenance, however, is evident in the failure of rainwater goods and associated damp stains and vegetation at high level. Setting The building is outside the site and relates in its setting to the harsh, traffic dominated environment of Great Howard Street and to the massive scale of the Stanley Dock warehouses. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 114

Designation Listed Grade II in the buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value Although it is outside the WHS and the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, the level of integrity and authenticity of the warehouse is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Bonded Tea Warehouse is assessed as High value. Development Proposal The closest development of the Liverpool Waters site is the two buildings on the west side of the boundary wall, just south of the graving docks. These are intended to be constructed in Phase 4 of the masterplan (2031-2036). Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: There will be no physical impact on the warehouse which is outside the site. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The proposed development would not be visible in relation to the warehouse building and is outside its immediate setting. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 115

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.13

GATE TO CLARENCE GRAVING DOCKS

Gate to Clarence Graving Dock from Regent Road History and Description Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s gateways in the stretch of wall from the Clarence Graving Docks to the Waterloo Dock were all in the classical style, with square section piers in buff sandstone, with pitted rusticated bases, ashlar shafts and gable caps with acroteria. Although the slots for the original gates survive in all the gateways, the gates themselves have been replaced by modern fencing. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and encompasses the graving docks westwards. The current openness of the dock landscape, however, is amorphous. Designation Listed Grade II in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 116

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance, the gate to Clarence Graving Docks is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development A building of 21 m in height is proposed to be constructed just to the south of the gate. This is set back 9 metres from the wall and is one of a series of blocks that will form a new edge to the site set within the wall. The gateway will be used for pedestrian access only. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The proposed development immediately to the south of the graving dock will have a slight effect on the setting of the gate. The scale and height of this development, however, is lower than the tobacco warehouse at the Stanley Dock, and will not therefore be unduly dominant. The proposed block is one of a series of buildings that define the new grid of the area and create a western edge to the dock road. This will have a broadly positive impact on the structure of the area, within which the OUV will be made more understandable. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 117

Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.2.14

CLARENCE DOCK (below ground remains)

Power Station at Clarence Dock from west

Infilled dock looking from south west

History and Description The Clarence Dock was built by Hartley in 1830 as the first element in his expansion programme arising from the growth in the textile industry and the opening of markets in India, China and South America. The Clarence Dock was built to specialise in steamships, being sited away from the existing docks to reduce fire risk to other shipping. It consisted of two enclosed dock basins, parallel to the river, one serving as a half tide dock. On the north side of the half tide dock was a passage with a lock giving access to the Clarence Basin which led on to the Graving Docks. In 1929 a programme of modernisation was carried out in the central docks, leading to the infilling of Clarence Dock and Clarence Half Tide Dock. The former was sold to Liverpool City Council for the construction of a Power Station and the latter was reconstructed to form part of a new Trafalgar Dock. The Power Station was demolished in the 1990s. It is known that some sections of original dock retaining walls, most notably the northern half of the Clarence Dock, survive below ground, but substantial sections of the south and west walls (and possibly part of the east wall) were removed for the extension of the power station in the 1950s. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 118

Condition The condition of the surviving masonry is not known, but where it exists and was not disturbed by the construction of the power station, it can be assumed to be in reasonable condition. Some cast iron mooring posts remain in a decayed condition. Setting The infilled dock (which is wholly below ground, and therefore concealed from view) is currently open to the north, south and west. Its existence is no longer recognisable on the ground. The open setting is artificial and results from redundancy of the docks and from the closure and demolition of the power station. The dock was previously enclosed by transit sheds on all four sides with no visual connections to the adjoining dockyards apart from the entrance passage from the Clarence Graving Dock. An extensive area of setts and rail tracks on the eastern side of the dock dates from the 1930s and 50s and served the power station. The setts may have been reused from other areas. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value Whilst the Clarence Dock was an important initiative in the northern expansion of the docks, and was the first dock to be designed specifically for steamships, the loss of sections of the original wall, together with infilling have affected its integrity and authenticity. At present the flat site conveys little about the significance of the dock, although as an archaeological resource, its contribution to OUV remains high, relating to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Clarence Dock is assessed as High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out development at Clarence Dock as part of Phases 3 and 4 of the masterplan (2030-2036). The area has been highlighted in the WHS SPD as an opportunity for a Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 119

secondary cluster of tall buildings, and the proposal involves a high density development of tall and medium rise buildings ranging in height from 20 m to 148 m. Two and three levels of underground car parking will be constructed within the dock, and to the south and west of it where the power station extended through and beyond the original walls of the dock. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The underground parking will be contained within the dock and the area occupied by the power station where it is known that sections of the dock walls have been removed. The CMP indicates that consideration will be given to exposing short sections of the dock wall copings within the public realm together with interpretation to explain the former layout and evolution of the site. If this is feasible, all necessary repairs will be carried out to any sections of the retaining walls and copings to be exposed. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The introduction of a new grain to the area above and around the infilled dock, based on a combination of its original footprint and the urban street form of the area to the west of the dock wall, will restore identity to the currently featureless area, and help (in the layout) to convey something of its former outline and usage. Whilst the current openness of the area will be completely changed, this is not an aspect of significance that is associated with this formerly enclosed dock. It has been suggested in consultation with EH that the historical relationship between the Clarence Dock and the Victoria Clock Tower would be destroyed by the height of development to the north of the graving docks. This view rests on an assumption that the Clarence Dock was visible from and enjoyed a functional relationship with the Clock Tower. This, however, was not the case historically, for the Clarence Dock and the group of northern docks were built at different times, and had no relationship in terms of management or function. The clock tower related to the entrance to the northern complex of docks and not to the Clarence Dock which had its own separate entrance. Nor was the clock tower visible from the graving docks above the roofs of the transit sheds as is demonstrated by the existing single storey transit shed on the south side of the Bramley-Moore Dock which prevents the clock tower being visible from the quaysides. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 120

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.15

GATE TO CLARENCE DOCK

Gate to Clarence Dock from Regent Road History and Description Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s gateways in the stretch of wall from the Clarence Graving Docks to the Waterloo Dock were all in the classical style, with square section piers in buff sandstone, with pitted rusticated bases, ashlar shafts and gable caps with acroteria. Although the slots for the original gates survive in all the gateways, the gates themselves have been replaced by modern fencing. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 121

Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and encompasses the area of the infilled Clarence Dock westwards. The current openness of the dock landscape, however, is artificial and amorphous. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the gate to Clarence Graving Docks is assessed as Very High value. Development Proposal A series of buildings ranging from 20 m to 33 m in height is proposed to be constructed along the edge of the site set back 9 m from the dock boundary wall. The gateway will be used for vehicular and pedestrian access. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts on the west side of the wall together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The construction of the blocks to the north and south of the gateway will have some effect on the setting of the gate. The scale and height of this development, however, is lower than the tobacco warehouse at the Stanley Dock, and will not therefore be unduly Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 122

dominant. The proposed blocks are part of a series that define the new grid of the area and create a western edge to the dock road beyond the dock wall. This will have a broadly positive impact on the structure of the area, within which the OUV will be made more understandable. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.2.16

TRAFALGAR DOCK (mostly below ground remains)

Trafalgar Dock in 1970

Dock as currently partially infilled

History and Description Following construction of the Clarence Dock in 1830, Hartley built three further docks on the land between the Princes and Clarence Docks. Waterloo Dock was completed in 1834, and Victoria and Trafalgar Docks in 1836. All three were aligned east west, with their short ends to the river. Transit sheds surrounded each of the docks on each side. Hartley reduced both construction and operating costs by using interconnected docks, limiting the number of river entrances to a single Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 123

entrance via Victoria Dock, and connecting the three docks to the Clarence Half Tide Dock to the north and the Princes Basin to the south. In 1868 the Waterloo Dock was reconstructed as two separate basins orientated north south. East Waterloo Dock became a specialist grain dock with three massive brick warehouses built on the quaysides. West Waterloo Dock provided berths for medium-sized ocean-going vessels and provided a passage between Victoria and Princes Half-Tide Dock. The programme of modernisation in 1929 that saw the infilling of the Clarence Dock also led to the creation of a new Trafalgar Dock, a long, narrow basin aligned north-south, parallel to the river wall, and ultimately to the infilling the original Victoria and Trafalgar Docks in the 1970s. At the north end the reconfigured Trafalgar Dock incorporated the Clarence Grid Iron Basin which provided access to the Clarence Graving Docks. The West Waterloo Dock was altered in 1949 with further reconstruction of the Trafalgar Dock and the creation of a new river entrance. Further changes were made in 1969. The modern extension to West Waterloo Dock has now mostly been infilled at the northern end and altered to accommodate the canal link. Condition Aerial photographs from the 1960s and 70s indicate that the east wall and substantial lengths of the north and south walls of the original Trafalgar Dock will survive below ground in reasonable condition. The west wall may also survive, though it was either refaced or rebuilt in concrete as part of the 20th century reconstruction of the dock. The western section of the north and south walls were both removed for the realigned extension of the dock in the 1920s, and the canal link has caused a further removal of historic fabric. Setting The infilled dock is currently open to the north, south and west, though the eastern end of the original dock is occupied by a large modern storage building. Apart from the remaining section of water at the northern end and some stretches of stone copings, both of which belong to the 1920s extension of the Trafalgar Dock, the existence of the dock is no longer recognisable on the ground. The open setting is artificial and results from redundancy of the docks and from the closure and demolition of operational buildings and the power station. The original east west orientated dock was surrounded by transit sheds on all its four quaysides, and after its extension

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 124

and reorientation, the new quaysides were also occupied by transit sheds. There is an extensive area of setts and rail tracks on the western side of the dock. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The interlinked group of central docks, the east west orientated Trafalgar, Victoria and Waterloo Docks, together with the Clarence Dock, were an important episode in the expansion of Liverpool’s dock system. The loss of sections of the original Trafalgar Dock walls for the 1929 reconfiguration and its infilling have affected its integrity and authenticity to a considerable degree, so that the flat and featureless site conveys little about the significance of the dock. Its contribution to OUV remains high, however, and relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.1.2, the Trafalgar Dock is therefore assessed as High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out development in the area of the original Trafalgar Dock as part of Phase 3 of the masterplan (2023-2036). The existing storage building will be demolished, and the infilled area of former dock will be redeveloped with high density tall and medium rise buildings ranging in height from 20 m to 134 m. Two and three levels of underground car parking will be constructed within the dock space. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The underground parking will be contained within the dock space. The CMP indicates that investigation will be given to the feasibility of exposing short sections of the dock wall copings within the public realm together with interpretation to explain the former layout and evolution of the site. All necessary repairs will be carried out to any sections of the retaining walls and copings to be exposed.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 125

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

DOCK BOUNDARY WALL FROM COLLINGWOOD DOCK SOUTH TO WATERLOO DOCK, EXTENDING ALONG WATERLOO ROAD AND REGENT ROAD

Dock wall from Waterloo Road

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 126

History and Description The dock boundary wall was extended by Hartley to enclose the series of docks that he built in the 1830s to provide security and control over access. He followed the style of Fosterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dock wall of 1821, being in red brick with sandstone copings. By the Clarence Dock is a cast iron drinking fountain, one of 33 inserted into the dock wall in 1859 in an effort to keep dock workers out of the pubs. It also incorporates cast iron stanchions remaining from the Liverpool overhead railway. This section of the boundary wall is 5.5 metres tall. It is listed Grade II together with the four original gateways that led into the Waterloo, Victoria, Clarence and Clarence Graving Docks. There are five additional modern gateways. Most are not in current use. The dock boundary wall, which was built to provide security to the dock estate, is one of the defining features of the Liverpool docks. Until the programme of dock closure in the second half of the 20th century, and the subsequent redevelopment of the dock estate, the wall stretched for five miles north and south of the city centre. With the wholesale removal of the wall in the historic south docks, the townscape impact of this fortress-like feature can only now be appreciated in the central and north docks. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this section of the dock boundary wall is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the wall encompasses the buildings on the east side of Regent Road, and the area of open land on the west side. The wall has lost its role as a security barrier, though now acts to exclude the public from what is a derelict area of open land. The removal of the overhead railway changed the nature of the wall, and returned it to its original state, although it now bounds an area of low activity and openness. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 127

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock wall is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance, the Dock Boundary Wall is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development Development will be carried out on the land west of this stretch of the wall in Phase 3 (2023-36). It will consist of eight blocks, set back a minimum of 9 m back from the wall, occupying part of the footprint of former transit sheds. The height of development varies from 20 to 42 m. One intervention in the wall is proposed. This involves the creation of a new opening at Dublin Street for vehicular access to the Liverpool Waters site so as to avoid the need to take traffic around the edges of the Graving Docks. The justification for the loss of historic fabric is the opportunity to enhance the setting of the Graving Docks, which is intended to form a major area of public realm. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: With the exception of the new opening at Dublin Street, the dock boundary wall will not be physically altered by the development. Any necessary repairs will be carried out to the structure as set out in the CMP, and following the standard set in the first phase of repairs carried out in 2009 at the Princes Dock. Historic features such as the drinking fountain, police huts, timber gates and overhead railway stanchions will be retained and restored. The existing gateways, both historic and modern will be used for vehicular and pedestrian access, and no new entrances through the way are required for functional reasons. The new opening involves the loss of 19 m of existing wall, but will allow for the area surrounding the graving docks to be fully pedestrianised and free of traffic. Considering the balance of benefits and disbenefits described above, in accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be minor beneficial. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 128

Impact on Setting: The development, which will be visible above the dock wall from Regent Road, will create a defined edge to the dock road. Whilst this will have an impact on the current setting of the wall, it will not reduce its capacity to transmit understanding of the dock management and security system. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.18

GATE TO VICTORIA AND TRAFALGAR DOCKS

Gate to Victoria and Trafalgar Docks from Regent Road History and Description Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s gateways in the stretch of wall from the Clarence Graving Docks to the Waterloo Dock are all in the classical style, with square section piers in buff sandstone, with pitted rusticated bases, ashlar shafts and gable caps with acroteria. Although the slots for the original gates survive in all the gateways, the gates themselves have been replaced by modern fencing.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 129

Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and encompasses the area of the infilled Trafalgar and Victoria Docks westwards. The current openness of the dock landscape, however, is artificial and amorphous. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the gate to Victoria and Trafalgar Docks is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development A building, 42 m in height, is proposed to be constructed to the north of the gateway, set back by 20 m from the dock wall. The gateway will be used for pedestrian access. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts on the west side of the wall together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 130

Impact on Setting: The height of the block to the north of the gateway will make it appear dominant in relation to the gate, though it will not prevent the role of the gateway as an entrance through the security wall, and hence its contribution to OUV being undermined. The proposed block is one of a series of buildings that define the new grid of the area and create a western edge to the dock road beyond the dock wall. This will have a broadly positive impact on the structure of the area, within which the OUV will be made understandable. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.19

VICTORIA DOCK (below ground remains)

Victoria Dock joined with

Area of infilled docks looking south

Waterloo West Dock, 1955 History and Description Following construction of the Clarence Dock in 1830, Hartley built three further docks on the land left between the Princes and Clarence Docks. Waterloo Dock was completed in 1834, and Victoria Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 131

and Trafalgar Docks in 1836. All three were aligned east west, with their short ends to the river. Transit sheds surrounded each of the docks on each side. Hartley reduced both construction and operating costs by using interconnected docks, limiting the number of river entrances to a single entrance via Victoria Dock, and connecting the three docks to the Clarence Half Tide Dock to the north and the Princes Basin to the south. In 1868 the Waterloo Dock was reconstructed as two separate basins orientated north south. East Waterloo Dock became a specialist grain dock with three massive brick warehouses built on the quaysides. West Waterloo Dock provided berths for medium-sized ocean-going vessels and provided a passage between Victoria and Princes Half-Tide Dock. The programme of modernisation in 1929 that saw the infilling of the Clarence Dock led to the reconstruction to create a new Trafalgar Dock, a long, narrow basin aligned north south parallel to the river wall, and ultimately to the infilling the original Victoria and Trafalgar Docks in the 1970s. The West Waterloo Dock was altered in 1949 with further reconstruction of the Trafalgar Dock and the creation of a new river entrance. Further changes were made in 1969. The modern extension to Trafalgar Dock has now mostly been infilled at the northern end and altered to accommodate the canal link. Condition Aerial photographs from the 1960s and 70s indicate that the east wall and substantial lengths of the north and south walls of the original Victoria Dock will survive below ground in reasonable condition. The west wall may also survive, though it was either refaced or rebuilt in concrete as part of the 20th century reconstruction of the Trafalgar and West Waterloo Docks. The western section of the north and south walls were both removed for the realigned system the 1920s, and the canal link has caused a further removal of historic fabric. Setting The infilled dock is currently open to the north, south and west, though the eastern end of the original dock is occupied by a large modern storage building. There is nothing to indicate on the ground the existence of a dock in this location. The open setting is artificial and results from redundancy of the docks and from the closure and demolition of operational buildings. The original dock was surrounded by transit sheds on all its four quaysides, and to the south was

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 132

situated the group of three monumental Waterloo grain warehouses, only one of which now survives. There is an extensive area of setts and rail tracks on the western side of the dock. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The interlinked group of central docks, the east west orientated Trafalgar, Victoria and Waterloo Docks, together with the Clarence Dock, were an important episode in the expansion of Liverpool’s dock system. The loss of sections of the Victoria Dock wall for the 1929 reconfiguration and its infilling have affected its integrity and authenticity to a considerable degree, so that the flat and featureless site conveys little about the significance of the dock. Nevertheless its contribution to OUV as a below-ground heritage asset remains high. This relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. The Victoria Dock is therefore assessed as High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out development in the area of the Victoria Dock as part of Phases 3 of the masterplan (2021-2022). The existing storage building will be demolished, and the infilled area of former dock will be redeveloped with two new blocks at 29 m and 44 m in height at the southern edge. The majority of the dock will be laid out as a large landscaped area of public realm. Two and three levels of underground car parking will be constructed within the dock space. Impact Assessment

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 133

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The introduction of a new grain to the area above and around the infilled dock, based on a combination of its original footprint and the urban street form of the area to the west of the dock wall, will restore identity to the currently featureless area, and help (in the layout) to convey something of its former outline and usage. Whilst the current openness of the area will be retained to some degree by the use of the area as a large public open space, openness is not an aspect of significance that is associated with this formerly enclosed dock. The blocks on the southern edge of the infilled dock will enclose the area in much the way that the former grain warehouse in this location did before its demolition in the 1940s. The secondary cluster of tall buildings on the northern side will be the dominant feature of the area. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.20

NORTH GATE TO VICTORIA, PRINCES AND WATERLOO DOCKS

Gate from Waterloo Road Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 134

History and Description Hartley’s gateways in the stretch of wall from the Clarence Graving Docks to the Waterloo Dock are all in the classical style, with square section piers in buff sandstone, with pitted rusticated bases, ashlar shafts and gable caps with acroteria. Although the slots for the original gates survive in all the gateways, the gates themselves have been replaced by modern fencing. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and is dominated by the Waterloo Warehouse. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the north gate to the Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The block that was proposed to be erected north of the gateway has been omitted and the block to the west equates in height to the demolished north Waterloo warehouse. The area to the north of the gate will be laid out as a large public open space. The gateway will be used for vehicle and pedestrian access.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 135

Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts on the west side of the wall together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The height of the block to the north of the gateway will make it appear dominant in relation to the gate, though it will not prevent the role of the gateway as an entrance through the security wall being understood. The proposed block is one of a series of buildings that define the new grid of the area and create a western edge to the dock road beyond the dock wall. This will have a broadly positive impact on the structure of the area, within which the OUV will be made understandable. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting would be negligible adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 136

6.2.21

GATE TO WATERLOO DOCK (off site)

Gate from Waterloo Road History and Description When the Prince’s Dock was constructed, it was entered via a half-tide basin situated immediately to the north. Since the Princes Half-Tide Basin was not used for unloading high-value goods, it was not at first enclosed by a wall, remaining open even after the Waterloo, Victoria and Trafalgar Docks had been built to the north. At this time, the land east of the Prince’s Basin was occupied by slate yards, which were outside the dock estate. By 1865, however, maps show that the slate yards had been demolished and the area had been enclosed by a wall running alongside Waterloo Road and connected to the existing boundary walls at Princes Dock and Waterloo Dock. The section of wall is built of brick to the same height and form as the Princes Dock, and incorporates four gateways, all designed by Hartley in granite rubble. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. However the gate is not in the applicant’s ownership. Setting The gate is outside the site and is dominated by the large Waterloo warehouse. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 137

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the north gate to the Waterloo Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The area of the former Victoria Dock will be redeveloped with two new blocks at 29m and 44 m in height at the southern edge. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development, and is outside the site. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: There will be a no effect on the setting of the gate by the construction of the block to the north of the gateway, and the Waterloo warehouse will remain the dominant element in the setting. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 138

6.2.22

WATERLOO GRAIN WAREHOUSE (off site)

Waterloo warehouse from south west

Before demolition of north & west warehouses

History and Description The existing Waterloo Warehouse was one of three that stood on the west and north, as well as east quays of the West Waterloo Dock. There were five working floors plus a basement and a mezzanine level on the top floor. The surviving warehouse is 43 bays long and 5 bays wide. The basement and mezzanine levels held machinery and conveyor belts, which were operated in all the warehouses by one hydraulically driven system, in a separate engine house. The hydraulic system also operated three moveable bridges, ten ship capstans and 24 gate engines. The north warehouse was demolished following war damage in 1941, and the west block was demolished in 1969. The east warehouse has been converted to apartments. Condition The warehouse has been refurbished and converted to apartments, and is in good condition. It is outside the site and is not in the applicantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ownership. Setting The warehouse dominates the East Waterloo Dock which has been developed on the western side with low rise apartment blocks of inappropriate scale and design. To the north is the infilled Victoria Dock and the large modern storage building and to the south is the Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Half Tide Dock. The setting of the warehouse changed by the loss of two of the original three blocks which created a greater sense of enclosure and massive bulk.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 139

Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the warehouse is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the Waterloo warehouse is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to construct two new blocks to the north on the site of the infilled Victoria Dock. These will be 29 m and 44 m in height. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The warehouse is not in the ownership of the applicant and will not be physically altered by development. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: There will be some effect on the dominance of the warehouse by the construction of the two blocks to the north. However, these blocks are similar in scale to the lost warehouses, and will serve to reinstate something of the original enclosed character of the dock. Further north is the secondary cluster of tall buildings, but these are set on the other side of the central park and sufficiently distanced to be beyond the setting of the Waterloo warehouse. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 140

Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse. 6.2.23

EAST WATERLOO DOCK (off site)

East Waterloo Dock looking south History and Description Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s original Waterloo Dock which was aligned east-west, with its short ends to the river, was reconstructed by Lyster in 1868 as two separate basins orientated north-south. East Waterloo Dock became a specialist grain dock with three massive brick warehouses built on the quaysides. West Waterloo Dock provided berths for medium-sized ocean-going vessels and provided a passage between Victoria and Princes Half Tide Dock. The north grain warehouse was damaged by war-time bombing, and the warehouse on the western side of the dock was demolished in 1969. Low rise apartment blocks have been built on the north and west quaysides. Condition The dock walls are generally in good condition, and original mooring posts have been retained and refurbished.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 141

Setting The dock is fully enclosed from the dock road by the Waterloo warehouse and is also concealed from the river. There are visual connections with the Princes Half-Tide Dock. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the East Waterloo Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development It is not proposed to carry out development within the setting of the East Waterloo Dock. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock is not within the ownership of the applicant and will not be physically altered. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: There will be no effect on the setting of the dock. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 142

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.24

WEST WATERLOO DOCK

Waterloo West Dock from north

River entrance to West Waterloo Dock

Cross section through West Waterloo Lock with concrete walls and shallow arched floor History and Description Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s original Waterloo Dock which was aligned east west, with its short ends to the river, was reconstructed by Lyster in 1868 as two separate basins orientated north south. East Waterloo Dock became a specialist grain dock with three massive brick warehouses built on the quaysides. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 143

West Waterloo Dock provided berths for medium-sized ocean-going vessels and provided a passage between Victoria and Princes Half Tide Dock. The north grain warehouse was damaged by war-time bombing, and the warehouse on the western side of the dock was demolished in 1969. Low rise apartment blocks have been built on the north and west quaysides. In 1949, the West Waterloo Dock was remodelled with a new river entrance at the south end of the dock. This involved the removal of most of the original 1834 dock wall as remodelled in 1863/68. The new entrance lock had a shallow arched floor designed to withstand upward pressure and 20 foot thick concrete walls (see drawing above). The original river wall was also removed. Condition The dock walls are generally in fair condition. The northern part of the dock has been infilled to create the canal link. The 1949 river entrance has also been largely infilled, though the lock gates remain in situ. Setting The dock is open to the river and to the north and south, where it connects with the Princes HalfTide Dock. It was originally largely enclosed; the east quayside of the dock was formerly occupied by the massive grain warehouse which was demolished in 1969, and a transit shed occupied the west quayside until the construction of the new river entrance in 1949. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The changes carried out to the dock have significantly affected its level of integrity and authenticity. Lysterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reconstruction as two separate docks was a progressive episode in the evolution of the docks, but later alterations have generally been harmful. The 1949 river entrance was neither technically innovative, nor managerially effective, and makes a limited contribution to OUV which relates to the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. It involved the removal of 19th century fabric. The later infilling has also affected its integrity. Nonetheless, the dock contributes to OUV in relation to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 144

commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the West Waterloo Dock is assessed as High value. Proposed Development It is proposed to carry out development at West Waterloo Dock in Phase 3 (2021-2023), with a cruise liner terminal, a commercial block and a cultural venue. The cultural centre has a maximum height of 41 m, and the cruise liner terminal includes a tower at a maximum of 44 m. Some further infilling of the West Waterloo Dock is proposed to provide adequate space for the cruise liner terminal. This will involve building over the retaining walls of the 1949 walls of the West Waterloo Dock and river entrance. The remaining sections of dock wall will be repaired. Two levels of underground car parking are proposed within the infilled section of the dock. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. Foundation design of the cruise liner terminal will avoid interventions into the river entrance and dock walls. The exposed sections of dock walling, copings, historic surfaces and quayside artefacts will be restored in accordance with the CMP. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: Three issues need consideration in relation to setting: 

Impact of the three riverfront buildings



Impact of building over the river entrance



Infilling a section of the dock

Riverfront Buildings: Two of the three buildings proposed for the riverfront – the cruise liner terminal and the cultural venue – provide facilities of major public benefit, and form a focus of the regeneration project. Their location is determined by functional, urban design and heritage considerations. The cruise liner terminal is sited to take advantage of deep water, and relates to a bend in the river front. Inclusion of a tall element in the design of the building relates to the Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 145

Council’s policy that supports tall buildings at key transport nodes. The cultural venue is sited so as to terminate the view at the main site entrance and opens off the central park. The Heritage Places OUV assessment claims that the Council’s SPD does not accept the principle of mid-rise development along the riverfront further south than Nelson Dock. This view, which is repeated many times in the Heritage Places document, is based on a mistaken interpretation of Fig. 4.3 on page 59 of the SPD. The criteria for high rise buildings in the buffer zone is set out in paragraphs 4.6.15-21, where no such exclusion is made. Planning consent has been granted for several mid rise buildings within the WHS and buffer zone since the adoption of the SPD, including at Princes Dock, the Strand, Liverpool 1 and Old Hall Street. Building over the river entrance: The 1949 river entrance falls outside the time frame on which Liverpool’s inscription as a WHS is based, and does not represent an important aspect of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, or its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. The entrance is mostly infilled at present, and therefore building over it would not represent a significant impact on its capacity to convey OUV. Infilling a section of the dock: The dock has already been partly infilled in accordance with planning consent. Policy 4.7.7 of the SPD states that the only exception to the presumption against infilling existing water spaces in the buffer zone is where permission has previously been granted for partial infilling and where circumstances have not changed sufficiently for any similar proposals to be rested in the future. Without the additional infilling, the cruise liner terminal could not be delivered, and this is the chief justification for the proposal. Taking account of the issues discussed above and in accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 146

Mitigation Mitigation would involve recording of all features prior to their disturbance; accurate reinstatement of temporarily displaced surfacing materials and furniture in their original locations; reinstatement of permanently displaced surfacing materials and furniture in locations that are appropriate to their date, function and style; and provision of publicly accessible information during and after construction works relating to the nature of the local historic environment. Likely impact after mitigation would be slight adverse. 6.2.25

SOUTH GATE TO VICTORIA, PRINCES AND WATERLOO DOCKS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 147

Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and is dominated by the Waterloo Warehouse. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the south gate to the Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development It is not proposed to carry out development within the setting of the gateway. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts on the west side of the wall together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: There will be no effect on the setting of the gate.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 148

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.2.26

SPRAGUE BROS ENGINEERING WORKS, 2-4 ROBERTS STREET (off site)

Sprague Brothers from north east

View from north west

History and Description The Sprague Bros Works dates from c.1880. It consists of a three and a half storey office building and a lower works, all faced in brick. It was marked on a map of 1891 as Richmond Tobacco Works. Condition The building is in good condition. Setting The building stands within an area that is mostly characterised by vacant land and late 20th century light industrial premises. It is dominated by the Waterloo warehouse and the recently

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 149

constructed City Lofts. In the late 19th century, the building was surrounded by a dense matrix of warehouses, works and housing. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The building is an undesignated heritage asset, but as a tobacco works it had associations with the dock and therefore contributes to OUV. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, Sprague Bros Engineering Works is assessed as Low value. Proposed Development The King Edward estate is proposed to be redeveloped in Phase 2 (2016-29). Development includes a mid rise building at 38 m and a tall building at 170 m to the immediate south and south west of the works. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The building will not be physically altered by development, which is outside the application site. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Setting: The proposed tall building will overshadow the works and create a dramatic contrast of scale in the street scene. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 150

6.2.27

DOCK GATE OPPOSITE ROBERTS STREET

Gate from Bath Street History and Description When the Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock was constructed, it was entered via a half-tide basin situated immediately to the north. Since the Princes Half-Tide Basin was not used for unloading high-value goods, it was not at first enclosed by a wall, remaining open even after the Waterloo, Victoria and Trafalgar Docks had been built to the north. At this time, the land east of the Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Basin was occupied by slate yards, which were outside the dock estate. By 1865, however, maps show that the slate yards had been demolished and the area had been enclosed by a wall running alongside Waterloo Road and connected to the existing boundary walls at Princes Dock and Waterloo Dock. The section of wall is built of brick to the same height and form as the Princes Dock, and incorporates four gateways, all designed by Hartley in granite. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this gateway is generally in sound condition. No urgent repairs were identified. Setting The setting of the gateway (which relates to the setting of the wall itself) extends to the opposite side of the dock road eastwards, and is dominated by the modern City Lofts building. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 151

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the gate is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the south gate to the Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The King Edward industrial estate is proposed to be redeveloped in Phase 2 (2016-29). Development includes a building of 170 m immediately west of the gateway on the opposite side of Bath Street, and further tall buildings rising up the slope towards the existing commercial district. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The gate will not be physically altered by development. The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the wall and gateways. The area of stone setts on the west side of the wall together with the rail tracks will be incorporated as part of the public realm. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The setting of the gate will change by the increase in scale and height of development on the King Edward site, but this will not obscure the gate from view, or impede understanding of its former role in enclosing the dock estate, which is its principal contribution to OUV. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 152

RIVER ENTRANCE TO PRINCES HALF TIDE DOCK

River entrance to Princes Half Tide Dock from river History and Description The entrance was constructed by G F Lyster in 1868 as part of a modernisation of the tidal basin. It is based on the design of Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s entrance to the Salisbury Dock with two passages and a barge lock, and is in granite rubble brought to a fair face, laid in blocks of greatly differing sizes to landward and seaward of the original timber gates. Two capstans remain to the landward side, and there are substantial areas of granite sett and cyclopean paving on and adjacent to the islands. The river entrance was sealed up after the new entrance into the West Waterloo Dock was formed in 1949, and the two northern passageways were infilled on the river side. Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the entrance walls are generally in sound condition. Medium term repairs are required to the timber gates.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 153

Setting The setting of the river entrance includes the river to the west and extends to the Half-Tide Dock and the buildings that surround it. The Alexandra Tower is situated immediately to the south. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the entrance is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the river entrance to Princes Half-Tide Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development Development of the area relating to the Half-Tide Dock will be carried out in Phase 2 (2021-23). The only building within the setting will be the cruise liner terminal, a medium rise building with a tower at the southern end rising to 44 m. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The river entrance will not be physically altered by development. Foundation design of the cruise liner terminal will avoid interventions into the retaining walls. The exposed sections of dock walling, copings, historic surfaces and quayside artefacts will be restored in accordance with the CMP. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be moderate beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The cruise liner terminal will extend over the northernmost passage of the river entrance will make it less easy to appreciate its original form and function. This will have a negative impact on setting. Offset against the harm that will be caused, the development will

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 154

allow access to the river entrance and a greater opportunity to view it in detail both from land and from the river side. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.29

PRINCES HALF TIDE DOCK AND RETAINING WALLS

Half Tide Dock from north west

View of Half Tide Dock c.1900

History and Description The Princes Half Tide Dock began as a tidal basin, built at the same time as Princes Dock in 1821 by J Foster. Although as expensive to construct as an enclosed dock, the uses for Princes Basin were limited, and it could only be used by the smallest vessels such as for landing fish and small coastal cargoes. It was primarily used to provide access to Princes Dock and later in the construction process of Waterloo and Clarence Dock.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 155

In 1868 it was modernised by G F Lyster, with dock retaining walls in the style of Hartley, and two passages and a barge lock were built at the river entrance following Hartley’s design for Salisbury Dock (see above). The retaining walls to the dock basin are of fair faced granite rubble, constructed of large and small blocks. There are entrances to the West Waterloo and East Waterloo Docks, where recesses survive for swing bridges that no longer exist. Around the quaysides a number of historic features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards survive. Condition The condition survey of heritage assets carried out for Peel in 2009 shows that the Princes Half Tide Dock walls are generally in sound condition, though with some loss of mortar, particularly below copings, vegetal growth, and minor cracks. No immediate works are required. Setting The setting of the Half-Tide Dock includes the river to the west and extends to the northern part of the Princes Dock to the south, where the Alexandra Tower occupies a prominent location on the riverfront. To the north are the massive Waterloo Warehouse and the low rise apartment blocks that surround the East Waterloo Dock. The new City Lofts building occupies the western quayside. There is a view south to the Liver Building across the Princes Dock, and the commercial district is visible over the King Edward Industrial Estate to the south west. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the Princes Half-Tide is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpool’s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britain’s greatest global influence, and its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the river entrance to Princes Half-Tide Dock is assessed as Very High value.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 156

Proposed Development Development of the Half-Tide Dock area will be carried out in Phase 2 (2021-23). The only building on the immediate quayside will be the cruise liner terminal, a medium rise building with a tower at the southern end rising to 44 m. Also visible from the dock will be the tall building cluster at the King Edward site, and from certain points the new development at Princes Dock. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The dock will not be physically altered by development. The exposed sections of dock walling, copings, historic surfaces and quayside artefacts will be restored in accordance with the CMP. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The construction of the cruise liner terminal will enclose the western edge of the dock and restrict views out to the river at the point where the northern passage formerly ran. The tower will be a dominant feature of the quayside. The Shanghai Tower and the tall buildings on the King Edward Street site will also considerably increase the scale and density of development within the setting of the dock. The cruise liner terminal will however serve as a major transport hub, with a prospect of recreating the levels of activity seen on quaysides in the 19th and early 20th century, and becoming a focus of the riverfront. This would justify a landmark structure in accordance with Council policy. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 157

6.2.30

PRINCES DOCK AND RETAINING WALLS

Princes Dock looking south

Prince Dock looking north c.1960

History and Description The construction of the Princes Dock represented the first substantial expansion of Liverpool’s closed dock system that had been created in the late 18th century. Designs by J Rennie in 1810 were executed by J Foster who completed the works in 1821. The construction was remarkable for the use of steam power and an iron railway to help remove spoil. Until 1832 it was the largest dock in Liverpool and was intended to be a flagship for Liverpool’s trade with North America for imported cotton and for emigration. The dock had a lock at the southern end connecting it with Georges Dock, and at the northern end was a second lock leading to the Princes Dock Basin which provided access to the Mersey. A series of transit sheds and offices stood on the east side of the dock. In 1873 Lyster infilled the Georges Dock Basin which allowed the construction of a long floating roadway that led down to the Floating Landing Stage, a wooden and iron pontoon that served the ferries and cross river traffic. Eventually the landing stage was extended to 2,500 feet, running from the Pier Head northwards the full length of the Princes Dock, and becoming the embarkation point for transatlantic passenger liners. In 1895 Riverside Station was opened on the west side of the dock, bringing main line passengers right down to the river’s edge, with covered bridges leading directly to the floating landing stage at two levels.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 158

In 1905 the whole west side of the original water area of the Princes Dock was altered by the introduction of a concrete quayside structure complete with sheds, followed in the 1920s by another similar structure on the eastern side. This established, belatedly, a specialised facility for coastal trade with an emphasis on Irish traffic. After its closure in 1981, Princes Dock was regarded as a potential area for new office development, and following the preparation of a masterplan in 1992 the first phase of development at the southern end commenced. The transit sheds and other dock buildings were cleared, the east quay was widened to create larger development sites, and the dock walls were partly rebuilt. A revised masterplan prepared in 1998 provided a framework for the remainder of the site, including road access and the partial infilling of the dock. Further revisions were made in 2002, when a greater mix of uses was approved, higher development densities and indicative heights for each development plot. A new footbridge across the dock was constructed in 2001, and has recently been lifted to accommodate the passage of canal boats. Alterations were made to the north and south walls for the canal link. Condition Following the changes made in the early 20th century and the recent regeneration of the dock, relatively little historic fabric remains visible above ground. With the partial infilling, the dock walls were mostly retained, but with new retaining walls built within the dock. At the south end, the blocked passage to the former Georges basin and the original coursed sandstone quay wall survive. Along the riverside, where a set of derelict steps remain, it is possible to see sections of the original river wall. The Princes Jetty survives in a dilapidated condition. Setting The first phase of regeneration of Princes Dock carried out in accordance with the 1992 masterplan was limited in ambition. Whilst the 1992 and 2002 revisions to the masterplan created greater opportunities, and led to a higher standard of architecture, the overall objectives have still not been achieved. Many plots remain undeveloped, and the area lacks vitality. The setting of the dock, however, which was derelict and disused, now contains a number of successful employment and residential buildings, together with hotels and car parking that contribute to the economy of the city.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 159

The setting of the dock encompasses the new buildings that surround it, the Princes Jetty, which remains derelict, and at the southern end the Liver Building, which terminates the view. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The Princes Dock was the earliest of the docks to be built north of the Pier Head, and is therefore important to the understanding of the development of the dock system. The degree of alterations carried out to the dock itself, however, including partial infilling, construction of new retaining walls and the loss of all dock furniture and historic surfaces, has significantly affected its level of integrity and authenticity. Its contribution to OUV relates more to its place in the overall dockland landscape than to historic fabric, plan form or character. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the Princes Dock and retaining walls are assessed as High value. Proposed Development Development of the Princes Dock will be carried out in Phase 1 (2012-16). The proposals are to construct buildings on the sites already identified for development in the approved masterplan, but to differing land use, height and layout parameters. The tallest building will be the Shanghai Tower on the eastern side of the dock, with another tall building on the adjoining Plot A5 of similar height to the approved scheme for the site (formerly Plot 3A). Two floors of underground parking are proposed on the western side of the dock towards the northern end (A: 3.0), and on the eastern side of the dock (A: 2.0). A further three floors of underground parking are proposed on the western side at the southern end of the dock (A: 1.0). Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The underground car park A: 2.00 will have an impact in an area of high archaeological potential, but there is an existing planning consent for basement parking on this site, with appropriate conditions relating to archaeology. With the exception of this area, the dock will not be physically altered by development. Major improvements will be made to the public realm, including the full repair and restoration of the Princes Jetty and the creation of a bridge

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 160

structure that will link it to the Shanghai Tower on the east side of the dock. Any exposed sections of dock walling, copings or historic surfaces will be restored in accordance with the CMP. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The proposed development will complete the regeneration of Princes Dock and provide a more coherent and unified setting. Moreover, the additional tall buildings have the capacity to strengthen and consolidate the existing commercial cluster in accordance with the WHS SPD (which makes provision in 4.6.16 for tall buildings at the Princes Dock). It will also improve the quality of the public realm. Since the contribution made by the Princes Dock to OUV does not relate to its present form and layout, the impact of higher density will not have a significant effect on setting. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be minor beneficial. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 161

6.2.31

PRINCES DOCK BOUNDARY WALL

Dock Wall looking south from Bath Street

Gate at Bath Street

History/Description Access to Princes Dock was controlled by a boundary wall, the first to be built in Liverpool, begun in 1816 and completed in 1821 when the dock opened. Built by J Foster, the wall was of red brick, 5.5 m high and four courses thick in English bond, with sandstone copings and a gateway built with sandstone piers in the Greek Revival style. The wall originally ran around all sides of the dock, but it survives today only on the east side. The remaining gateway is at the northern end of the dock, and consent has been granted for a new opening adjoining the multi-storey car park. This section of wall, together with the gateway is listed Grade II. Between 1845 and 1865, the wall was extended northwards to connect with the wall that Hartley had built to enclose his group of 1830s docks. This section of wall is built of brick to the same height and form as the Princes Dock section, and incorporates four original gateways, all designed by Hartley, and built of granite rubble masonry. There is also one modern opening that leads via a mini roundabout into the Princes Dock. This section of the wall is unlisted, but is treated as a listed structure since it is attached to the gate piers which are listed Grade II. A short section of the 1821 Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock wall was rebuilt, probably after GF Lyster became Dock Engineer in 1861. This runs northwards from a point marked by a vertical break where a drinking fountain with outlets on both sides of the wall has been inserted as far as the 1821 gateway. A further short section was rebuilt at the southern end of the Princes Dock and is identical in materials and construction to the section described above. These two short sections are also unlisted. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 162

The section of Fosterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s original Princes Dock wall survives largely as built, but an increase in the level of Bath Street carried out in the 1970s has affected its appearance on the east side, and two small doorways have been punched through it in recent years. The section of wall running from Princes Dock to Waterloo Dock has been lowered in height where it passes the Waterloo Warehouse, and the southernmost part of the Princes Dock wall was lowered in height when the Crowne Plaza Hotel was built. The dock boundary wall is one of the defining features of the Liverpool docks. Until the programme of dock closure in the second half of the 20th century, and the subsequent redevelopment of the dock estate, the wall stretched for five miles north and south of the city centre. With the wholesale removal of the wall in the historic south docks, the townscape impact of this fortress-like feature can only now be appreciated in the central and north docks. Condition The condition survey of the wall carried out for Peel in 2008 shows that this section of the dock boundary wall is generally in sound condition, though repairs are required to the 1821 gateway, which has cracked due to the corrosion of ferrous metal cramps. A first phase of repairs has been carried out on the river side of the wall in the vicinity of the Malmaison Hotel. Setting The setting of the wall encompasses the buildings on the east side of the dock road, and the Princes Dock on the west side. The wall has lost its role as a security barrier, but now gives the Princes Dock area a distinctive character and protects it from the traffic noise and pollution. Outside the wall the environment is poor, dominated by roads and degraded by the development of the King Edward Industrial estate. Designation Grade II listed in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock wall is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 163

time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 4.2.1, the Dock Boundary Wall is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development Development of the Princes Dock will be carried out in Phase 1 (2012-16). The proposals are to construct buildings on the sites already identified for development in the approved masterplan, but to differing land use, height and layout parameters. The tallest building will be the Shanghai Tower on the eastern side of the dock, with another tall building on the adjoining Plot A5 of similar height to the approved scheme for the site. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The boundary wall will not be altered physically by the development. Any necessary repairs will be carried out to the structure, and historic features such as the police huts, drinking fountains, surviving timber gates and overhead railway stanchions will be retained and restored. The existing gateways, both historic and modern will be used for vehicular and pedestrian access, and it is proposed to implement the existing permission for an additional opening either in the approved location or a short distance further north to suit the preferred movement pattern. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The development of tall buildings on the west side of the wall is consistent with existing planning permissions, and will therefore have a limited impact on its setting. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be negligible adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 164

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.2.32

REINFORCED CONCRETE AND WOODEN JETTY INTO MERSEY, WEST OF PRINCES DOCK

Jetty from river History and Description At the north end of the Liverpool Landing Stage the Princes Jetty was built in 1895-97 for the Irish cattle trade. Designed by A G Lyster, in association with Gustave Mouchel, it is said to be the first reinforced concrete structure in the docks and one of the earliest examples of the use of the

Hennebique system in Britain. Nearby are the wooden piles that formed the foundations for holding pens to house the cattle before they were loaded into railway wagons. The space was later converted into waiting rooms for coastal passenger services. The jetty incorporates two substantial components, constructed of timber with a concrete deck, and following the removal of the original iron and timber structure in 1975, it is the only surviving element of the Liverpool Landing Stage. It incorporates the former fire-damaged remains of a timber shelter and a moveable bridge. Condition The reinforced concrete structure is in sound and repairable condition, but the timber decking, balustrades and shelter are seriously decayed and dangerous.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 165

Setting The jetty projects into the river which is part of its setting. It is also related to Princes Dock and the buildings that surround it. In its decayed state, the jetty fails to convey the contribution it makes to OUV. For as part of the landing stage, linked to the rail system, it was a place of major activity associated first with movement of cattle, and later with the transport of people. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The communal value is very high, and the contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exceptional testimony to the development of maritime mercantile culture. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Princes Jetty is assessed as Very High value. Impact Assessment Development of the Princes Dock will be carried out in Phase 1 (2012-16). The proposals are to construct buildings on the sites already identified for development in the approved masterplan, but to differing land use, height and layout parameters. The tallest building will be the Shanghai Tower on the eastern side of the dock, with another tall building on the adjoining Plot A5 of similar height to the previously approved scheme for the site.

Impact on Fabric: It is proposed to fully restore the jetty in the first phase of development as part of the public realm, together with interpretation relating to the history of emigration from Liverpool. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The development of tall buildings on the east side of the Princes Dock is consistent with existing planning permissions, and will therefore have a limited impact on the setting of the jetty. The extension of the public realm across the Princes Dock to connect with the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 166

jetty will enhance its setting and together with the creation of interpretation concerning its former role in emigration, will restore activity within the area. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate beneficial. Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is large beneficial. 6.2.33

PRINCES DOCK TO BRAMLEY-MOORE DOCK AREAS OF HISTORIC SURFACING AND DOCK-RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING CAPSTANS, MOORING FACILITIES AND RAILWAYS

Paving and rail tracks, Clarence Graving Dock

Paving at Princes Half Tide Dock

History and description Around the quaysides of all the historic docks are features such as mooring posts, capstans and bollards. In addition there are several areas of historic pavings in different materials and patterns. All these areas have been surveyed, and include stone setts, cobbles and flags. Along seaward side of the dock boundary wall, along the river edge and along certain quaysides there are stretches of rail tracks, which have also been surveyed. All these features have been plotted onto a GIS map base, and related to below ground archaeology. Condition The historic surfacing and dock-related infrastructure throughout the site is in a varying state of repair. The surfacing is often patchy and rutted, subject to subsidence and damage, and will in Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 167

most cases require lifting and relaying on a solid sub-base. In some areas setts have been overlaid with concrete or asphalt. The train tracks will need to be repaired and any voids filled with a suitable compound to make them suitable for pedestrian access. Where possible, bollards, capstans and mooring posts will be repaired and retained in situ. Where this is not practical, they will be carefully removed, restored and reused in appropriate locations within the public realm. Setting The surfacing is generally related to quaysides, where they were laid in strips between the docks and transit sheds. There are also extensive areas alongside the dock boundary wall, often incorporating rail tracks. To the west of the Clarence Docks is a large area of setts with rail tracks which dates only from the 1930s and 50s, and was laid for the delivery of coal to the power station. Designation The historic surfacing and dock-related infrastructure forms a variety of undesignated heritage assets. Some areas and artefacts are within the WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area, some are in the buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The historic surfacing and associated items vary in importance, depending on their location, date and condition. In the WHS, where related to surviving docks, operational buildings or the dock boundary wall, they are essential to the understanding of OV. In the buffer zone where docks have been infilled, the surfacing has lost its context, and therefore the state of integrity and authenticity has suffered. As a consequence the value differs from area to area. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the areas of historic surfacing and dock related infrastructure within the WHS is assessed as High value and the areas in the buffer zone as Medium value. Proposed Development Development within most phases of the masterplan involves construction of buildings in areas where historic surfacing and artefacts survive. Underground car parking is situated below certain areas of setts and rail tracks. The CMP makes provision for detailed recording, lifting and storage of materials and artefacts where necessary, conservation and reinstatement. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 168

Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: In order to serve as pedestrian or vehicular servicing in any regeneration scheme for the central docks, most of the historic surfacing will need to be lifted and properly relaid. This will have an overwhelmingly beneficial impact. Careful examination of the location of new development in the indicative layout suggests that in a small number of areas, sett paving will need to be taken up and relocated elsewhere. Whilst relocation could benefit OUV where it would help to restore or consolidate areas where setts have disappeared, the relocation itself would have a mildly harmful impact. The conservation of dockside artefacts which will be retained in their existing locations is entirely beneficial. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric would be moderate beneficial.

Impact on Setting: The existing areas of historic surfacing are difficult to understand in the absence of the transit sheds and other buildings to which they originally related. The masterplan indicates that new development will largely occupy the footprint of previous transit sheds, and thus will â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;anchorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the historic surfaces within a clearer context. This will provide greater understanding of their function and serve to explain the layout of the docks more effectively. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be negligible beneficial. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 169

6.2.34

FORMER POLICE STATION NE OF CLARENCE GRAVING DOCKS

Police Station from south east History and Description The small two storey building at the north east corner of the Clarence Graving Docks was a former police station with cells below. It appears to date from date from the construction of the group of northern docks in 1848, and may have been designed by Hartley. It is of brick with a hipped slate roof. A short section of the original security wall around the graving docks survives alongside the building. Condition Whilst the building has suffered from neglect for a long period, it has recently been repaired and is now secured and in a wind and waterproof condition. Setting The quaysides to the graving docks are a storey lower than the general dockyards, and as a result the police station is single storey on the north side and two storeys onto the south side. It faces the dock boundary wall on the east side, with the massive tobacco warehouse beyond, but is otherwise largely open to the docks. Formerly, the building was enclose by the transit shed to the Collingwood Dock on the north side, and the Clarence Dock to the south. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 170

Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the former police station is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the former police station is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The graving docks area is to be developed in Phase 4 (2034-36). A medium rise building is proposed to be built to the north west roughly on the footprint of the former transit shed. It is intended that the building will be used as an information point or other public facility. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the external fabric of the building, and the interior will be refurbished as a visitor facility. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: Whilst the new building proposed to enclose the south side of the Collingwood Dock is located roughly on the site of the former transit shed, its greater height and bulk would have an impact on the setting of the former police station. The proposed use of the building as a public facility, recreating the original interiors, will provide the opportunity for interpretation, and enhance the contribution to OUV. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 171

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.35

OTHER STRUCTURES TO BE RETAINED AROUND CLARENCE GRAVING DOCKS

Office building, south of Graving Dock

Air raid shelter and open shelter, south of Dock

History and Description The other structures around the Graving Docks comprise a Dock Workshop, two small brick office buildings, the former office for the Collingwood Dock, an open shelter for storage of materials, and three Second World War air raid shelters. The workshop dates from the late 19th century; the other buildings are 20th century. Condition Whilst the buildings have suffered from neglect for a long period, they have recently been repaired and are now secured and in a wind and waterproof condition. Setting The small operational buildings are scattered around the quaysides of the graving docks, both at the lower and upper levels. Their setting includes the graving docks, the surviving section of the Trafalgar Dock to the west and the immediate areas to north and south. The graving docks are currently open to the dockland, but formerly they were enclosed to north and south by the backs of transit sheds serving the Collingwood and Clarence Docks.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 172

Designation Undesignated heritage assets in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value Whilst these are minor buildings, only one of which dates from before the 20th century, they contribute to the integrity and authenticity of the WHS, and their contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the other structures around the Clarence Graving Docks are therefore assessed as Medium value. Proposed Development The graving docks area is to be developed in Phase 4 (2034-36). Medium rise buildings are proposed to be built to the north and south on the footprint of former transit sheds. It is intended that the buildings will be used as kiosks, interpretation points, premises associated with boat repairs and leisure activities. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The CMP indicates that all necessary repairs will be carried out to the external fabric of the buildings, and the interiors will be refurbished as appropriate. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be major beneficial.

Impact on Setting: Whilst the new buildings proposed to north and south are located on the site of former transit sheds, their greater height would have an impact on the setting of the buildings at the graving docks. The proposed use of the buildings in connection with the gravity docks as a public facility, will provide the opportunity for interpretation, and enhance the contribution to OUV.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 173

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be moderate adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.2.36

BASCULE BRIDGE (off site)

Bascule Bridge before and after restoration History and Description The Bascule Bridge is a rolling type of lifting bridge constructed by Dorman Long to replace an original swing bridge in 1932. It is constructed of steel girders with an elevated timber-clad engine house and rolling ballast box. Condition The bridge has recently been repaired and repainted. Whilst it no longer operates as a lifting bridge, the original hydraulic machinery and later turbines survive within the engine room in good condition.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 174

Setting The bridge stands above the passage between the Collingwood and Stanley Docks, and provides a good viewpoint both into the Staley Dock and the wider docklands on the west side of Regent Road. Its principal setting relates to the Stanley Dock, where it is dominated by the tobacco warehouse. The presence of the overhead railway on the west side would formerly have restricted views from the bridge into the docks on the west side. Designation Undesignated heritage asset in WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the bridge is high, and its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Bascule Bridge is assessed as High value. Proposed Development The Collingwood Dock is to be developed in Phase 4 (2031-36). No buildings are proposed within the setting of the Bascule Bridge. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: The bridge has recently been fully refurbished. The CMP indicates that the condition of the structure will be regularly monitored and maintained as necessary. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The bridge will not be affected by the proposed development. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 175

Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.37

STANLEY DOCK (off site)

North warehouse from Stanley Dock

Tobacco warehouse from Salisbury Dock

History and Description Built by J Hartley, The Stanley Dock was the only dock east of Regent Road, providing a link between the dock system and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. It had been envisaged from the outset as a fully enclosed dock like Albert, with warehouses within a boundary wall, to provide secure storage for high value or bonded goods. Connection with the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway enabled direct dispatch of bonded goods from the warehouses to most of the key towns of the Lancashire hinterland and beyond. There was also a connection to the Dock Railway connecting Stanley to other docks, and the lines of the London and North Western Railway. Stanley Dock was partly infilled in 1900 when the massive Tobacco Warehouse was erected between Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s warehouses. The north Hartley warehouse is listed Grade II*, the south warehouse and the Tobacco Warehouse are both Grade II. Also Grade II listed are the four entrances to the dock with their characteristic granite rubble built gate piers and gate watchmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s huts, and also the hydraulic tower to the west of the north warehouse. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 176

Condition The buildings are generally in poor condition, and the complex is almost completely vacant. The fabric, however, is robust and likely to suffer only slow deterioration. Planning consent has been granted for mixed use conversion, but this is unlikely to be implemented in the present economic conditions. Setting The dock is enclosed and inward looking, the water space dominated by the huge warehouse structures to north and south. The link to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal to the east and the Bascule Bridge to the south are within the setting of the dock. Designation The north warehouse is listed Grade II*, the south warehouse, tobacco warehouse, the Hydraulic Engine House and the dock boundary wall are all listed Grade II. It is within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the dock is very high, and the complex is one of the key components of the WHS, its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Stanley Dock is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The Dock is outside the site, and no buildings are proposed within its setting. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: No physical impacts on the fabric.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 177

In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The dock will not be affected by the proposed development. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.38

WAREHOUSE, 27 VULCAN STREET (off site)

Warehouse from Vulcan Street History and Description 6 storey warehouse fronting Waterloo Road, dating from c.1850, and one of a small group of 19th century warehouses surviving in Vulcan Street and Porter Street.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 178

Condition The building is in partial use as a music venue and is in reasonable condition. Setting The neighbourhood on the eastern side of the dock is mixed, comprising industrial buildings from the 19th and 20th centuries, mostly low rise, with vacant land. In the 19th century there was a concentration of warehouses with works and courtyard dwellings. The setting includes the dock road and Vulcan Street. Designation The warehouse is listed Grade II, and is within the buffer zone. Assessment of Significance and Value The warehouse was dependent on the docks and is an important link with the mercantile system of transport and storage of goods. Its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Vulcan Street warehouse is assessed as High value. Proposed Development The secondary cluster of tall buildings is sited due west of Vulcan Street, and will be visible from the warehouse. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: No physical impacts on the fabric. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 179

Impact on Setting: Whilst outside the direct setting of the building, and separated from it by the dock boundary wall and the mid rise buildings immediately west of the wall, the tall buildings will a modest adverse impact on the east facade of the building. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be negligible adverse. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.39

PORT OF LIVERPOOL BUILDING (off site)

Georges Dock partially infilled

Port of Liverpool Building from south west

History and Description Built as the offices of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board in 1903-07, and designed by Briggs and Wolstenholme with Hobbs and Thornely. It was the first of the trio of buildings to be erected on the site of the obsolete Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock as part of a municipally planned development of the Pier Head. The three buildings were conceived as landmarks to act as a symbol of maritime Liverpool at the height of its prosperity and influence. The dock office building is a large rectangular block in English Baroque style of impressive grandeur, constructed with a steel frame Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 180

and clad in Portland stone, with turrets at the four corners and a high copper-covered dome at the centre. Condition The building is in full use for offices, and is in good condition. Setting The building is a key landmark on the waterfront, and widely visible. Development of Mann Island and the Museum of Liverpool has had a broadly beneficial effect on its setting when viewed from the south and across the river. Designation Listed Grade II*, within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the building is very high, and the Pier Head complex is one of the key components of the WHS, its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Maritime Mercantile Culture and Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Port of Liverpool Building is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The property is outside the site, and no development is proposed within its setting. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: No physical impacts on the fabric. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The dock will not be affected by the proposed development. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 181

CUNARD BUILDING (off site)

Cunard Building from south west

Cunard Building from west

History and Description The Cunard Building was built by Willink and Thicknesse in 1914-16 for the Cunard Steamship Company to an original design by Arthur J Davis of Mewes and Davis. By comparison to the other two buildings it shuns bombast in favour of refinement, and is emphatically horizontal to contrast with the discordant buildings on either side. The Italian Renaissance palazzo style is derived from American architects such as Mc Kim Mead and White. Condition The building is fully in use for offices, and is in good condition.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 182

Setting The building is a key landmark on the waterfront, and widely visible. Designation Listed Grade II*, within WHS and Stanley Dock Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the building is very high, and the Pier Head complex is one of the key components of the WHS, its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Maritime Mercantile Culture and Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Cunard Building is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The property is outside the site, and no development is proposed within its setting. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: No physical impacts on the fabric. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 183

Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.41

ROYAL LIVER BUILDING (off site)

Liver Building drawing

Liver Building from north west

History and Description By Aubrey Thomas and built 1908-11 for the Royal Liver Friendly Society. It was part of a planned development of the site previously occupied by the Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock. Notable as one of the earliest multi-storey reinforced concrete framed buildings in Britain designed on the Hennedique system, it is wholly faced in granite. In developing the eclectic design, Thomas drew on influences from North American commercial architecture, mixed with Byzantine motifs and echoes of Hawksmoorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s London churches. With its eye-catching roofline of domes and towers topped by the two liver birds with outspread wings, the building was hailed as the first UK skyscraper, and was a blatant advertisement to a worldwide public. Condition The building is in full use for offices, and is in good condition.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 184

Setting The building is a key landmark on the waterfront, and widely visible. The building is currently open to the north, though the previously approved scheme for Plot 3A at Princes Dock was intended to provide enclosure to St Nicholas Place and assist in framing the Three Graces when seen from the west. Designation Listed Grade I, within WHS and Pier Head Conservation Area. Assessment of Significance and Value The level of integrity and authenticity of the building is very high, and the Pier Head complex is one of the key components of the WHS, its contribution to OUV relates to the tangible evidence of Maritime Mercantile Culture and Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role as the supreme example of a commercial port at the time of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest global influence, its innovative techniques and types of construction of dock facilities and port management. In accordance with the table of significance in 2.4.1, the Royal Liver Building is assessed as Very High value. Proposed Development The property is outside the site, and no development is proposed within its setting. Impact Assessment

Impact on Fabric: No physical impacts on the fabric. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on fabric will be neutral.

Impact on Setting: The development of Princes Dock will have an effect on the setting of the building. The proposal for Plot A-01, which is closest to the Liver Building, is unchanged from the scheme that has already received planning permission. This will have a beneficial impact by enclosing St Nicholas Place and the south western corner of the Princes Dock. The tallest element of the building is below the parapet line of the main block of the Liver Building, allowing the towers to remain visible from the north. Planning consent has also been granted for a tall building Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 185

of 120m on the east side of Princes Dock, which is reflected in the proposal for Plot A-04. The Shanghai Tower at the north east end of the Princes Dock is taller at 190 m, and whilst it will be visible in views of the Liver Building from certain directions, it is situated a considerable distance away, and will not therefore dominate its setting. In accordance with the criteria for assessment of scale or severity of impact set out in 2.5.1, the impact on setting will be neutral. Significance of Effect or Overall Impact Combining the impact on fabric and the impact on setting, the scale or severity of impact is neutral. Taking account of the value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.2.42

WATERFRONT ARCHAEOLOGY Background The rapid and continuous growth of Liverpool during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries has left few visible sites to represent its early origins. The development of the port and its docks changed the waterfront, reclaiming the margins of the river, and the buildings and structures that stood on the foreshore. Documentary research, combined with on site evaluation where recent development has taken place, has revealed the location of buried archaeological remains at the Pier Head, the Albert Dock and elsewhere within the WHS. The recent excavation of the Old Dock and its display within Liverpool One greatly added to knowledge about early dock construction and operation. The City Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach to the protection of archaeological remains is set out in UDP Policy HD17 and Objective 7.1 of the WHS Management Plan. It aims to secure the interpretation of the archaeological resource of the WHS. This reinforces the requirement in the UNESCO Operational Guidelines that the cultural heritage of a Site should be presented and transmitted to future generations. Policy HD17 establishes an approach for addressing archaeological issues for development in areas of known and suspected archaeological importance, and the WHS SPD states that the

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 186

entirety of the WHS is an area of suspected archaeological importance under the terms of UDP policy HD17. This policy requires that applicants engage at an early stage in the development process with the City Council’s planning officers and their archaeological advisors to determine the scale of pre-determination investigation required to assess the nature of any buried or standing archaeological remains. The pre-determination work may include, but not be limited to:  Full archaeological desk-based assessment  Non-intrusive archaeological investigations  Intrusive archaeological evaluation works  Intrusive and non-intrusive buildings archaeology recording and investigation works Archaeological Studies carried out for Liverpool Waters The 2009 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Baseline study for the Liverpool Waters site provides a summary of existing information about the archaeology and cultural heritage of the area, based on desk-based research, analysis of data, and site visits, and establishes heritage principles for development. The study area for the baseline study report comprised the land within the proposed development site plus the area lying immediately adjacent to it. A total of 54 heritage assets were identified within the Liverpool Waters site and a further 30 on adjoining land. The baseline study was the subject of consultation with Liverpool City Council and English Heritage, and was finalised taking account of comments received. The archaeology and cultural heritage section of the Liverpool Waters scoping report for the EIA provided a summarised description of the heritage assets both within and in the immediate vicinity of the application site. The scoping report which was subsequently agreed with LCC after consultation with EH and others provided a general framework for the preparation of the archaeology and cultural heritage environmental assessment carried out by Oxford Archaeology North. This stage resulted in the inclusion of additional heritage assets, a detailed assessment of potential effects, the specification of mitigation measures, and proposals for a series of safeguarding conditions on any planning permissions. Following the submission of the Liverpool Waters planning application and Environmental Statement in November 2010, English Heritage requested the preparation of an ‘Archaeological Deposit Model’ as a tool to identify areas of ‘high, medium and low archaeological potential’ and to identify any areas where archaeological evaluation might be required to clarify the impact of Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 187

development on the significance of archaeological assets. In response to this request the applicant commissioned CgMs Consulting to prepare such a Model. Based on the research already undertaken, a further review of data sources was carried out by CgMs. The project seeks to map and document historic features evidencing the topography, dock structures, wharfs, transit sheds and related dock furniture (bollards, swing bridges, cranes, railway tracks, etc.) on an interactive Geographical Information System (GIS) database. Geotechnical (borehole and test pit) data has also been added, as has a link to a gazetteer of archaeological assets. The database has been created in EsriArcMap and incorporates historic maps as Jpegs, existing site information from AutoCAD drawings and Shapefiles created in GIS. Following construction of the GIS database, which comprises the ‘Archaeological Deposit Model’, areas of ‘high, medium and low archaeological potential’ were identified. Subsequently, the basement car parks set out in the Illustrative Masterplan supporting the original outline application were tested against the Model to identify those areas where proposed basements might impact areas of high and medium archaeological potential. Following this initial exercise a series of reviews took place with Design Team members in order to consider the reconfiguration of basements to avoid areas of high archaeological potential and to identify areas where insufficient information exists to enable an informed judgement to be made, and where further archaeological evaluation work may be required. In effect, this exercise brought forward a process originally intended to be carried out at the reserved matters stage. Deposit Model Methodology The Deposit Model is based on a series of historic maps surveyed between 1785 and 1956. These maps have been used to identify the evolving topographic landform, from the original estuary shoreline, through successive reclamation of land to create enclosed docks. Structures associated with the docks (sea locks, half-tide locks, swing bridges, transit sheds, railway lines, etc.) have been identified from maps and aerial photographic sources, as have alterations to the form of dock basins and demolition of structures. A gazetteer identifies each historic item, for instance a Transit Shed shown on the 1841 Ordnance Survey map (or in the case of a line of bollards along a dock-side, a group of items) with a unique reference number. The gazetteer records the earliest and latest cartographic evidence for the feature, its legal status (listed building, etc.), its reference in the Liverpool Historic Environment Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 188

Record, its reference in the application documentation (ES) and provides for other information to be added. The Deposit Model also incorporates the locational information of all known geotechnical investigations (boreholes and trial pits) excavated over the period from 1993 to 2010, current topographic data relating to historic surfaces, and aerial photographic images from Google Earth and relevant aerial and ground-based photographic information in the English Heritage National Monuments Record. It is known that most of the dock bases are on bedrock, and the regular de-silting and sluicing of the docks would have cleared any potential archaeological deposits associated with wrecks. Archaeological High, Medium and Low Potential The identification of areas of ‘high, medium and low archaeological potential’ should not be confused with the identification of ‘significance’ undertaken in the ES, although inevitably there is a degree of overlap. The significance of heritage assets has been undertaken on the basis of existing information and accords with widespread practise for the preparation of Environmental Statements. Rather, the identification of ‘potential’ sought by EH, applies a set of definitions about the perceived archaeological potential of dock and dock-related features to land within the application site in order that potential impacts can be identified and gaps in knowledge identified. The definitions used are: Low Potential: Extant Dock basins – generally cut to or into Sandstone bedrock. Considered to be Low Potential because water-filled basins are assumed to have been maintained (dredged or sluiced) and sediments and artefactual evidence on the basin floor will be recent in date and of very limited archaeological interest. Medium Potential: Wharves – the date of construction has been deduced from historic map sources and the nature of wharf structure has generally been characterised by geotechnical data. Transit Sheds and other undesignated buildings (extant structures and ‘site of’) - date of construction and demolition and extent of structures deduced from cartographic sources. Foundations and floors of Transit Sheds of some, but generally limited, archaeological interest. Other (undesignated) structures also identified as being Medium Potential for their Industrial Archaeology interest. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 189

High Potential: All current and historic dock walls (where they survive), sea lock structures, half-tide lock structures and associated sluices, hydraulics, swing bridges, etc â&#x20AC;&#x201C; have been identified as High Potential for the physical evidence they contain about technological innovation within the WHS. Where the exact location of sub-surface features is only approximately known, the area of high potential has been extended to incorporate an additional area around the presumed location. This category includes sea and dock walls subsequently buried by dock remodelling. All designated buildings are identified as being of high archaeological potential for their Industrial archaeology interest. A zone 5m wide either side of each dock wall has been identified in order to accommodate inaccuracies in historic mapping and potential structures at the base and to the rear of each wall. Designation None of the waterfront archaeology is scheduled as an Ancient Monument. That which is within the WHS is thus designated, that which is within the buffer zone is undesignated. Assessment of Significance and Value In assessing significance, consideration is given to the contribution made by archaeological remains to OUV for their evidential and historic values, as well as their state of integrity and authenticity. Whilst the river wall, docks walls, and quaysides, together with lock gates, recesses for swing bridges and sluices are key attributes of OUV, the level of integrity and authenticity of the altered and infilled docks within the buffer zone is lower. Consequently, the docks within the WHS are all Very High value, whilst the Clarence Dock, Trafalgar Dock, Victoria Dock and West Waterloo Dock are High value. Where buildings survive as below-ground foundations, their level of significance will need to be assessed on an individual basis. The dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s house, which existed until the 1990s north west of the Salisbury Dock, for example, was a key element of the Hartley design for the group of northern docks, and its foundations may yield information about its form, construction and layout; otherwise its archaeological interest is modest. Transit sheds, whilst repetitive in form and standardised across the site, dated from different periods, and archaeological evaluation of foundation design may contribute to knowledge of the transhipment process. Within the WHS, such remains may vary from High through to Low value. Within the buffer zone they are more

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 190

likely to be Medium to Low for their contribution to OUV, but again assessment on an individual basis will be needed. Proposed Development The main threat to archaeology is the provision of underground car parking. Without safeguards, building foundations could have an impact, as may services infrastructure, roadways and landscaping. Impact Assessment The initial Deposit Model described above contained the spatial extent of the 16 basement areas proposed by the original Liverpool Waters planning application. A number of the proposed basements coincided with areas identified as being of Medium or Low Archaeological Potential. Some areas of proposed basement coincide with areas identified as being of High Archaeological Potential. Discussions with the Project Architect during July 2011 resulted in modifications to the proposed configuration of basement car parking. With the exception of Plot A2 (to the east of Princes Dock, straddling 18th and 19th century waterfronts and outside the WHS), impacts to areas of high archaeological potential were avoided by design changes and therefore archaeological assets of high potential will be preserved in-situ. The revised car parking strategy (along with an overground car parking strategy) forms a revision to the planning application. Need for and Scope of Archaeological Evaluation Following receipt of the revised basement car parking proposals, consideration was given to the potential conflict between the proposed basement car park in Plot A2 and the zone of high archaeological potential represented by the 18th and 19th century waterfronts. However, planning records indicate that planning permission for the redevelopment of this plot has recently been renewed. The planning permission (reference: 10F/2787 granted on 6 June 2011) relates to Plot 3a, Princes Dock, William Jessop Way and provides for the replacement of planning permission 07F/0028 to erect a mixed development of 133 no. apartments, 129 no. bedroom hotel, 12,000 sqm of commercial offices and 500 sqm of retail floorspace, situated in a 34 storey tower and 8 storey building with a central piazza, 153 no. space basement car park, ancillary uses and associated infrastructure.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 191

English Heritage was consulted on the now approved Full application (reference: 07F/0028). Whilst commenting on design and materials, English Heritage made no comment on archaeological issues. The Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s archaeological advisor also commented on this application and sought planning conditions to safeguard archaeological interests. Relevant conditions were included on the Full permission and on the recent renewal. It is thus evident that planning permission (10F/2787) has been granted for development with a basement car park in the location of the Liverpool Waters proposed A2 basement car park. The existing planning permission contains conditions to identify and protect (either by in-situ preservation within the new structure or by a programme of excavation, recording and publication of results) any archaeological assets there may be within the footprint of this basement. Such measures appear wholly appropriate and it is equally appropriate that a similar approach be adopted to safeguard this area of high archaeological potential in the current Liverpool Waters scheme. Similarly, a condition or conditions can be included to ensure that an identical process is followed to gain sufficient information to inform foundation design on those buildings without basements where they have a potential to impact areas of high archaeological potential. Planning conditions to secure the archaeological investigation and recording of areas of medium archaeological potential would also be appropriate. It is therefore concluded that no archaeological evaluation is necessary prior to determination of the Liverpool Waters outline application and that suitable measures to protect the archaeological interest of the site can be secured by appropriately worded planning conditions. Mitigation

Overall Safeguards The Environmental Statement commits to a number of overall safeguards designed to ensure that heritage assets are respected in accord with national planning policy guidance and good practice. The safeguards introduced address two particular matters: ď&#x201A;ˇ

In the development process, some uncertainty inevitably remains regarding underground assets and features until the ground is excavated.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Unless good practice site management is put in place, harm can arise inadvertently to features of general or specific heritage interest.

The safeguards can be secured formally through conditions attached to a planning permission.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 192

Outline Proposals The planning application seeks outline planning permission. The indicative masterplan proposals are designed carefully to respect heritage assets on the basis of thorough research and appraisal by specialists, including details of foundations and associated features. For example, the Deposit Model makes provision for the battered form of the inner and outer faces of the dock and sea walls in defining the area of high archaeological potential. Similarly, the mechanisms and structural housings associated with assets such as swing bridges which may not always be readily apparent are taken into account. The revised EIA has been conducted on the basis of development as shown in the amended masterplan drawings, as informed by the Deposit Model. The masterplan has been designed expressly with a focus on the heritage features of the site, to avoid any harm to them and to reveal them where possible. Nevertheless, having regard to the above, for all built development, reserved matters approval by the Council will be required in respect of detailed aspects of the design of the development and the reserved matters applications are to be prepared in the context of detailed masterplans to be worked up for each development phase. In advance of that more detailed design work, further archaeological excavation will be undertaken to confirm - in detail - the likely sub-surface extent of heritage assets or other possible sites to a brief agreed with the Council in areas where built development is proposed close by. Such works can have the additional benefit of enhancing the understanding of the historic features of the site.

Service Runs and Infrastructure Installation On a similar basis, the line and depth of service runs and of other infrastructure, such as roads, needs to be planned carefully to ensure no harm to heritage interests or to minimise the impact of these.

This is to be done at the reserved matters stage in conjunction with the detailed

masterplans for each phase in accordance with arrangements to be agreed in detail with the Council. Where sub-surface heritage assets are known to exist, selective trial trenching will be undertaken prior to any excavation to ensure their preservation.

Development Management Some surfacing and features, such as rail tracks, remain visible at numerous locations across the site and, without normal safeguards, might be impacted during construction work. There is also the potential, without such safeguards, for damage to surface features of heritage interest as a result of the movement of heavy plant, particularly machines with metal tracks, and the Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 193

installation of large rigs, such as cranes and pile drilling equipment.

To ensure that these

features are not harmed and that they are either protected or that they can be re-used elsewhere on the site as appropriate, the normal course is to undertake a detailed survey and audit of such features which can then provide the basis of a heritage management protocol to be agreed with the Council ensuring reasonable care and protection.

That is what is proposed at Liverpool

Waters; a basic audit has already been undertaken which will be enhanced at detailed masterplan stages.

Contamination Removal and treatment of contaminated material from the site based upon the locations of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;contamination hotspotsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; identified as part of the Liverpool Waters research similarly has the potential to impact upon historic surfaces and associated features such as railway tracks. If this were to comprise the removal of discrete deposits of material that lay above the horizons of archaeological interest any impact is likely to be minimal. However, if contaminants have leached below the levels of archaeological interest and if removal of significant fabric was necessary, this could increase the severity of impacts.

Arrangements for addressing this will therefore be

included in the heritage management protocol just described.

Possible and Unknown Sub-Surface Remains The potential exists for the presence of additional sub-surface remains of archaeological significance that have not been known about or recognised previously. Sites which are thought to have been destroyed or damaged may also survive unexpectedly, as shown by recent work by OA North between 2006 and 2009 in advance of the new Liverpool Canal Link and Mann Island Developments. When thorough research of the kind undertaken in relation to the Liverpool Waters has been undertaken and not identified such remains, or the likelihood of such remains, if they exist, they will only be encountered by excavation. To ensure that the possibility of unknown sub-surface remains is addressed responsibly, archaeologists working for the developer will be closely involved in the planning of ground works associated with the proposed development. Where any such remains are encountered as a result of ground works they will be subject to archaeological evaluation and, where appropriate, mitigation. In areas of particular potential interest - for example, the locality of a fort shown on historical maps in the vicinity of Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock - an archaeological watching brief may be appropriate. Such locations and details of such arrangements will be agreed with the Council. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 194

Potential Construction Impact There are two main forms of impact that can negatively affect sites of archaeological and cultural heritage significance during the construction phase of the development: 

The first of relates to direct damage to sub-surface and exposed remains as a result of ground works, and vibration and displacement that might result from works being undertaken in areas adjacent to sites of interest. The risk of such damage is normally addressed, and fully mitigated, by a management protocol on the lines just outlined. That is what is proposed in the case of Liverpool Waters.



The second form of potentially negative impact during construction relates to the temporary diminution in the quality of the setting of sites. For example, this could be a result of the presence of cranes and conspicuous machinery and materials or the infilling of dock water space.

Potential impacts could, therefore, involve both physical damage to visible and buried remains and the temporary impairment of an appreciation of the docks. This will be mitigated as described above and in Section 4.6. The main forms of positive impact on the setting of the site during the construction phase comprise: 

The demolition of incongruous buildings, generally of late twentieth-century origin in the present case, that are aesthetically detrimental to the historic character of the area; and



The removal of widespread deposits of waste from demolition and fly-tipping. Such deposits contribute to a sense of neglect and dereliction in some parts of the development area.

Significance of Effect or Overall Impact The assessment of impact on archaeology has necessarily been carried out in a different way to the assessment of impact on the fabric and setting of other heritage assets. The benefits of the increased knowledge that will result from archaeological evaluation when the proposed mitigation measures have been implemented will be very considerable. PPS5 also recognises that realising

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 195

the archaeological interest of a heritage asset and the dissemination of the results of archaeological investigations has a positive contribution to make to place-making. Taking account of the differing value of the asset in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, and the mitigation set out above, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. Depending on the results of mitigation, the impact could become slight or moderate beneficial. 6.2.43

SUMMARY OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT IMPACTS ON HERITAGE ASSETS Assessment of the planning application proposals for Liverpool Waters shows that the impact on

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

the physical fabric and the setting of heritage assets (scored on a 1:1 basis) will be as follows:

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 196

Any adverse impacts identified in the assessment will be due to changes in the setting of heritage assets arising from the proximity of new development. Such impacts, which are generally assessed as minor, are inevitable since the existing setting is artificially open and uncontained. The one case of moderate adverse impact â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to the West Waterloo Dock â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is as a result of partially building over the 1949 river entrance, and partial infilling of the water body for the construction of the cruise liner terminal. Mitigation as proposed in the assessment would reduce the impact to slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 197

6.3

IMPACT ON KEY VIEWS Introduction The views to, from and within the WHS are an important aspect of its OUV as stated in the WHS SPD (paragraph 4.4.1). The Evidential Report that accompanies the SPD includes a number of key views in which principal features of significance are visible. These views are structured by the topography of the wider city, its relationship with the river, the location of landmark buildings and the urban form and skyline of the WHS and its Buffer Zone. In terms of OUV, the test of significance is how the views contribute to appreciation and understanding of the tangible and intangible attributes enshrined in the Statement of OUV and what impact, if any, the development proposals would have on those values. The views are identified on Figure 2. Categories of Views The 34 key views identified in the SPD are grouped into four categories as follows: 

Distant View/Panorama/River Prospect



General View/Panorama



General View with focal point



Defined vista

In addition to these, a number of other views have been modelled in response to requests from EH and LCC, which have also been assessed for impact on OUV. The SPD draws attention to the role of landmark buildings and building complexes that form a fundamental part of the WHS’s OUV and wider city’s visual structure (paragraph 4.4.5). The key landmark buildings of the WHS as a whole are defined as the Stanley Dock Complex, Pier Head Complex, Albert Dock Complex, Town Hall, St George’s Hall, Liverpool Museum, Lime Street Station, Municipal Buildings, Anglican Cathedral, Metropolitan Cathedral, St Luke’s Church, Beacon, Beetham Tower West, Unity Building, St Nicholas Church, Victoria Clock Tower, Waterloo Warehouse and Wapping Warehouse. With the exception of the Beetham Tower West and the Unity Building, which do not in themselves contribute to OUV, each of these buildings or building complexes is considered in terms of the potential impact on intangible values.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 198

Distant views providing broad-ranging panoramas can be of particular significance since they place key landmark buildings within their wider urban and topographical context. The Evidential Report differentiates between River Prospects, which are broad views from the other side of the River Mersey and have a clearly defined river edge against the background of the city centre, and Panoramas, which are long distance views over the city centre from high viewpoints. The relationship between the River Mersey and the WHS is also fundamental to an understanding of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history and OUV, and whilst the SPD points out that mapping the views of the WHS from the river is impossible given the mobile nature of the views and the varying course that ferry craft and ships take on their passage along the river, the kinetic nature of views and the impact of the proposed development can be appreciated by the series of views that have been modelled from regular viewpoints along the Wirral shoreline. Key local views can also be significant to OUV, and are defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report and separated into three categories: Defined Vistas which are views towards a landmark building, typically along streets or thoroughfares; General Views/Panoramas which are often broad ranging views that enable the viewer to place a number of landmarks within the wider urban context; and General Views with focal point which vary considerably in terms of their scope but will have at least one focal point which is often a landmark building. Views of the river from the city, from the docklands and from buildings within the WHS are also important to the understanding of OUV. In view of the importance placed in the SPD on protecting the relationship between the River Mersey and the WHS for its contribution to OUV, river front development both within the WHS and the Buffer Zone is singled out for special attention. The importance of views of the Pier Head buildings as the focal point for Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and the WHSâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s river frontage, the varied skyline of the city centre, and in particular the views to the two cathedrals and other landmark buildings, and the careful juxtaposition of buildings of different periods along the waterfront, demonstrating the evolution of the waterfront are all significant aspects of OUV. Of particular importance are the key views of buildings that define the attributes of OUV and relate directly to the matters referred to in the WHS inscription criteria.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 199

Assessment Methodology A number of techniques exist for assessing heritage significance in a view and the impact of development on that view. The WHS SPD comments that there is no perfect technique as many views are dynamic and change as the viewer moves; views assume different qualities in different light and climatic conditions; a photographic view can be changed dramatically by the width of the subject matter; and there is much subjectivity in the relative importance of views (paragraph 4.4.3). This assessment makes use of the methodology Seeing the History in the View, published by English Heritage in 2011. The following stages are taken to ensure consistency and objectivity in the assessment process, which has been adapted to focus on identification of attributes of OUV in each of the views: 

Establish the importance of a viewpoint



Description of the view



Identify heritage assets and attributes of OUV in the view



Understand the significance of heritage assets and attributes in the view



Changing aspects of the view



Assess the overall heritage significance in the view



Assess the magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV



Determine the overall impact



Identify ways of mitigating the impact of the development if appropriate

As encouraged in the guidance, reliance has also been placed on the experience and insight of the author as an expert in the field of architectural history and conservation of the built environment. This has been provided through an in-depth understanding of Liverpool’s heritage and an informed knowledge of the area over many years. A selection of photomontages taken from the LVIA assessment are illustrated in the report.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 200

DISTANT VIEWS/PANORAMIC/RIVER PROSPECTS 6.3.1

LIVERPOOL FROM MAGAZINE PROMENADE (VIEWPOINT 2)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a fixed point on Magazine Promenade which runs for a distance of two and a half miles from New Brighton to Seacombe. The name derives from the magazines which were used for storage of gun powder that was required to be off-loaded from vessels entering the Port of Liverpool in the 18th century. The promenade was constructed in the 1890s and is a valuable and well-used open space within reach of a large population and affording extensive views of the river approaches and maritime activity. The location adopted is identified as a Strategic View, but has no historical associations with the WHS, and is no more important than any other point along the promenade.

Description of the View In the foreground can be seen the Wirral shoreline and the river margins. In the middle ground is the river wall, Stanley Dock warehouses, Victoria Clock Tower, Waterloo Warehouse, and dockside wind turbines. In the background is the Everton Ridge, the tall buildings that break the skyline in the city centre, and the Pier Head complex, in particular the Liver Building, with other landmarks being St Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Beacon and the RC Cathedral.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View This is a panoramic view of the Liverpool Docks and the river approach that gives a good understanding of the wider setting of Liverpool and its maritime context. The principal heritage attributes that contribute to understanding are the river setting, the tidal movements of the Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 201

Mersey, the overall topography of the Liverpool coast, the river wall and the extent of the dockland landscape. The relationship between the river and WHS can also be understood. The city centre is distinct as the heart of a wider area. The Pier Head buildings, the Victoria Clock Tower, and the Tobacco warehouse are the major heritage assets in the view; few other individual buildings can be identified from this distance.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The heritage value of the view relates chiefly to the extent of the dockland strip, the result of land reclamation from the river, and its relationship to the river. Other principal attributes are the rising land beyond, and the location of the commercial centre of the city, which is understood from the cluster of taller buildings. The presence of shipping in the operational docks to the north, and occasional vessels within the river provide evidence of the port. However, in this distant view, little information is conveyed about the Liverpool Waters site itself that contributes to the understanding of OUV in terms of architecture, technology, engineering or port management.

Changing Aspects of the View Since this is a long view, changes in daytime and weather conditions have a marked effect on values. At night, the site is visible only as a dull orange glow from the street lights beyond the dock boundary wall. Few buildings within the wider area are illuminated. Fog and sea mist obscure the site. The movement of the tide also affects the landform and the prominence of the river wall, whilst the presence of shipping changes the focus and scale of objects in the view. Since the viewer is not normally static, the viewpoint is indeterminate, and thus the information contained in the view is not constant.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is important as one of a kinetic sequence stretching two and a half miles along the Wirral coastline from where the importance of the city, its docks and maritime history can be understood. Whilst this particular viewpoint is too distant to provide understanding of the buildings and engineering achievements that are a crucial factor of OUV, the topography, landform and riverside environment are powerful contributors to the wider values. The overall value of the view is very high.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 202

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The impact of development seen from this viewpoint results in a consolidation of the urban form in the city centre, the expansion of the city northwards onto the Liverpool Waters site, and the introduction of a new waterfront stretching as far north as the Bramley-Moore Dock. The secondary cluster of tall buildings and the medium rise strip of waterside blocks in particular would draw attention to the Liverpool Waters site as a new city quarter of prominence and importance. The scheme strengthens the identity of the river wall and its maritime setting that is an important attribute of OUV, and reasserts the existing landform by the horizontality of the waterfront development. Of the two buildings currently visible on the Liverpool Waters site, the Victoria Clock Tower and the tobacco warehouse, the latter would be obscured. This would have a harmful impact on OUV in terms of understanding the role of warehousing in the management of the dock estate, but since the buildings are not strongly identifiable in this view, the harm would be slight. The Liver Building would also be partly obscured, but this is due not to the current proposals, but to the previously approved scheme for Plot 7, Princes Dock.

Overall impact on OUV The impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse. 6.3.2

LIVERPOOL FROM WALLASEY TOWN HALL (VIEWPOINT 3)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 203

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a fixed point on the steps leading up from Seacombe Promenade to Wallasey Town Hall. It is identified as a Strategic View, but is not on the direct promenade route and has no historical associations with the WHS.

Description of the View In the foreground can be seen the Wirral shoreline and the river margins, and the viewpoint is directly opposite the central part of the Liverpool Waters site. In the middle ground is the river wall, the Waterloo Warehouse, the Stanley Dock warehouses, the Victoria Clock Tower, the Pier Head group and the Kingway ventilation shaft. Beyond the Pier Head is the new Museum of Liverpool, the Albert Dock and the Echo Arena, the latter maintaining a low horizontality roughly on the same line as the ridge behind. Both the Anglican and Roman Catholic Cathedrals are obscured by existing buildings, and the natural topography is not clearly discernable in the city centre because of the Pier Head buildings, the Capital Building, the Unity Building and other large structures in the middle ground. On and around the Liverpool Waters site the landmarks are the Victoria Clock Tower, the Tobacco warehouse, the Kingsway ventilation shaft and the Waterloo Warehouse, all of which except for the Victoria Tower are set back from the riverfront. The significance of the Waterloo warehouse has been compromised by the inappropriate low rise modern apartment blocks built in front of it. Further to the left the docks stretch as far as the eye can see.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View This is a panoramic view in which the eye is drawn to the city centre because of its visual interest and dynamism. Whilst the link with the docks can be understood, the lack of a visual focus in the Liverpool Waters site makes it largely indeterminate and illegible by contrast. The principal heritage attributes that contribute to understanding of OUV are the river setting and the overall topography of the Liverpool coast, the river wall and the extent of the dockland landscape. The Victoria Clock Tower, Tobacco warehouse and Waterloo warehouse are prominent heritage assets and convey values associated with the operation of the port and pioneering technology. The Pier Head group also stands out as a focal point in the view, particularly the Liver Building. The Kingsway ventilation shaft is discernable beyond the dock boundary wall as a symbol of transport, though it does not relate to the time period for which the WHS has universal value. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 204

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View From this viewpoint there is a memorable image of Liverpool as a port city with its commercial heart, waterfront office buildings and riverside setting. The docks can be understood as a long horizontal strip, but like the previous view, not much is revealed about the attributes of OUV relating to the docks, notably the pioneering technology, methods of dock construction and port management. The Clock Tower, Tobacco warehouse and Waterloo warehouse are the most significant assets, but since they are spread wide across an otherwise featureless landscape, they fail to convey a powerful and coherent message about maritime mercantile culture.

Changing Aspects of the View Since this is a cross-river view, changes in daytime and weather conditions can have an effect on values. At night, the site is visible only as a dull orange glow from the street lights beyond the dock boundary wall. Few buildings within the wider area are illuminated. Fog and sea mist obscure the site. The movement of the tide also affects the landform and the prominence of the river wall, whilst the presence of shipping changes the focus and scale of objects in the view. Since the promenade viewer is not normally static, the viewpoint is indeterminate, and thus the information contained in the view is not constant.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is important as one of a kinetic sequence of views stretching two and a half miles along the Wirral coastline from where the importance of the city, its docks and aspects of maritime history can be understood. This viewpoint is directly opposite the Liverpool Waters site and whilst the docks cannot be seen or understood other than for the values conveyed by the river wall, the Victoria Clock Tower and the two warehouse structures, the topography, landform and riverside environment are powerful contributors of OUV. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV Seen from this viewpoint the proposed development will result in considerable change. The image of the city centre will be strengthened by consolidating the commercial district cluster of tall buildings, but an additional focus is provided by the secondary cluster of tall buildings on the site of the Clarence Power Station. This secondary cluster is strongly criticised in the Heritage Places Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 205

OUV assessment as representing ‘...the triumph of modern commerce over its Victorian forebear, with the commercial city spreading northwards and engulfing its neighbour – thus destroying the legibility of the historic development of the area’. This is not a view that is shared by the author of this assessment, for the following reasons: 

The commercial core of the city was until recently focussed on the Exchange, requiring dense development in a confined area. When the first generation of docks became redundant due to the increasing size of vessels, they were infilled to accommodate the city’s expanding economy. The Old Dock became the site of the new Custom House, then the tallest building in Liverpool. Later the George’s Dock was redeveloped for the prestigious Pier Head group of offices, the Liver Building being the tallest commercial building in the UK. In recent times the Princes Dock was partly infilled to become an extension of the commercial district, with approval granted for tall buildings. In the same spirit of change, the Clarence Dock, which was used in the 1930s as the site of a power station, is proposed to be the city’s major growth area for international commerce.



With the introduction of IT, proximity to the Exchange is no longer essential for business, and commercial centres can be more dispersed.



The ambition to attract international investment is consistent with one of the principal attributes of OUV, namely Liverpool’s links with the global economy.

The creation of a secondary commercial cluster need not therefore be seen to be in competition to the existing commercial district, and represents a further and consistent phase in the city’s evolution. It is on that basis that it is provided for in the Council’s WHS SPD policy guidance. The ribbon of medium rise blocks are intended to protect the site from the riverside climate, and create a horizontal strip on the riverfront, reflecting the land form and the uniform architecture of transit sheds and warehouses, albeit interrupted at intervals to allow views in and out of the site. The consequence of these blocks, however, is to restrict views of the Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse. In this view the Tobacco warehouse is concealed apart from the upper floor and parapet, whilst the Waterloo warehouse is partly obscured. This compromises the understanding of the role played by warehousing in the commercial life of the city. However, the location of these warehouse several blocks back from the riverfront, makes them background buildings, and any requirement to maintain their all round visibility would inevitably lead to sterilising much of the regeneration site.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 206

As with the view from Magazine Promenade, this view would draw attention to the Liverpool Waters site so as to emphasise its significance. The scheme gives prominence to the river and its maritime setting that is an important attribute of OUV, and reasserts the existing landform by the horizontality of the waterfront development. Whilst the Liver Building would be partly obscured, this is due not to the current proposals, but to the design principles agreed in relation to the previously approved scheme for Plot 7, Princes Dock. Because of the impact on the visibility of the warehouses the impact on the view is considered to be minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. 6.3.3

LIVERPOOL FROM WOODSIDE FERRY TERMINAL (VIEWPOINT 4)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a point alongside the Woodside Ferry Terminal where there is a short riverside promenade. It is identified as a Strategic View, and has important historical associations with the WHS, being one of the major points of embarkation for cross river travellers since the 18th century. Many of the leading merchants and businessmen who played a role in Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development as a mercantile port lived on the Wirral and commuted to Liverpool by ferry before

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 207

the construction of the underground rail and road links. It remains an important interchange for buses and ferries.

Description of the View In the foreground can be seen the river, and the viewpoint is directly opposite the Albert Dock, with the Pier Head slightly to the left. In the middle ground are the river wall, the Echo Arena, the Albert Dock warehouses, the Museum of Liverpool and the Pier Head complex. In the background the Hope Street ridge is visible along with the Anglican Cathedral, Metropolitan Cathedral, St John’s Beacon, the Unity Building, St Nicholas’ Church, and West Tower. To the north, on and around the Liverpool Waters site, part of the Waterloo Warehouse can be seen, as well as the Tobacco Warehouse and the Victoria Clock Tower. In this view the city’s topography can be understood with the two Cathedrals set on the background ridge and the buildings stepping up from the waterfront. The horizontality of the Albert Dock is continued in the low profile of the Echo Arena and Convention Centre. The tall buildings in the commercial district can also be seen to rise up on the higher land to Old Hall Street, but the cluster is too spread out and disparate to form a coherent group. The recent architecture, notably the Museum of Liverpool, the Mann Island development and the Echo Arena and Convention Centre can be seen to make a positive contribution to the ensemble, though the later inevitably obscures the Wapping warehouse in the same way that the proposed development at Liverpool Waters will affects the Tobacco warehouse and Waterloo warehouse. The lively and jumbled townscape of the city centre which is a delight to the eye contrasts strongly with the featureless profile of the dockland to the north.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Pier Head complex is the clear focus, making the display of mercantile culture and civic pride well understood. So too is the relationship between the commercial centre and the docks in the adjacency of the Pier Head and the Albert Dock. The distant view of the Tobacco warehouse helps to demonstrate the extent of the historic docks stretching down river. In addition, the river wall, the layered townscape and the ridge with the two cathedrals explain the form of the city and its urban plan. All these attributes well represent the values of innovative technologies, mercantile culture, architectural quality and influence in port management. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 208

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View From this viewpoint there is a memorable image of Liverpool as a lively commercial city on the edge of a wide river. The focus is the commercial heart, with waterfront office buildings, particularly the Pier Head group and other landmarks rising up the escarpment beyond, as the embodiment of a world mercantile city. The operation and management of the docks can be understood from the view of the Albert Dock, with its river entrance and warehouse buildings, and in terms of its profile as a long horizontal strip, contrasting with the tall buildings in the commercial district.

Changing Aspects of the View Since this is a cross-river view, changes in daytime and weather conditions can have an effect on values. At night, the Pier Head buildings are illuminated to enhance the view. Fog and sea mist can conceal the tops of some of the buildings and affect the clarity of view. The movement of the tide affects the landform and the prominence of the river wall, whilst the presence of shipping changes the focus and scale of objects in the view.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is exceptionally important for its direct and tangible links between view and viewpoint. It well represents the form of the city centre and its connections with the docklands and river, and includes a number of key heritage assets and attributes that demonstrate the values of innovative technologies, mercantile prestige, architectural quality and influence in port management. It is probably the best cross river viewpoint from which to understand the OUV of the WHS. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV Seen from this viewpoint the two clusters of tall buildings will cause a considerable change to the skyline. The existing commercial cluster will be significantly strengthened and consolidated as a coherent cluster set back from the river front, which will benefit the identity of the city. An additional and complementary focus is provided by the secondary cluster of tall buildings on the site of the Clarence Power Station, which is clearly subservient in this view.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 209

The Liverpool Waters riverfront is marked by a ribbon of medium rise development creating a horizontal strip that replicates the profile of the Albert Dock to the south. In this view the Waterloo warehouse is largely concealed, though principally by development already approved in the Princes Dock masterplan. The Tobacco warehouse is obscured, but the Victoria Tower remains visible. Since the Albert Dock is a focus of the view, the fact that the other warehouses are concealed does not seriously compromise the understanding of significance. The stark contrast between the varied and dramatic townscape of the existing centre and the flat docklands to the north will be changed by the proposal. Whilst this may in a superficial sense make the former land use less clear, it will not compromise the understanding of OUV in the view, given the strong focus and clear differentiation of landform, and in terms of activity it will recapture something of the dynamism of the docks in their historic role. The impact on the view is considered to be minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.3.4

LIVERPOOL FROM BIDSTON HILL (VIEWPOINT 5)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 210

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a high point on Bidston Hill where Liverpool is visible over the trees. Bidston Hill was a popular viewing point in the 19th century from where many paintings of the developing city were made. It is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD.

Description of the View In the foreground is the wood and heathland, with the city visible in the distant background across the Birkenhead Docks. Whilst the Pier Head buildings and several other landmark structures can be seen and the city centre can be clearly recognisable, the river is concealed, so it is difficult to understand where Birkenhead finishes and Liverpool begins.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View This distant view makes it difficult to distinguish Liverpool from Birkenhead, and to pick out individual features. Whilst heritage assets such as the Pier Head complex, the Albert Dock, the Roman Catholic Cathedral and some other landmark buildings can be recognised, without a clear context for the city and its river side location, they do not clearly convey the OUV of the WHS.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View In this view the significance of heritage assets and the attributes of OUV are not strongly conveyed.

Changing Aspects of the View Since this is a distant, cross-river view, changes in daytime and weather conditions can have an effect on values. Fog and sea mist will affect the clarity of view. Changing light conditions will also have an effect.

Overall heritage significance of the view Whilst the view is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD, and is impressive as a panorama of the wider setting of Liverpool, it is not especially revealing for an understanding of OUV. The primary interest is the elevated perspective and the opportunity to see the wider setting including Birkenheadâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Docks. The result, however, is confusing in relation to the expression of OUV. The overall value of the view is medium. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 211

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV From this viewpoint the photomontage shows that the most striking change would be to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s skyline due to the two clusters of tall buildings. This will help to identify the commercial centre of the city and enhance its focus. The extent of separation of the clusters and the subservience of the northern one is apparent. The ribbon of waterfront development would help to mark the river edge and so better explain the morphology of the city. The impact on OUV is considered to be negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.3.5

LIVERPOOL CITY CENTRE FROM EVERTON PARK (VIEWPOINT 25)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a high point in Everton Park, looking across the river to the Wirral peninsula. Everton Park was created in the 1960s following a major programme of slum clearance. Whilst the park is well used by local residents, it provides a relatively new viewpoint, and thus has no historical associations with the WHS. It is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 212

Description of the View In the foreground is Everton Park, with the dockland landscape, mixed use development in Everton and Vauxhall in the middle ground. The city centre is seen to the left of the view, marked principally by the tall buildings in the commercial district. The Liver Building is also visible. Unlike the view from Bidston Hill on the Wirral, the river can be seen so that it is possible to understand where the waterfront runs, though Wallasey Town Hall is the only significant landmark on the opposite land mass. In and around the Liverpool Waters site, the Stanley Dock warehouses are the only heritage assets that are clearly visible, though the Waterloo warehouse can also be glimpsed above the tree line. This view gives a good impression of the topography of north Liverpool , but conveys little to the viewer about the WHS and its OUV.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View As with other panoramic views, this gives a good impression of the separation of the commercial city and the docks, the first portrayed as vibrant and successful, the latter as abandoned. The elevated position is a good point to understand the underlying topography of the city from the landward side, and the consequent relationship between the river and the docks. Although the Stanley Dock warehouses, the Kingsway ventilation shaft and the Waterloo warehouse stand out as heritage assets in the view, the docklands as a whole within the Liverpool Waters site are not easily understood. The operational docks further north are much more understandable in the view.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significant elements of the view are the historic relationships between the differing sectors of the maritime mercantile city and their expression within the topography and landform. The landmark buildings, notably the Tobacco warehouse, Waterloo warehouse and Kingsway ventilation shaft provide orientation and significance in relation to pioneering technology and dock management.

Changing Aspects of the View Being a distant view, it is sensitive to changes in daytime and weather conditions which can have an effect on values. Fog and sea mist will affect the clarity of view. Changing light conditions will also have an effect. Different positions in the park could have kinetic effects.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 213

Overall heritage significance of the view Whilst the view is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD, it is not a historic view, and has only existed since the 1970s. The primary interest is the elevated perspective and the opportunity to see the river setting from above. The landform is clearly understood, and the present day contrast between vibrant city centre and abandoned docks can be well appreciated. The view, however, is not especially revealing about the primary aspects of OUV, in relation to the docks, which are not clearly visible. Notwithstanding the fact that this is a modern viewpoint, the overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV From this viewpoint, the photomontage shows that the image of the city centre will be strengthened by the additional tall buildings that give more coherence to the primary cluster. The secondary cluster provides a second focus in the view, and a new commercial hub, continuing the tradition of expanding economic activity away from the old centre, as suggested in the WHS SPD. The views of both the Stanley Dock and Waterloo warehouse are not affected. A negative effect will be the loss of visibility of the river, which will be screened from view by development. Development of anything more than 4 storeys, however, would have this impact, and sufficient of the water remains visible to clearly understand its course. The view of Wallasey Town Hall is maintained, though this is not crucial to OUV. The linear pattern of riverfront buildings, backed up by the lower buildings around the dock water spaces help to make the layout of the dockland landscape more readable, and recreate something of its original layout. On balance, the impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 214

6.3.6

LIVERPOOL CITY CENTRE FROM ANGLICAN CATHEDRAL (VIEWPOINT 7)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from Hope Street just to the east of the Cathedral, looking across St John’s Gardens. It is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD. The Cathedral sits on an elevated site, and affords views across the city. Whilst not a part of the WHS, it has strong associations with it as a symbol of mercantile culture and civic pride, and is a major landmark on the city’s skyline.

Description of the View The selected viewpoint fails to provide a contextual view of the city, and apart from the Cathedral itself and the dense landscape of the St John’s Gardens, which was formerly a cemetery, it contains little history in the view. From the west (ecclesiastical) end of the cathedral a viewpoint can be found which includes rooftops and the St John’s Beacon in the middle ground, and the towers of the Liver Building, the Unity Building and other recent tall buildings in the commercial district in the background.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Anglican Cathedral itself is the only heritage asset in the view.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 215

Overall heritage significance of the view The view provides little information relating to OUV, apart from the cultural and aesthetic values of the cathedral and its setting on the ridge from which this view is taken. The overall value of the view is medium.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows that the cluster of tall buildings that are already visible from the cathedral would be supplemented and consolidated. The impact on the view is considered to be neutral. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.3.7

LIVERPOOL CITY CENTRE FROM METROPOLITAN CATHEDRAL This view was not thought to be significant and has not therefore been modelled. From this location the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.8

LIVERPOOL CITY CENTRE FROM TOP OF HOLT HILL, TRANMERE This view was not thought to be significant and has not therefore been modelled. From this location the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 216

GENERAL VIEWS WITH FOCAL POINT 6.3.9

LEEDS AND LIVERPOOL CANAL LOCKS TO STANLEY DOCK (VIEWPOINT 41)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a position on the canal just at the head of the locks. The viewpoint is within the WHS at a point where visitors arriving by canal will enter the dockland, and thus has singular importance to the understanding of OUV. It is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD.

Description of View The view looks down the series of locks towards the Stanley Dock. The focal points are the canal locks, the Stanley Dock warehouses, the reinforced concrete grain silo and in the background, above the boundary wall of the Stanley Dock, the upper part of the Victoria Clock Tower.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Leeds and Liverpool Canal is largely concealed from public view, except to users of the canal and towpath, and one of the opportunities of regeneration is to increase usage and promote greater understanding of its importance in the history of the port. The heritage assets in the view are the canal locks, the Tobacco warehouse, the north and south Hartley warehouses, the chimney of the hydraulic engine house at the Stanley Dock, and the Victoria Clock Tower. Too little of the clock tower is visible to make it meaningful in the view. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 217

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The canal represents the importance of transport methods, the layout and planning of the dock estate and innovative port management. The links between the canal and the warehouses within the Stanley Dock can be understood in the view. The values associated with the lives of boatmen and hauliers, as well as warehousemen are also manifest. However, there is no understanding of the docks themselves or the river beyond.

Changing Aspects of the View The canal towpath is a potentially important pedestrian link between the riverfront and north Liverpool, and a kinetic sequence of views will be possible from it, as well as from the canal itself. Whilst the view will change and reveal more of the Liverpool Waters site from further away, the focus will remain the canal and the Stanley Dock warehouses as foreground elements.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is very important as revealing the series of canal locks that lead into the Stanley Dock. The relationship between the canal and the Stanley Dock is also implicit in the view. Whilst it is localised in its context, it powerfully projects aspects of the WHSâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s OUV. The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV There is no appreciable impact on the view or the setting of the canal and the other focal points since all proposed development is obscured by existing buildings. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 218

6.3.10

BASCULE BRIDGE TO VICTORIA CLOCK TOWER (VIEWPOINT 35)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Bascule Bridge looking across the Collingwood and Salisbury Docks towards the Victoria Clock Tower. At this point there is a gap in the dock wall which affords an impressive view across the water spaces and across the river. It is identified as a city view in the WHS SPD.

Description of View From this point there is an expansive view of dockland, with focal points being the passage into the Salisbury Dock, the Clock Tower and the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office. Around the quaysides are items of dock furniture and some historic surfacing that provide historic context and character. The entrance to the Stanley Dock that can just be glimpsed in the foreground retains the recesses for a former swing bridge. Beyond the docks the river can be seen and the Wirral coastline with Wallasey Town Hall a distant landmark. This illustrates the interlinked layout of the docks, and conveys information about the methods of dock planning and construction, as well as port management.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 219

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view is focussed on the Victoria Clock Tower, which is on axis with the passage between the Collingwood and Stanley Docks where the bascule bridge crosses. The dock walls to the Collingwood and Salisbury Docks, the sea wall and the dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office are also visible in the view. The view would formerly have been largely obscured by the overhead railway and the train line crossing of the passage below, but is now a rare point from which a view of the docks can be obtained from Regent Road. In the 19th and early 20th century the Collingwood Dock was flanked by transit sheds on the north south and west sides, and therefore would have been much more enclosed.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Victoria Clock Tower is one of the most vivid conveyors of OUV, being both an intended landmark and a functional structure. It marked the entrance to the group of five northern docks that opened in 1848, and also provided a timepiece and warning bells for the safety and convenience of mariners. The relationship of river, dock structures and canal can be understood in the view, and many of the artefacts and historic features surviving on the quaysides contribute to the authenticity of the site.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is fixed at a break in the boundary wall, and there is no scope for variation.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is very important as conveying understanding of the management and operation of the docks, their layout and planning, and the robustness of construction. There is also information in the view that evokes aspects of mercantile culture and the lives of the people that worked in the dockyards which are vital to the WHSâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s OUV. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The view will remain open after development, with buildings placed to each side of the Collingwood and Salisbury Docks, on the footprint of former transit sheds, so as to provide enclosure of the water spaces on the north and south quaysides. The buildings are relatively low in height so as not to harm this sensitive setting. The small building on the south side of the Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 220

Salisbury Dock has been positioned so as to allow a view of Wallasey Town Hall, though from this exact position it obscures the tower of the town hall, and also the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office. However, the latter building will be visible from the northern end of the Bascule Bridge. The conservation of the heritage assets that can be seen in this view and the enclosure of the docks will create a greater focus on the Clock Tower, which will be beneficial. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.11

WATERLOO ROAD/VULCAN STREET TO STANLEY DOCK (VIEWPOINT 31)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a point on Waterloo Road further south than Vulcan Street looking north so as to include more of the development site. It is also taken from the east side of the road which means that the Stanley Dock is not visible. The viewpoint is within the buffer zone and the dock boundary wall is the only heritage asset that is visible in the view.

Description of View The view contains relatively little of heritage interest. The section of dock wall in the foreground has been demolished and replaced with a dwarf brick wall and modern steel railings enclosing the car park for the residents of the Waterloo warehouse. There is a wide modern entrance way beyond with concrete fencing and railings. Within the site is a large industrial shed, clad in profiled steel sheeting, and built on the site of the infilled Victoria Dock. In the background is a section of the listed dock wall incorporating tow original gateways.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View Only the dock wall in the background currently contributes to OUV. The Stanley Dock warehouses are concealed from view by buildings on the east side of Regent Road.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View Whilst the dock boundary wall is of great significance to the character of the dockland estate, this view is taken at one of its weakest points. The refurbishment of the Waterloo warehouse involved the demolition of a substantial stretch of the wall and its replacement by an ugly and inappropriate dwarf wall and railings. Combined with the large vehicular access, this breaks the sense of enclosure provided by the wall and reduces its contribution to OUV. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 221

Changing Aspects of the View The viewpoint could be from anywhere along the east side of Regent Road, which is currently little used by pedestrians due to the lack of activity and desolation found in the Northshore area. As a kinetic view, a much greater understanding of the area will be revealed, through a closer examination of the intact sections of the dock wall, glimpses through the gateways, and the experience of the area of remaining warehouse buildings, works and public houses on the east side of Regent Road.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view conveys relatively little understanding of the management and operation of the docks, their layout and planning, and only the dock boundary wall in the distance gives a sense of the technical innovation and robustness of construction associated with OUV. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The updated photomontage of this view shows a significant amendment to the original application proposal. The result of omitting block C-07 that had been proposed to stand on the corner of Regent Road and the main site entrance, and setting back blocks C-013 and C-014 further from the dock boundary wall has been to open up the view into the central park space, and reduce the impact on the dock wall. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.12

GREAT HOWARD STREET/OLD HALL STREET TO STANLEY DOCK (VIEWPOINT 27)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken looking across to Great Howard Street from the junction of Old Hall Street and King Edward Street. The viewpoint is within the buffer zone. Great Howard Street is one of the principal routes into the city centre and runs parallel with the docks. It affords glimpsed views of the dockland and the dock boundary wall down the connecting streets.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 222

Description of View The foreground of the view is dominated by the traffic junction with traffic lights, lamp standards, cameras and barriers. On the west side of Great Howard Street and King Edward Street are trees, which obscure the Waterloo Warehouse. The roof of the Sprague Engineering Works and the top of the Kingsway Tunnel Ventilation Tower can be seen in the background.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Sprague Engineering Works and the Kingsway ventilation shaft can be partially seen in the background of the view. The context of a busy and cluttered highway junction prevents these glimpses being properly understood.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View This is a poor view out from the northern edge of the commercial centre, which provides little understanding of OUV. It is dominated by the road junction and the heritage assets that are partially visible (in themselves of some significance in terms of OUV) are incidental and meaningless in the context.

Changing Aspects of the View The viewpoint is fixed at the crossing point of Leeds Street, but can be seen as one of a kinetic sequence of views along Great Howard Street, which provide glimpses of the river, docks and warehouses down the east-west connecting streets.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view conveys very limited understanding of the docks, their layout and planning, and only the Tobacco warehouse in the distance gives a sense of the technical innovation and robustness of construction associated with OUV. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows how the junction will be enclosed by the new buildings fronting King Edward Street and the effect of the secondary cluster of tall buildings beyond the Waterloo Warehouse. This will provide physical and visual connectivity between the commercial district and

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 223

the docks. There will be no impact of the view of the Tobacco Warehouse, which will remain visible to the right of the view. The impact on the view is considered to be minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.3.13

ROAD BRIDGE OVER PRINCES DOCK/PRINCES HALF-TIDE PASSAGE TO SOUTH This is an important viewpoint in the context of the WHS where the Liver Building is the focal point of a view over the full length of the Princes Dock. The development will not obscure the view or affect the setting of significant framing components, and has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.14

TITHEBARN STREET/TEMPEST HEY TO ST NICHOLASâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; CHURCH From this viewpoint the spire and lantern of St Nicholasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Church is the focal point, framed by commercial buildings within the business district. The proposed development will not be visible in the view which has consequently not been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 224

6.3.15

HARTLEY BRIDGE OVER CANNING HALF-TIDE DOCK/ALBERT DOCK PASSAGE TO PIER HEAD GROUP (VIEWPOINT 12)

Importance of Viewpoint Taken from the north west corner of the Albert Dock this is an important historic dockland location within the WHS that is well used by the public.

Description of View The view is focussed on the west front and roofline of the Pier Head group, framed by the Museum of Liverpool and the Mann Island development. The quayside environment with various historic artefacts sets the dockland character and context. The Mann Island scheme has been designed so as to protect views through to the Pier Head, where the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool are silhouetted against the sky.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View A number of heritage assets are included in the view: the principal ones being the Liver Building, the Cunard Building, the Port of Liverpool Building and the Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock Ventilation Tower, together with the Canning Half-Tide Dock, the two Canning Graving Docks, the swing bridge, two watchmansâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; huts and the pilotage building. The historic surfacing and associated dockside artefacts are part of the heritage scene. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 225

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View Following the demolition of structures that historically enclosed the dock and separated it from the Pier Head, the view was for a time more open. The Museum and Mann Island development, however, have recently been constructed to a design that successfully protects the significance of the view. The concept has been to allow the chief elements of the buildings to remain visible between the wedge-shaped blocks of the new buildings. Thus the inter-relationship of the river, the docks and the commercial centre remains a powerful image, with the Pier Head buildings expressing the values of global mercantile influence, insurance and port management, linked to the functional and workaday environment of the docks.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is part of a sequence along the edge of Canning Dock from the Strand to the Tate Gallery, where different elements of the Pier Head buildings are revealed. The view is especially remarkable at night when the buildings are illuminated.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is one of the most important and most celebrated within the WHS, and conveys clearly why Liverpool is inscribed as an outstanding example of a world mercantile city. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows that whilst nothing in the view will be obscured, the tops of the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district will be visible behind the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. The 2D representation, however, is misleading, for the eye will compensate for this when seen in three dimensions because the tall buildings are situated a good distance beyond the Pier Head complex. The eye is naturally drawn to foreground features, to lighter planes and to clearer objects, compensating for distance as well as what appears in the picture plane. As a result, the skyline features of the Liver Building and Port of Liverpool Building will remain dominant, even though the tall building cluster will affect the way in which the silhouettes are seen against the sky. In this view, the Shanghai Tower is located directly behind the west tower of the Liver Building which is an unfortunate juxtaposition, but treated kinetically, the effect can be mitigated by the viewer moving to left or right.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 226

The impact on the view is considered to be minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. Mitigation through kinetic adjustment would reduce the impact to slight adverse. 6.3.16

NORTH GATES OF ALBERT DOCK ESTATE (VIEWPOINTS 13)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the entrance to the Albert Dock from the Strand. It is part of a well used public route between the city centre and the Albert Dock.

Description of View The view is taken from within the Albert Dock site and is a view across the Canning Dock towards the east front of the Cunard Building with the south front of the Liver Building behind. The view is framed by the Mann Island development. The White Star Line offices and other commercial buildings are visible on the east side of the Strand.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view is dominated by water in the foreground, but includes a number of important heritage assets: the Canning Dock walls and basin, the two Canning Graving Docks to the left of Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 227

the view, the Liver Building, the Port of Liverpool Building, the Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock Ventilation Tower, the White Star Line Building, and the Mann Island Pumping Station. The view includes a number of fine contemporary buildings such as the Museum of Liverpool, the Mann Island development, One Park West (as well as a very poor one in the former Halifax Building Society offices on the Strand).

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View Following the demolition of structures that historically enclosed the Canning Dock and separated it from the Pier Head, the view was for a time more open. The Museum and Mann Island development, however, have recently been constructed to a design that successfully protects the significance of the view. The concept has been to allow the chief elements of the buildings to remain visible between the wedge-shaped blocks of the new buildings. Thus the inter-relationship of the docks and the commercial centre remains a powerful image, with the Pier Head buildings and the parade of buildings along the Strand expressing the values of global mercantile influence, insurance and port management, linked to the functional and workaday environment of the docks.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is a relatively new one, which has considerably altered over the last few years. The evolution has been beneficial, with new development strengthening the profile of the city, and adding to the stock of high quality architecture. It eloquently conveys why Liverpool is inscribed as an outstanding example of a world mercantile city. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontages show that the tall buildings in the commercial district will form a new backdrop to the existing mass of buildings on either side of the wide street. This will not harm the silhouette of key buildings and will enhance the legibility of the city. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 228

In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.17

STRAND TO PIER HEAD GROUP AND ALBERT DOCK WAREHOUSES (VIEWPOINT 14)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the central reservation of the Strand, a wide street that marks the former shoreline of the Mersey. The crossing has recently been improved and civilised to connect Albert Dock with Liverpool One. It provides expansive views of the WHS and its differing character areas.

Description of View The view is focussed on the east front and tower of the Liver Building, and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building framed by the Mann Island development and the Museum of Liverpool. The White Star Line building is also a focal element, framed by the buildings enclosing Chavasse Park. The view provides a striking conjunction of old and new buildings, which embodies the enduring value of Liverpool as an outstanding example of a world mercantile city.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view is dominated by the highway in the foreground, but includes several important heritage assets: a sideways glimpse of the Canning Dock walls and basin, the Liver Building, the Port of Liverpool Building, and the White Star Line Building. The view includes fine Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 229

contemporary buildings including the Museum of Liverpool, the Mann Island development and One Park West.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is only static if the viewer is trapped on the island whilst crossing the road. Otherwise, it is glimpsed as part of a sequence from Liverpool One to the Tate Gallery, where different elements of the Pier Head buildings are revealed. The view is especially remarkable at night when the Pier Head buildings are illuminated.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view has considerably altered over the last few years. The evolution has been beneficial, with new development strengthening the profile of the city, and adding to the stock of high quality architecture. It eloquently conveys why Liverpool is inscribed as an outstanding example of a world mercantile city. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontages show that the tall buildings in the commercial district will form a new backdrop to the existing frontages on the east side of the Strand. This will not harm the silhouette of key buildings and will enhance the legibility of the city. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 230

6.3.18

WEST QUAY OF WAPPING DOCK TO ANGLICAN CATHEDRAL From this viewpoint looking towards the Anglican Cathedral, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible, and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

DEFINED VISTAS 6.3.19

TOWN HALL FROM THE STRAND UP WATER STREET From this viewpoint on the Strand looking up Water Street towards the Town Hall, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible, and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.20

TOWN HALL FROM SIR THOMAS STREET ALONG DALE STREET From this viewpoint at the junction of Dale Street and Sir Thomas Street looking towards the Town Hall, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible, and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.21

TOWN HALL FROM DERBY SQUARE ALONG CASTLE STREET From this viewpoint at Derby Square looking along Castle Street to the Town Hall, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 231

6.3.22

LIVER BUILDING FROM DUKE STREET/SLATER STREET DOWN DUKE STREET From this viewpoint at the junction of Duke Street and Slater Street looking down Duke Street to the Liver Building, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.23

ST LUKE’S CHURCH FROM LEWIS’S ALONG RENSHAW STREET From this viewpoint outside Lewis’s looking up Renshaw Street to St Luke’s Church, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.24

ST GEORGE’S HALL FROM LEWIS’S ALONG LIME STREET From this viewpoint outside Lewis’s looking along Lime Street to the south portico of St George’s Hall, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.25

RIVER FROM TOWN HALL DOWN WATER STREET From this viewpoint in front of the Town Hall looking down Water Street towards the river, the Liverpool Waters development will not be visible and the view has not therefore been modelled. The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 232

KINETIC VIEWS 6.3.26

WIRRAL PROMENADE FROM NEW BRIGHTON TO SEACOMBE LOOKING TOWARDS LIVERPOOL

Importance of Viewpoints Starting at Fort Perch Rock, the promenade runs for two and a half miles south to the Seacombe Ferry Station. The walk provides a revealing and compelling picture of the port of Liverpool, its topography and its built form. The focus of the view for its full length is the city centre, marked by the Pier Head group and the tall buildings in the commercial district. The horizontality of the river edge is seen against the higher ground beyond.

Description of Views , Significance of Views and Impact of Development treated kinetically Viewed from Fort Perch Rock (viewpoint 1), the foreground is the causeway leading to the fort and New Brighton seafront. In the middle ground is the river and the river wall on the Liverpool side, together with the wind turbines and the container port. The city centre is seen in the far distance, though marked only by the modern tall buildings since the Pier Head is concealed by the New Brighton Floral Pavilion. Few buildings can be identified singly, though the Tobacco warehouse can be picked out by its size and bulk. The effect of the development at Liverpool Waters at this distance will be to enhance the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s legibility, and also to strengthen the sense of its maritime identity by the creation of a new riverfront. As the viewer moves south along the promenade, the dockland landscape on the opposite side of the river changes little. The flatness of the frontage strip is relieved by the wind turbines and the occasional crane or visiting vessel. Heaps of scrap metal and other waste materials characterise the current port operations along this stretch of the docks. In time the city centre becomes more distinctive and its buildings more clearly identifiable, with the Pier Head group heralding a sense of arrival. The Stanley Dock warehouses, the Victoria Clock Tower and the Waterloo Warehouse mark the central docks and are a legacy of the trade in goods on which the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s prominence and prosperity in the 19th century was based. The Liverpool Waters development will obscure the Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse for the first mile of the walk, though the Victoria Clock Tower will remain visible throughout.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 233

At a point on Egremont Promenade, roughly where it is met by Maddox Street, the view of the Victoria Clock Tower becomes clearer and the entrance to the Salisbury Dock becomes understandable. From this point the Tobacco warehouse will be revealed through the wide gap in the Liverpool Waters riverfront development, where it will be seen across the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks. As the viewer continues over the next three quarters of a mile, the west elevations of the Stanley Dock warehouses will in turn become fully visible and then gradually be obscured again. For a much greater distance the entrance to the group of five northern docks, which is marked by the Victoria Clock Tower will be clearly readable as a main focus of access to the port. Further on, at Wallasey Town Hall, the viewer is directly opposite the central part of the Liverpool Waters site. At present the Victoria Clock Tower, the Stanley Dock warehouses and the Waterloo warehouse are the principal heritage assets in the view. The Pier Head group is a strong focus, and beyond that the new museum, the Albert Dock and the Echo Arena and Convention Centre set up a horizontal line that reflects the line of the river wall. From this viewpoint there is a memorable image of Liverpool as a port city with its commercial heart, waterfront offices and riverside setting. Although the docks can be understood as a long horizontal strip, little is revealed about the attributes of OUV relating to the docks, notably the pioneering technology, methods of dock construction and port management. At this point the parapet of the Tobacco warehouse remains visible above the new riverfront development. The Waterloo warehouse will also have come into view, seen through breaks in the frontage buildings and over the roof of the cruise liner terminal. At the Seacombe Ferry Terminal the viewer is directly opposite the original entrance to the Princes Half-Tide Dock, where the dock layout can be well understood. From this point the Liverpool Waters development will not obscure the Waterloo warehouse, even though the Tobacco warehouse will be hidden by the riverfront development and the secondary cluster of tall buildings. The Pier Head group will remain the focus of the view, though the Shanghai Tower in particular, and the other tall buildings in the commercial district cluster will contribute to create an additional and powerful image of the city. The secondary cluster is situated north of the Waterloo warehouse and set back from the riverfront so as to avoid dominating the view. In the progress of this long and remarkable kinetic view, all the aspects of OUV can to varying degree be understood. Whilst the proposed development will at certain points conceal from view Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 234

some of the heritage assets on which this understanding depends, none are fully hidden, and the kinetic process of gradual change and recognition will give a greater sense of discovery and interest to the view. Some aspects of the development will highlight and strengthen public perception of the WHS, in particular the anticipation that the site contains something extraordinary, and worth visiting. Considered as a kinetic view the impact is considered to be minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.3.27

CANAL CORRIDOR FROM STANLEY DOCK TO PIER HEAD

Importance of Viewpoints Starting at the canal locks where the Leeds and Liverpool canal feeds into the Stanley Dock, and running through to the Pier Head and on to the Albert Dock, the journey passes through the full length of the Liverpool Waters site. It can currently be navigated by canal boat, though the site is otherwise publicly inaccessible. A boat trip is currently the best (and indeed only) way of understanding the contribution that the dockland site makes to OUV. The route includes views of the areas of greatest heritage significance. In time, and when the Stanley Dock is also developed, the full route will be accessible on foot as well as by boat.

Description of Views , Significance of Views and Impact of Development treated kinetically In the initial view from the locks (viewpoint 41), the Tobacco warehouse is currently the dominant structure, together with the other warehouses and the grain silo at Stanley Dock. From this viewpoint the Liverpool Waters development will be largely obscured by the existing dock buildings and boundary walls. From within the Stanley Dock the views are even more constrained by the existing structures, though the Bascule Bridge and the Victoria Clock Tower will remain visible looking towards the river. As the viewer moves into the Collingwood Dock, the blocks on the north and south quaysides will be revealed, and beyond that the riverfront development starting north and south of the Salisbury Dock. The clear focus of the view will remain the Victoria Clock Tower and the river beyond. Moving into the remaining Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 235

section of the Trafalgar Dock, the view of the Clarence Graving Docks with the Tobacco warehouse and Stanley Dock south warehouse behind the boundary wall will be unaffected. Looking west, there will be glimpsed views of the river between the breaks in the riverfront development. The modern section of canal link between the Trafalgar and Waterloo Docks runs through a featureless area of infilled dockland with a view towards the tall buildings in the commercial district. The towers of the Liver Building can also currently be seen. The setting of the canal will be transformed by development on each side to create a lively pedestrian thoroughfare with active frontages at ground level. Some of the buildings set back on the eastern side of the canal will be tall blocks, though their height will not be apparent from street or canal level. The Alexandra Tower will remain the focus of the view along the narrow section of the canal. At the southern end of this section the large public space is reached where it fronts onto the Cultural Building. At this point the Waterloo warehouse comes into full view, and remains visible along the length of the Waterloo Dock and the Princes Half-Tide Dock. Moving into the Princes Dock, the Liver Building is the focus of the view ahead and will remain unaffected by the proposed development. Passing the full length of the Liverpool Waters site, the major impact that the viewer will notice will be the transformation from an abandoned industrial and dockland site to a place of activity and vibrancy. This will recall the past history of busy quayside activity that characterised the docks until their closure in the 20th century. The docks will be restored with all their surviving historic buildings and accoutrements, and views of all the major historic assets on route will be protected. The masterplan draws out the spatial potential of the site in ways that will benefit the entire city and the region beyond. New districts drawing on the historic character of the site will include carbon-neutral development with buildings of deliberately contrasting height in a grain that provides both axial and labyrinthine experiences. Taking inspiration from the city centre and its dense urban structure, the mixed use plan includes a hierarchy of public spaces from large and small squares, short narrow streets and alleyways, as well as the huge water spaces and the central linking canal. Considered as a kinetic view, the impact is considered to be moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 236

Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is large beneficial. 6.3.28

LEEDS STREET FROM SCOTLAND ROAD TO PIER HEAD The journey from Scotland Road to the Pier Head along Leeds Street is likely to be made by car or bus, as the street is wide, unprotected and dominated by traffic. Any development along Leeds Street is set back from the road, which is too wide to create a defined vista. For the journey from Scotland Road to Old Hall Street there is little history in the view, but from Old Hall Street to the Pier Head via King Edward Street more of the historic character of the city is revealed. The initial stretch is up hill and there is no focus to the view, but soon the existing tall buildings in the commercial district come into focus, as well as historic landmarks such as the dome of the Royal Insurance Building in Dale Street. The Alexandra Tower and City Lofts terminate the view, but are not at the bend in the road but in the Princes Dock on the lower ground beyond. At the junction with Old Hall Street/Great Howard Street, the Waterloo warehouse becomes visible and as the corner is turned there are glimpses of the river and the Wirral. Moving further, the Liver Building becomes the focal point and remains so until it is passed at the junction with Water Street. The impact of development from a point on Leeds Street shortly before reaching Old Hall Street can be seen in viewpoint 29. The photomontage shows both clusters of tall buildings. The new buildings on the King Edward Industrial Estate frame a view down the pedestrian boulevard to the Alexandra Tower, and the secondary cluster is seen to the right of the Waterloo warehouse behind the Kingsway Ventilation Shaft. Whilst the tall buildings on the King Edward Street site will help to give a stronger focus, the character of Leeds Street will only be improved when there is new development that addresses the street in a positive and humane fashion. The secondary cluster, which looks awkward in the photomontage, will then be largely obscured. The most rewarding part of this kinetic view is the final section from Old Hall Street to Water Street. Here the new development on King Edward Street will frame the view of the Liver Building and provide enclosure to the street. The river will be partially obscured, but defined

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 237

vistas will be created such as the view down the pedestrian boulevard from which moored cruise liners will be seen, and at the Pier Head. Leeds Street and Kind Edward Street are 20th century highways, They are designed for traffic and lack a historical sense of place. As such they do not reveal much of the OUV of the WHS, and have yet to be integrated into the grain of the city. The proposed development will help to give greater focus and definition to the kinetic view, but will not positively enhance the OUV. Considered as a kinetic view, the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.29

GREAT HOWARD STREET FROM STANLEY DOCK TO STRAND Like Leeds Street, Great Howard Street is dominated by traffic and is not much used by pedestrians. The views described are therefore likely to be those of the traveller by car or bus. Whilst Great Howard Street is a historic route, the buildings that fronted it have mostly been demolished, and only a limited number of sites have been redeveloped. Whilst some of the frontages have been planted with trees to soften the immediate environment, and the coordinated street lighting has been introduced, the street lacks a distinctive character and retains little evidence of its industrial and mercantile past. The major focus of interest and aspect of OUV relates to the Stanley Dock, at which point the kinetic view commences. From the Stanley Dock, looking along Great Howard Street to the south, the focus of the view is the Beetham Tower, with the West Tower behind. This is a positive landmark, which will not be affected by the development. The additional tall buildings will be seen to the west of these existing towers as part of the expanded cluster. As the viewer moves along Great Howard Street a number of the narrow roads on the west side lead through to Regent Road where there are glimpses of the dock boundary wall. None of the historic or modern gateways in the dock wall, however, lines up with these streets so it is impossible to gain views into the dock estate. One new gateway is proposed, opposite the end of Dublin Street and that will provide the only view into the Liverpool waters site from Great Howard Street, as seen in the photomontage from viewpoint 33, where the development around the Clarence Graving Docks is also visible. Other views have been modelled to show the impact looking along Walter Street at viewpoint 36, where the Stanley Dock north warehouse is

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 238

visible, and along Oil Street at viewpoint 32, where the secondary tall building cluster will be seen rising above the dock boundary wall. In this latter view the contrast between the tall buildings and the streetscape is particularly stark because of the semi-derelict character of Oil Street. There is also a view of the Waterloo warehouse from just beyond Oil Street, which will be unaffected by development. Considered as a kinetic view, the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.30

LONDON ROAD FROM PEMBROKE PLACE TO WILLIAM BROWN STREET The journey along London Road from Pembroke Place to William Brown Street runs downhill. The street is well used by pedestrians and is flanked by retail premises and other complementary uses. The vista stretches down to the Queensway Tunnel entrance, and beyond where the ground rises again to the commercial district. As such it provides an eventful view with many landmarks and features that contribute to the richly composed townscape. Amongst the most prominent landmarks are the Wellington Monument, and in the distance the West Tower. As the viewer reaches William Brown Street, St George’s Hall and the other cultural buildings become visible, as well as St John’s Gardens and more of the commercial district beyond, including the towers of the Liver Building. The chief aspect of OUV that the view reveals is the dense nature of the commercial district which was centred around the Exchange and the other trading markets. The undulating topography that is seen in the view relates to the location of the Pool of Liverpool which reached its north eastern extent roughly where the tunnel entrance is situated. The Wellington Monument heralds the cultural quarter, which is gradually revealed, and is an important aspect of OUV. The photomontage from viewpoint 23 at the junction of London Road and Seymour Street shows that the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district will be visible to the north of the Unity Buildings and the West Tower. Much the same groping is seen from viewpoint 22 at the north end of St George’s Hall. None of the characteristics of OUV manifested in the kinetic view will be affected by the Liverpool Waters development. Considered as a kinetic view, the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 239

6.3.31

ISLINGTON FROM SHAW STREET TO SCOTLAND ROAD Like Leeds Street, Islington is a hostile and wide road that is dominated by traffic and lacks historic context. At the junction with Shaw Street a cluster of highly significant buildings survive including the RC Church of St Francis Xavier, the Collegiate School and the former Baptist Chapel. Beyond this the road falls steeply downhill passing the UNISON Head Quarters, the backs of the cultural buildings on William Brown Street, and the 1960s concrete flyovers. In the view various landmarks are visible including the Wellington Monument, Lime Street Chambers and St John’s Beacon. The distant focus of the view, as from London Road is the West Tower, and the impact of the proposed development will be broadly similar in the way that the additional tall buildings will strengthen the cluster and add interest to the skyline. Considered as a kinetic view, the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

GENERAL VIEWS/PANORAMAS A further category of views identified in the SPD has also been assessed and included in the assessment matrix at the end of this section. Since the development will not be visible in any of these views, and the impact is therefore neutral, they have not been described in the text. The views are as follows: 6.3.32

VIEW WEST ACROSS RIVER FROM PIER HEAD The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.33

VIEW EAST TO WILLIAM BROWN STREET, ST GEORGE’S HALL FROM QUEENSWAY TUNNEL EXIT The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.34

VIEW WEST ACROSS CITY FROM METROPOLITAN CATHEDRAL The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 240

6.3.35

VIEW NORTH WEST ACROSS CITY FROM ANGLICAN CATHEDRAL The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.36

VIEW NORTH ACROSS DOCKS FROM BRIDGE OVER QUEEN’S DOCK/COBURG PASSAGE The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

6.3.37

VIEW WEST ACROSS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FROM WILLIAM BROWN STREET/ST GEORGE’S HALL The impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

ADDITIONAL VIEWS REQUESTED BY ENGLISH HERITAGE 6.3.38

PARLIAMENT STREET/CHALONER STREET (VIEWPOINT 6)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a point almost 2 km south of Liverpool Waters on the edge of the southern docks. The view is taken from a busy road junction that is not much used by pedestrians, so would be experienced largely from a passing vehicle. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 241

Description of View The foreground of the view is dominated by highway clutter and a scattering of poor quality modern development. The principal focus is the Wapping warehouse, and beyond that the city centre.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view includes only one heritage asset, which is the Wapping warehouse, designed by Hartley, and impressive by its scale and robustness. The highway follows the line of the original dock road, but its character has been lost as a result of widening, the demolition of the dock boundary wall, and the removal of virtually all the 19th century warehouses and other buildings that lined the road. The modern development is puny in scale, wastefully planned and architecturally bland.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significance relates solely to the Wapping warehouse, but in the view it is too isolated to convey much beyond its survival as a monument to its trading function and engineering excellence.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is kinetic and one experienced not by pedestrians but vehicle users. At night it is subject to glare of street lights and vehicle lamps.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view has hugely altered over the 50 years, and little history is left. It conveys little information about OUV, other than the flatness of the topography and the qualities of the Wapping warehouse. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV Such values as there are in the view are not affected by the Liverpool Waters development, which cannot be clearly seen from this distance. The additional tall buildings would have some benefit in strengthening the existing commercial cluster and making it more legible. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 242

The impact on the view is considered to be negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.3.39

ECHO ARENA AND CONVENTION CENTRE (VIEWPOINT 8)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the public square in front of the arena, the new elevated space within Kings Waterfront. It is well frequented when the arena is in use, and is flanked by hotels and bars on the east side.

Description of View The view is north towards the Albert Dock, which runs the length of the enclosed piazza. Visible above the flat parapet of the Albert Dock warehouses are the towers of the Liver Building and the West Tower.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The principal heritage asset is the Albert Dock warehouses, which look impressive and impregnable in the view. The tops of the towers of the Liver Building are visible, but there is insufficient to give them much meaning. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 243

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significance relates solely to the Albert Dock warehouses, which are well displayed in the view and give a positive sense of enclosure to the new public space. The historic context in the view, however, has otherwise been lost in the process of redevelopment and consequently has less to tell us about OUV than other views of the Albert Dock.

Changing Aspects of the View The view need not be fixed within the piazza, and could be more interesting and revealing at other points, where views of the river and other historic assets could be gained.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view has altered significantly over the 50 years, and whilst the regeneration of Kings Waterfront has been a major contribution to Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cultural life, the limited degree of authenticity of the setting makes this a less valuable view than others. The overall value of the view is medium.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The additional tall buildings that would be visible above the roof of the Albert Dock warehouses will have no significant impact on the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 244

6.3.40

KINGS PARADE (VIEWPOINT 9)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the river wall at the south west corner of the Albert Dock at a point on the public promenade that runs along to the Pier Head. At this point the river wall juts out to afford an oblique view of the west wall of the Albert Dock.

Description of View The view north is half taken by the river and half by the Albert Dock. On the opposite bank of the river, the Kingsway ventilation shaft and Wallasey Town Hall are the only recognisable features. The distant focus of the view beyond the Albert Dock is the Alexandra Tower. The river wall is impressive in scale, material and construction.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The principal heritage asset is the Albert Dock warehouses, which look majestic in this view that incorporates the river and river wall. Some items of traditional quayside furniture are visible, but there are also modern bollards and railings.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significance relates to the Albert Dock warehouses, which are well displayed in the view and convey a powerful sense of the technical proficiency of the dock engineers, and robustness of the buildings and the port management. The river wall is similarly impressive by its scale and engineering, and the combination of warehouses and river setting are testimony to the unique

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 245

situation and planning of the docks to overcome the difficulties encountered from tide and weather conditions.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is part of a kinetic sequence along the riverfront promenade, but this is a good point to experience the qualities of the Albert Dock warehouses. Its appeal will depend upon weather conditions.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is strong in its display of the river wall and the Albert Dock. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The Liverpool Waters development would be almost imperceptible in the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.41

ALBERT DOCK (VIEWPOINT 10)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the south quay of the Albert Dock close to the south west corner. The Albert Dock is one of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s principal attractions, and the promenade around the dockside is much frequented by visitors and residents.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 246

Description of View The view north takes advantage of a gap between the warehouses on the north side where ships entered the dock from Canning Half-Tide Dock. The foreground is occupied by the water basin, surrounding by the ranges of colonnaded warehouses. Visible through the gap are the Pier Head buildings, the new Museum of Liverpool, a low section of the Mann Island development, and the upper part of the Alexandra Tower. Several buildings are visible above the roofline of the Albert Dock, including one of the towers of Liver Building, the top of the Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock ventilation shaft, the West Tower and One Park West.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The principal heritage asset is the Albert Dock, with its dock walls, warehouses, and the Dock Traffic Office at the north east corner. In the distance are the Liver Building, the Cunard Building and the Port of Liverpool Building. The focus of the view is the Pier Head group.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significance of all the heritage assets in the view is very high, and the view is one of the most celebrated in Liverpool. Formerly the Albert Dock was more enclosed by development of Mann Island, and the view would not have existed. Moreover, the exclusion of the public from the dock estate until 25 years ago makes this a relatively modern view. The relationship between the dock, the warehouses, the colonnaded quaysides, and vessels as seen in the view are fundamental to OUV. The state of integrity and authenticity of the scene is also remarkable, and compared with the sorry state of St Katherineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock in London makes the Albert Dock of exceptional value. It is a potent symbol of maritime mercantile culture. The relationship between the working dock and the commercial buildings at Pier Head is also fundamental.

Changing Aspects of the View The night time view changes due to the illumination of the Pier Head buildings, which enhances their importance as the focus of the view. Public access through the dock, however, is restricted at night.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 247

Overall heritage significance of the view This is one of the most celebrated and popular view in Liverpool, and one of the most impressive both scenically and in its contribution to OUV. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The Liverpool Waters development will not obscure any element of the view, but the proposed tall buildings will have an effect on the skyline silhouettes of the Liver Building and the Port of Liverpool Building. As with the view from Hartley Bridge (Viewpoint 15), however, the 2D representation is misleading, for the eye will compensate for the distance between the Pier Head complex and the tall buildings when seen in three dimensions. As a result, the skyline features of the Liver Building and Port of Liverpool Building will remain dominant, even though the tall building cluster will affect the way in which the silhouettes are seen against the sky. In the modelled view the Shanghai Tower appears behind the western tower of the Liver Building, whilst one of the other tall buildings stands behind the eastern tower. A third tall building is seen behind the outline of the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. The viewpoint, however, is not fixed and by moving to one side or the other, the juxtapositions would become less critical. The impact on the view is considered to be minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. Mitigation through kinetic adjustment would reduce the impact to slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 248

6.3.42

THE COLONNADES (VIEWPOINT 11)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the promenade that follows the river wall at a point between the Albert Dock and the Pilotage Building looking towards the Pier Head. This is a popular pedestrian route that affords excellent views of the river, the river wall, the docks and the Pier Head.

Description of View The view focuses on the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. The Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock ventilation shaft and the towers of the Liver Building are also silhouetted against the sky, though the western tower is cut off above the clock face by the dramatic south front of the Museum of Liverpool. In the foreground is the walkway which is paved in reclaimed setts and stone flags, with a grassed refuge to the right, and the river to the left. A number of buildings and features in the middle ground jostle for attention, including the angular forms of the Mann Island development, the museum, the Pilotage Building, together with the watchmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s huts, and reproduction street furniture. On the river front are the floating landing stage and the ferry terminal, and in the distance, the Alexandra Tower.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 249

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View A number of individual heritage assets are visible, notably the river wall, the entrance passage to the Canning Dock, two watchman’s huts, the Pilotage Building, the Port of Liverpool Building, the George’s Dock Ventilation Tower, and the Liver Building.

The principal

heritage asset is the Albert Dock, with its dock walls, warehouses, and the Dock Traffic Office at the north east corner. In the distance are the Liver Building, the Cunard Building and the Port of Liverpool Building. The focus of the view is the Pier Head group.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The significance of all the heritage assets in the view is very high, and the view is one of exceptional interest, that leads the viewer on to discover more of what is visible. The Pier Head buildings as the focus represent the city’s mercantile status, whilst the dock structures convey the spirit of innovation and engineering excellence. The characteristic hard materiality of the townscape is also well expressed. The contribution of contemporary architecture, which contains and focuses the view providing added drama, is also a positive factor.

Changing Aspects of the View The night time view changes due to the illumination of the Pier Head buildings, which enhances their importance as the focus of the view. This is a kinetic rather than a fixed view, and the pleasure is to see the changing townscape and its relation to the river scene along the length of the promenade.

Overall heritage significance of the view This is part of a sequence of exceptional views that vividly convey the values on which the WHS inscription is based. The overall value of the view is very high.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 250

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The Liverpool Waters development will not obscure any element of the view, but the tallest buildings will be visible above the parapet line of the museum. New development at Princes Dock will be seen as a background to the Pier Head. In this view, the enclosure of the Pier Head will be beneficial, and the tall buildings will give presence to the existing cluster that at present can only be slightly glimpsed in the cut off profile of the West Tower and the isolated form of the Alexandra Tower. The impact on the view is considered to be negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.3.43

LIVERPOOL MUSEUM (VIEWPOINT 16)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Pier Head, just to the north east of the Museum of Liverpool. The Pier Head is the principal public space in the city, and has recently been enhanced by the construction of the canal link and high quality urban landscape treatment. It is a place of large scale outdoor events and gatherings.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 251

Description of View The view looks directly north across the extent of the Pier Head, which is enclosed on the west side by the ‘Three Graces’, and is open to the river, apart from the ferry terminal, on the east side. The canal link, some of the monumental sculptures and the recently planted trees contribute to the quality of the public realm, which is hard and urban in feel, and windswept in harsh weather. In the background are the modern buildings erected at the Princes Dock. The river is also visible to the left, though no landmarks on the Wirral shoreline are recognisable.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Three Graces dominate the scene. The Liver Building is listed Grade I, whilst the Port of Liverpool Building and the Cunard Building are both Grade II*. The public monuments are also listed. The canal is a modern construction that recaptures something of the former history of the George’s Dock, the walls of which remain below ground, as well as other surviving heritage assets.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Pier Head is an important aspect of the setting of the Three Graces, and the scale of the public space affords generous views of these buildings, which were designed for display. The closure and infilling of the George’s Dock was intended to provide a site for commercial buildings that would express the maritime mercantile supremacy of the city and its role in global trade. However, instead of becoming a public space of dignity as intended, the Pier Head was used as a transport interchange until the 1990s. Only in the last few years has it been sympathetically treated. The image of the Pier Head remains recognisable today.

Changing Aspects of the View The night time view changes due to the illumination of the Pier Head buildings, which enhances their importance as the focus of the view. The clock faces of the Liver Building in particular, designed to exceed those of Big Ben, are a blatant advertisement for the Royal Liver Friendly Society.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is of particular importance to the understanding of the ‘Three Graces’ and their architectural force. The Pier Head has only in recent years achieved the dignity that was intended

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 252

when the decision to infill the Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Dock was made, and today the identity of the Pier Head vividly conveys the values on which the WHS inscription is based. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The major disappointment in the present view is the lack of enclosure at the northern end of the Pier Head. This has long been recognised, and the approved scheme for Plot 7 at Princes Dock, which is modelled in the photomontage was intended to achieve that objective. Whilst the scheme has not been implemented to date, it will significantly enhance the view. The Shanghai Tower and the other tall building seen in the distance are would cause no harm to their setting. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be negligible beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight beneficial. 6.3.44

MANN ISLAND/THE STRAND (VIEWPOINT 18)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 253

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from on the western side of Strand close to the George’s Dock Ventilation Tower. It is a crossing point of the Strand, and therefore on a well frequented public route. The Strand, however, is dominated by traffic, and often windy, and few linger to admire the views.

Description of View The view is framed by the Pier Head buildings to the west and the medium rise buildings that form a sheer wall on the east side of the Strand. The foreground is dominated by the wide and hostile highway, and in the distance are the Malmaison Hotel, the Princes Dock car park and City Lofts. Whilst the middle ground buildings that frame the view are impressive and uplifting, there is currently no focus.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view includes a number of designated heritage assets, notably the George’s Dock Ventilation Tower, the Cunard Building, the Liver Building, Tower Building and St Nicholas’ Church. West Africa House is also one of the more significant unlisted commercial buildings in the city centre. The original shoreline can be understood in the view.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view has changed dramatically during the 20th century, as a result of infilling of the George’s Dock and construction of the Pier Head buildings, by the demolition of the Goree Piazzas which occupied the centre of the Strand, and by the removal of the overhead railway. These combined actions opened up the space, and increased the scale of development. Heavy traffic flows give it the feel of an American style urban freeway, which is rare in a British context, and characteristic of the city’s international context. The Liver Building and Tower Building, both designed by Aubrey Thomas, are significant for their pioneering technology, and the George’s Dock ventilation tower is no less important in engineering terms. The major buildings are all connected through transport, trade or commerce with the port, and display aspects of mercantile culture.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 254

Changing Aspects of the View The view is subject to movement of vehicles and people and affected by noise and changing weather conditions. It is a kinetic view, for the receptor would not be static at this location. Night time illumination also changes the nature of the experience.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view contains a lot of information about OUV, although some of it may not be readily understandable. It is probably a view best experienced in a moving vehicle, in which case it is a kinetic view, and the speed at which this must be glimpsed gives little time to take it all in. The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontages show that the proposed cluster of tall buildings on the King Edward site and the Princes Dock will form a new focus to the view, providing greater background scale and reinforcing the identity of the commercial district. The new development is separated from the Pier Head buildings and therefore has no visual impact on their setting. The legibility of the city is enhanced in the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be minor beneficial. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 255

6.3.45

FENWICK STREET/BRUNSWICK STREET (VIEWPOINT 19)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the junction of Fenwick Street and Brunswick Street looking north. This is a part of the older commercial core of the city, close to the Exchange, where some of the first banks and trading houses were established.

Description of View Fenwick Street is narrow and the view is framed by commercial premises, of which India Buildings occupies the full block between Brunswick street and Water Street. The view continues into Rumford Street on the opposite side of Water Street, and then into Rumford Place, where the West Tower forms a focus. The corner of the Martins Building and the Unity Building are also visible to each side of Rumford Street.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The foreground features India Buildings, which is listed Grade II* and the former Union Bank to either side of the street. Beyond are the former Bank of Liverpool, and Martins Bank. In Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 256

the distance are the smaller scale buildings in Rumford Place. Whilst the streets contained by Castle Street, James Street, Strand and Water Street form a grid, further north the medieval street pattern is preserved.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view incorporates a mix of historic and new commercial premises and includes two of the most remarkable office buildings of the early 20th century in the UK, India Buildings and the Martins Bank, both designed by Herbert J Rowse, and influenced by early 20th century American architecture. The view expresses the mercantile nature of the city and its evolution over time.

Changing Aspects of the View This is not a static view, but one of many that would be experienced on foot in the network of small narrow streets within the old commercial district. The area is busy by day, but quieter at night.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view has evolved over time, with a mix of buildings of different periods and the contrast of regular and irregular street patterns providing visual interest, conveying information about the commercial growth of the city. The individual buildings, particularly the banks and India Building, express Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s wealth and prestige as a world mercantile city. The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows that one of the tall buildings on the King Edward site will close the view, and complement the West Tower in scale and height. The contrast of scale with the smaller building in Rumford Place adds a touch of drama in the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 257

6.3.46

WILLIAM BROWN STREET (VIEWPOINT 22)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from south front of St George’s Hall looking down William Brown Street. St George’s Plateau is an important public space and gathering point for public events. Whilst the street was once a major route in and out of the city, it was closed to traffic in the post war period and is the setting for the group of cultural buildings which are unrivalled in any other provincial English city.

Description of View This is a panoramic view across the city in which two aspects of Liverpool’s history can be seen, the cultural and the commercial. In the foreground are the cultural buildings erected in the 19th century as a designed complex, commencing with St George’s Hall, and in the distance the commercial district. William Brown Street runs sharply down hill towards the entrance into the Mersey Tunnel, and then up again towards to the commercial area, where taller buildings rise up in layered blocks. To the left is St John’s Gardens, formerly the churchyard, now containing a fine collection of public sculptures, and lined by trees which soften the scene.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The foreground is framed by the south entrance to St George’s Hall and the fronts of the Picton Library and William Brown Museum, with St John’s Gardens to the left. In the middle ground, some of the elements of the Queensway Tunnel can be seen, and beyond are Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 258

recognisable buildings including the towers of the Liver Building, the North John Street tunnel ventilation shaft, the dome of the Royal Insurance Building and India Buildings.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view expresses the aspiration and achievement of the merchants and civic leaders of the city in the 19th century, both in the cultural buildings and in their collections, which are a testimony to the mercantile culture of Liverpool. The cultural quarter is an exceptional example of civic pride, manifested in grand architecture and cultural display.

Changing Aspects of the View The cultural quarter is a pedestrian area, and walking around it affords changing views of the buildings and their setting. From the modelled viewpoint, more detail of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commercial district is revealed in winter when the trees surrounding St Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gardens lose their leaves. The area is generally quiet at night.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is significant for the opportunity to see the juxtaposition of the cultural and commercial areas of the city. Whilst it provides no understanding of the riverside setting, it expresses the varied topography of the settlement and the way that has shaped the urban plan. The group of cultural buildings is a remarkable expression of civic pride, which can only be appreciated by walking around the quarter and visiting the buildings to examine the collections. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows that the tall buildings on the King Edward site and Princes Dock will be highly visible on the skyline, and create a focal point to the view. The present cluster of tall buildings is fragmented, and the additional towers would strengthen and consolidate the group, reinforcing the value of Liverpool as an example of a world mercantile city. The impact on the view is considered to be minor beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 259

Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate beneficial. 6.3.47

GREAT HOWARD STREET/PAISLEY STREET (VIEWPOINT 28)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the busy traffic junction of Leeds Street and Great Howard Street at the point where Paisley Street runs off to the west. This is not an area that is used by pedestrians, and the complexity of the junction would not afford the opportunity for vehicle drivers to survey the view without danger.

Description of View The view is dominated by semi derelict buildings, waste land and highway clutter. Some of the land has been planted with trees, which are beginning to form a visual screen and soften the edges of the highway. To the left is a partial view of the upper floors of the Waterloo warehouse, seen behind the retail shed of Toys Râ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Us. The top of the Kingsway ventilation shaft is also visible.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Waterloo warehouse and the Kingsway ventilation shaft are the only heritage assets seen in the view.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 260

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view conveys little understanding of OUV and the contribution made to those values by the two heritage assets visible. Whilst sufficient of the Waterloo warehouse is visible to appreciate its size and grandeur, its dockside setting and proximity to the river are not apparent, and the top of the ventilation shaft is meaningless.

Changing Aspects of the View At night the environment is even more hostile, bathed in highway lights and completely unpopulated except by fast-moving vehicles.

Overall heritage significance of the view The principal messages conveyed in the view are about urban disintegration, decay and the dominance of highways. The area was once busy with activity associated with the docks, with housing and with social interaction. The need for regeneration, connectivity with the city centre and rebuilding a community are urgent priorities to combat social and economic decay. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The land in the foreground is not in the applicantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ownership, but is the site of the proposed King Edward Tower, which, if built, would complement the masterplan objectives for Liverpool Waters. These include an improved highway junction and pedestrian crossing that would enhance the connections between Old Hall Street and the Liverpool Waters site. The King Edward Tower would also obscure the Waterloo warehouse in the view. The photomontage shows the secondary cluster of tall buildings on the area of the Clarence Dock, which would become the focus of the view. The towers are situated some distance beyond the Waterloo warehouse, on the opposite side of the proposed central square, and would therefore be background structures. They would not appear therefore obscure or dominate the view, and the impact on OUV would be neutral or possibly enhanced by becoming a more noticeable feature of the view than at present. The contrast of verticality and horizontality would emphasise the scale and character of the warehouse. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 261

6.3.48

OIL STREET (VIEWPOINT 32)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from a point roughly half way between Oil Street and Great Howard Street looking towards the docks. Oil Street is one of the small cross streets that connect Great Howard Street and Waterloo Road. The street is quiet and unused by motorists and pedestrians.

Description of View The street contains no elements of interest, and apart from a few small workshop premises appears to have vacant frontages. At the end of the view the dock boundary wall is just discernable, with the blue shed on the Liverpool waters site beyond. To the left, the Kingsway ventilation shaft projects above the lower brick wall of an otherwise demolished building.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The only heritage assets visible are the dock boundary wall and the Kingsway ventilation shaft.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The two heritage assets seen in the view lack context and consequently fail to convey OUV.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 262

Changing Aspects of the View The area is ill-lit and threatening at night.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is has little interest and would be seen by a very small number of people. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV Since the view conveys almost no understanding of OUV, the impact of development cannot be unduly harmful. Thus, whilst the view will change dramatically as seen in the photomontage through the construction of tall buildings at the end of Oil Street, their presence could not adversely affect OUV. The impact on the view is considered to be minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse. 6.3.49

DUBLIN STREET (VIEWPOINT 33)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 263

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the junction between Dublin Street and Great Howard Street looking towards the docks. Dublin Street is one of the widest of the cross streets that connect Great Howard Street and Waterloo Road. The street is used by motorists needing to gain access to the dock road, but is not generally used by pedestrians.

Description of View Dublin Street preserves some 19th century building frontages, and is unusual in having two corner pubs, albeit that both have closed, one currently vacant, and the other in use as a cafe. The buildings frame the view down the street. On the left, beyond the cafe is the Bonded Tea warehouse, but the remaining buildings are of no special significance. Visible at the end of the street is the dock boundary wall, and glimpsed just over the wall is the Wirral peninsula.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The heritage assets are the Bonded Tea warehouse, which is listed Grade II, the two former public houses, and the dock wall.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The bonded tea warehouse is an important and rare survival of the huge number of 19th century warehouses that stood within reach of the Liverpool Docks. Designed by the architects S and J Holme, who were responsible for many of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commercial buildings, it is an early example of a fireproof warehouse and dates from c.1850. With a yet more impressive frontage to Great Howard Street it represents the tradition of warehousing on which the mercantile economy was based. The two pubs, albeit unlisted, are significant in terms of the life of those who worked in the docks and the associated industries in the vicinity. The dock boundary wall, although barely visible, is vital to the understanding of the dock management system.

Changing Aspects of the View The area is ill-lit and threatening at night.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view contains much of interest and importance in the foreground, but lacks a focus.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 264

The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The proposal involves the removal of the section of dock boundary wall at the end of Dublin Street to create a new vehicular access to the site. In visual and functional terms this will give Dublin Street more status, and will lead to it being more actively used. The photomontage shows the breach in the wall, and the development within. This consists of mid rise buildings south of the Clarence Graving Docks. The alignment of the Clarence Graving Docks means that it is not possible to create a clear vista from Oil Street across the site to the Wirral, and thus the cross river view will be lost. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is neutral. 6.3.50

CLOCK TOWER TO BASCULE BRIDGE (VIEWPOINT 34)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Victoria Clock Tower, looking across the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks towards the Bascule Bridge. The Clock Tower occupies a strategic position on the island at the entrance to the group of northern docks and acts as a landmark on the waterfront. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 265

Description of View From this point there is an expansive view of dockland, with focal points being the Bascule Bridge, which marks the passage into the Stanley Dock, and the tobacco warehouse. In the foreground is the setted surface of the island with a scattering of mooring posts and a capstan.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View A large number of heritage assets are visible. The view is focussed on the Stanley Dock with its north and south warehouses, Tobacco warehouse, hydraulic tower and chimney, together with its boundary walls. The dock boundary wall to Regent Road is also visible, as well as the Bascule Bridge. The retaining walls of the Collingwood and Salisbury Docks can be seen and also elements of the river entrance. The historic surfaces and associated artefacts are well displayed in this view. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the north, south and west quaysides of the Collingwood Dock, and the north and south quaysides of the Salisbury Dock were all occupied by transit sheds, and therefore the view would have been much more restricted.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View This is one of the best viewpoints from which to understand how the Tobacco warehouse was constructed within the Stanley Dock, and the impact that it had. Tobacco was one of the principal commodities passing through the port in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and a major generator of wealth. The view also illustrates the interlinked layout of the docks, and conveys information about the methods of dock planning and construction, as well as port management. The massive scale of the dock walls, the surfacing materials and the ruggedness of construction, which all contribute to the authenticity of the site, can be well appreciated from the heritage assets in the view. The viewer can also turn to see the river and the entrance, and understand the relationship between the river and the canal and dock systems, which was one of Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most important pioneering achievements.

Changing Aspects of the View The view is at a fixed point on the island, but will become part of a riverside promenade, where the views will change in accordance with the objectives of the public realm strategy. This is a very exposed viewpoint on the riverfront, where weather conditions will affect the experience of viewing the site. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 266

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is very important as conveying understanding of the management and operation of the docks, their layout and planning, and the robustness of construction. There is also information in the view that evokes aspects of mercantile culture, the trade in commodities and the lives of the people that worked in the dockyards which are vital to the WHSâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s OUV. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The view will remain largely open after development, with linear apartment buildings placed to each side of the Collingwood and Salisbury Docks, on the footprint of former transit sheds. These will provide enclosure of the water spaces on the north and south quaysides. The medium-rise buildings are in scale with the large water bodies, and the general spirit of place, and the block closest to the Stanley Dock has been sloped down so as to appear subservient to the Tobacco warehouse. However, Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s south warehouse will be partially obscured in the view, which would to some extent affect the ability to understand the evolution of the Stanley Dock, and the significance of the group of warehouses. Viewed kinetically, this can be overcome, as the south warehouse will come further into view by the receptor moving slightly northwards. The reintroduction of water borne activity to the docks will help to reclaim some of the liveliness which is crucial to OUV. The impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 267

6.3.51

WALTER STREET (VIEWPOINT 36)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the junction of Walter Street and Great Howard Street looking west down another of the narrow streets that connect with the dock road. The street is little used either by pedestrians or vehicles.

Description of View The view is framed on the left side by the boundary wall of the Stanley Dock, above which the upper floors of the remaining section of the Grade II* listed north warehouse can be seen. The right side is occupied by gap sites and modern sheds. In the background the dock boundary wall can be seen, but there is no focus to the view.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The only heritage assets in the view are the Stanley Dock north warehouse and boundary wall, and the main dock boundary wall. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the north side of the street was occupied by warehouse structures.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View Apart from the length of the boundary wall of the Stanley Dock and the upper floors of the north warehouse, little is revealed in the view. The setting is otherwise uninteresting and uninviting.

Changing Aspects of the View An inhospitable area by night. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 268

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is of some interest for understanding the extent and operation of the Stanley Dock as an enclosed system for the trading and warehousing of bonded goods, but the restricted view and the lack of incident provides limited information about the WHSâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s OUV. The overall value of the view is low.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The view will remain largely unaltered after development, with the end wall of one of the blocks on the north side of Collingwood Dock visible above the dock boundary wall. The building is subservient to the Stanley Dock warehouses, and provides a minor focus to the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.52

Regent Road (Viewpoint 39)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 269

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the junction of Regent Road and Boundary Street to the north of the Liverpool Waters site. The viewpoint provides a good impression of the invincible character of the dock boundary wall, but is currently experienced from a vehicle rather than on foot.

Description of View The aspect of the view is the dock wall which runs, largely unbroken, from north of the Wellington Dock to the south of the Nelson Dock. The view is otherwise featureless apart from the tower of the Hydraulic Engine House which can be seen rising above and beyond the wall.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The only heritage assets in the view are the dock boundary wall and the hydraulic engine house. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the view would have been enlivened by the overhead railway and the overhead coal railway, as well as busy activity along the dock road.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The fortress-like character of the wall can be well understood in the view.

Changing Aspects of the View An inhospitable area by night.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is of interest for appreciating the nature and extent of the dock boundary wall, its function as a barrier, and the security arrangements for bonded goods. The long vista with the wall continuing the full length also expresses the linear nature of the dock estate. The docks themselves, however, are not visible in the view, and there is no understanding of the relationship between the dockyards and the river. The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows development following the line of the wall set back 9 m from it within the site. The wall remains the dominant feature, and the hydraulic engine house stands separate and visually unaffected. In the revised scheme, one of the apartment blocks has been replaced by Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 270

a school, which is lower in height, and gives a more varied outline to the linear development seen in the view. In this view the impact on OUV is considered to be neutral. 6.3.53

GREAT HOWARD STREET/BOUNDARY STREET (VIEWPOINT 40)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the junction of Regent Road, Blackstone Street and Boundary Street to the north east of the Liverpool Waters site. This is a busy highway junction that is dominated by traffic, and would only be experienced from a vehicle passing through. There is almost no pedestrian traffic, and barriers around the junction prevent people on foot from crossing the roads.

Description of View The view is of a wide expanse of road with vehicles queuing at the traffic lights, and low modern industrial buildings in the foreground. Beyond is derelict land. In the middle ground the long horizontal profile of the Tobacco warehouse at Stanley Dock is the dominant feature. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the view would have included warehouses, works and terraced housing, which would have substantially obscured the tobacco warehouse from this viewpoint. The post war demolition of a substantial section of the north warehouse at Stanley Dock has also revealed more of the tobacco warehouse than would previously have been the case. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 271

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The only heritage asset in the view is the Tobacco warehouse.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The horizontal form of the Tobacco warehouse and its monumental scale is evident in the view, as well as its repetitive elevational treatment and mass of brickwork. From this angle, it is difficult to understand the relationship of the warehouse to the docks, since it does not form part of the dockland strip, and there is nothing in the view to explain that it stands within the Stanley Dock. The scattering of modern industrial buildings and dereliction shows how the urban landscape has changed and the linkage with the docks has been lost.

Changing Aspects of the View This is part of a kinetic sequence of views passing along Great Howard Street, where the relationship of foreground, middle ground and background features will change.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is of interest for appreciating the horizontality and scale of the Tobacco warehouse, and its appearance from the landward side. The view also shows the flatness of the landform, which extends beyond the dock estate into the area that was formerly occupied by warehousing, industrial premises associated with the docks and dock workersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; housing. The docks themselves, however, are not visible in the view, and there is no understanding of the relationship between the tobacco warehouse and the river. The view is only one of a kinetic sequence. The overall value of the view is high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows the two proposed groups of tall buildings appearing in the background. The Shanghai Tower and two other tall buildings on the King Edward site are seen above the eastern end of the roof of the Tobacco warehouse, whilst the secondary cluster of tall buildings at Clarence Dock are seen above its western end. The former are further away and, although taller, would therefore be less prominent. The secondary cluster will become the focus of the view, its verticality and dynamic forms contrasting with the horizontal scale of the tobacco warehouse. The change in the view would be striking, with the new towers becoming a new focal element. But Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 272

they do not obscure the Tobacco warehouse, nor prevent its scale and proportions being understood. The contrasting vertical forms serve to emphasise the horizontal line of the warehouse parapet, and draw attention to its massive size, an effect that would be more apparent in 3D than in the 2D photomontage. The design and materiality of the towers will also be crucial in this view. Dramatic through this change may appear, two further factors must be taken into account. Firstly, as a kinetic view, the position of the tall buildings in relation to the Tobacco warehouse will change as the viewer moves along Great Howard Street. At the point closer to the tobacco warehouse where views of the warehouse are most impressive, the tall buildings will not be visible at all. Secondly, once Liverpool Waters is developed, the hinterland between Regent Road and Great Howard Street is also likely to be regenerated. This will remove the vacant land, which currently provides this extensive view of the Tobacco warehouse. As can be seen in the view, the profiled sheet clad shed set back from Great Howard Street currently obscures the view of the Tobacco warehouse, which would be largely obliterated if the frontage to Great Howard Street were to be developed. Bearing in mind these factors, the impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 273

6.3.54

CLOCK TOWER FROM CLARENCE DOCK ENTRANCE (VIEWPOINT 42)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the historic gate leading into the Clarence Dock. This gate is to be used for pedestrian access to the site, and the view of the Clarence Graving Docks would be a first glimpse for people entering the site at this point on foot.

Description of View The current view is of a wide open expanse with the Graving Docks in the foreground and the Victoria Clock Tower marking the entrance from the river. In the distance a sliver of river water can be seen with the Wirral coastline beyond. The current openness, however, is artificial since there were transit sheds stretching the length of the southern quayside of the Collingwood Dock and the northern quayside of the Clarence Dock throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. There was also a transit shed on the southern quayside of the Salisbury Dock. These would have obscured the Victoria Clock Tower in this view, and enclosed the graving docks to each side. From 1929 when the Trafalgar Dock was reconfigured, a transit shed ran the full length of the dock along the riverfront, right up to the dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office, so that the view of the river would have been wholly obscured.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 274

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The Clarence Graving Docks are visible with their retaining walls, locks and perimeter buildings including the air raid shelters, police station and workshop building. An expanse of setts with rail tracks can be seen in the foreground.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view of the water basins with the river in the distance makes the relationship of the docks and river easily understandable. The way the docks were created by enclosing part of the river is also evident in the view. The Clock Tower marks the river entrance and explains the way that the docks were accessed and operated. The Clarence Graving Dock is an authentic dry dock, and can be used to explain the way vessels were repaired. The small operational buildings around the edges of the graving docks tell the storey of its use. The dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office is an important building from where the operation of the group of northern docks was controlled.

Changing Aspects of the View The graving docks are intended to become a major focus for the interpretation of the Liverpool docks, and fully accessible for the public. Visitors will move through the area, experiencing different views and understanding how the various structures functioned. As such, this is one of a sequence of views that will create visual permeability and build up a complete picture of the dockland landscape.

Overall heritage significance of the view The view is one of the best within the site for understanding the way in which the docks were both created and managed, and even though the original uses have disappeared, the level of integrity and authenticity remain high. The significance of the view can be further enhanced as one of a kinetic sequence within the area of the graving docks. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows a series of blocks placed to each side of the graving docks and on the riverfront. These have the effect of enclosing the graving docks and change the current openness of the view. The openness, however, is artificial and the blocks to each side are placed roughly on the footprint of former transit sheds. The block placed on the riverfront occupies part of the site Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 275

of the former transit shed that stretched the whole length of the reconfigured Trafalgar Dock after 1929. Whilst the former transit sheds were lower in height than the proposed buildings, they would have a similar impact in terms of enclosing the graving docks and obscuring both the Victoria Clock Tower and the river from view (as is demonstrated by the effect of the transit shed at the Bramley-Moore Dock). In scale the proposed buildings would not be overbearing. Treated kinetically, the clock tower would become visible by moving a few paces forward, as indeed would visual connections with other heritage assets across the site. The chief contribution made by the present view to OUV relates to understanding the landform and the links between the docks and the river, the operation of the graving docks and the pioneering technology. The integrity and authenticity of the Clarence Graving Docks are also high. The graving docks themselves, including the operational buildings around the perimeter, the historic surfaces and rail tracks, will not be altered physically, except for their repair and future maintenance. This, together with interpretation as set out in the CMP, will benefit the expression of OUV relating to operational factors and technology. The setting of the graving docks will change from the present open feel, but this openness is artificial. The understanding of land form and the relationship between the docks and the river will be compromised without the ability to cast the eye so widely, but this again is artificial. The linkages between the graving docks and other heritage assets will be afforded by moving around the site, providing more focussed views that command greater attention than bland openness. Whilst this important view will undoubtedly change as a result of the proposed development, it can be seen through an intelligent assessment that the principal effect will be to transform a currently derelict site containing forlorn heritage assets and attributes of OUV to a historic area with a distinct sense of place. The impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 276

6.3.55

CLOCK TOWER TOWARDS THE LIVER BUILDING (VIEWPOINT 43)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Victoria Clock Tower looking south across the site towards Princes Dock and the Liver Building. The Clock Tower occupies a strategic position on the island at the entrance to the group of northern docks and acts as a landmark on the waterfront.

Description of View The current view is of a wide open expanse of derelict land. In the foreground is the river wall and entrance passage to the Salisbury Dock. The Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office is just out of the view to the right. The middle ground is featureless. In the background the city centre is marked by the tall buildings of the commercial district and the towers of the Liver Building. To the right, the Wirral shoreline is visible, landmarked by the tall Queensway ventilation shaft. The current openness, however, is artificial, since transit sheds around all the docks to the south would have given structure to the layout of the water bodies and obscured the distant views of the city centre. The power station within the Clarence Dock would have dominated the view for much of the 20th century.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The sea wall and river entrance is the heritage asset that is most visible and evident in the view. Other heritage assets are the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office, the dock boundary wall, the Bonded Tea warehouse, the Waterloo warehouse, the Liver Building, the Anglican

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 277

Cathedral, and St Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Beacon. A number of mooring posts and the remains of lock gates are visible in the foreground.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The view affords understanding of the river wall and entrance passage, which are impressive for their scale and massive construction, though a better view could have been taken to show this. Before it was blocked up, the entrance led into the Salisbury Dock and then into the others docks in the northern group as part of an interconnected system. The relationship between the Clock Tower and the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office is an important operational factor. The heritage assets seen in the far distance do not convey powerful messages in this view due to the lack of relevant context and understanding about the intervening dockland scene.

Overall heritage significance of the view The long view, although revealing as an illustration of the derelict state of the dockland and its featureless character, actually conveys very little about aspects of OUV. What can be appreciated is the vast extent of the Liverpool Waters site, and its distant relationship with the city centre. The relationship with the river can be understood by the entrance passage and the visibility of the Wirral coast. The flatness of the dockland reclaimed from the river can also be appreciated. However, it is difficult to gain any real understanding of the dockland character. Prior to the clearance of transit sheds, the background buildings along the dock road and in the city centre would not have been visible, hence the relationship between the docks and the commercial centre would not have been so evident. Yet the layout of the docks, which appears amorphous in this view, would have been more understandable. Notwithstanding the problems of understanding, because of its strategic location on the island where the clock tower stands, the overall value of the view is high.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 278

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The proposed development introduces a major change in the view. In part this is a consequence of there being no buildings proposed for the foreground to contain the view as there are across other parts of the site, and as there were when transit sheds stood around all the docks. It is also because the view focuses on the secondary cluster where the density of development is at its highest. The consequence is that the current visual connection between the group of northern docks and the city centre is severed, as well as the views of the area west of the dock boundary wall. This, however, would have been the case when there were dock buildings on the site. The view of the Dockmasterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office is also obscured, though this can be restored should the viewer move slightly closer to the tower, from where there is direct visual communication. There is a strong emphasis in the view on the line of the canal corridor, which reinforces the legibility of the north south orientation of the remodelled Trafalgar Dock. The canal corridor is latest phase in the evolution of the dockland layout, and a key generator of the urban design concept of linkage, permeability and containment that underpins the masterplan. This is considered to be beneficial. The importance of the viewpoint as a visitor destination should also be considered. At present the view is unseen, and will remain so unless the site is developed and access permitted. Within the masterplan, it will become a focal destination on the riverside walk, with all round views: up and down the river, across to the Wirral peninsula, over the Salisbury Dock to the Collingwood and Stanley Docks, as well as the extensive view that is modelled in this photomontage. The cumulative understanding of OUV from the viewpoint will be valuable and compelling. Considered in the narrow terms of the fixed view, the impact is considered to be minor adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. In mitigation, taking account of the ability to gain access to the location and appreciate the view, as well as the other views that would be afforded in a kinetic framework, the impact would be slight adverse.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 279

6.3.56

BASCULE BRIDGE LOOKING NORTH ALONG REGENT ROAD (VIEWPOINT 44)

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Bascule Bridge looking north to the top of the Liverpool Waters site. The Bascule Bridge is a landmark structure and a good viewing point in all directions to gain understanding of the dockland estate. This is similar to Viewpoint 39 looking south from Boundary Road, and is essentially a view of the dock boundary wall.

Description of View The aspect of the view is the dock wall which runs, with few breaks, from the Bascule Bridge to the Bramley Moore Dock. The view is otherwise featureless apart from the tower of the Hydraulic Engine House which provides a focal point, and can be seen rising above and beyond the wall at the end of the view.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The fortress-like character of the wall can be well understood in the view.

Changing Aspects of the View None.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 280

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV The photomontage shows development following the line of the wall set back 9 m from it within the site. The wall remains visible and prominent, but the blocks behind it set up a new and assertive wall of development. The hydraulic engine house is obscured in the view. In the revised scheme, one of the apartment blocks has been replaced by a school, which is lower in height, and gives a more varied outline to the linear development seen in the view. The impact on the view is considered to be negligible adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is slight adverse. 6.3.57

BASCULE BRIDGE LOOKING SOUTH ALONG REGENT ROAD (VIEWPOINT 45)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 281

Importance of Viewpoint The view is taken from the Bascule Bridge looking south to the top of the Liverpool Waters site. The Bascule Bridge is a landmark structure and a good viewing point in all directions to gain understanding of the dockland estate. The view is from the middle of the road, which is unrealistic, but allows for a clear vista taking in the dock boundary wall on one side of the road and the end wall of the Tobacco warehouse on the other.

Description of View The view is framed by the rusticated stone base of the Tobacco warehouse and the cyclopean granite dock boundary wall with one of the gate piers prominent in the foreground. The wall shortly turns to brick where it reaches the Clarence Dock, representing an earlier phase of development. Little of interest is visible on the east side of the road beyond the Stanley Dock. The Waterloo warehouse is a focal point at the end of the vista, and beyond that the Beetham Tower, West Tower, City Lofts and the Alexandra Tower break the skyline and mark the commercial centre and the Princes Dock. During most of the 20th century, the power station would have been a major foreground feature of the view.

Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The heritage assets in the view are the dock boundary wall, the Stanley Dock wall and tobacco warehouse, and the Waterloo warehouse.

Significance of Heritage Assets and Attributes of OUV in the View The fortress-like character of the wall can be well understood in the view, as can the scale and robust character of the tobacco warehouse. The gateway conveys the importance of security for the dockland estate, and its construction is characteristic of Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attention to detail and appearance. Both the Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse, which are visually connected in this view display the importance of commodity trading and the bulk shipment and storage of goods in Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economic development and worldwide connections. The buildings are both pioneering in design and construction, and in the use of modern materials.

Changing Aspects of the View None.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 282

Overall heritage significance of the view This is an important view that forcefully conveys the values associated with bulk transportation and storage of goods, security of the bonded estate, pioneering engineering and construction and robustness. The linear nature of the docks can also be understood as well as the connection between the docks and the commercial centre. The overall value of the view is very high.

Magnitude of impact on heritage assets and attributes of OUV Whilst all the heritage assets in the view will remain unobscured, the photomontage shows a considerable degree of change. A high density of development is visible beyond the dock boundary wall, consisting of linear blocks setting up a new wall of development, backed up by the secondary tall building cluster on the site of the former power station. Closing the view at the end of the dock road is the cluster of tall buildings in the commercial quarter. The tall buildings in the primary cluster are beneficial in strengthening the image of the commercial district and reinforcing the identity of the mercantile heart of the city. The secondary cluster appears more arbitrary since the urban form is not understandable in the view. The dock wall, however, has always separated the docks from the wider neighbourhoods and concealed its identity, so this is not surprising. In terms of the ability for understanding OUV, little will be lost, but the scale and density of development apparent in the view is a dominant, but not unacceptable change. The impact on the view is considered to be slight adverse. Taking account of the value of the assets in the view and their contribution to OUV in accordance with the table set out in 2.5.3, the cumulative significance of effect or impact is moderate adverse. 6.3.58

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON KEY VIEWS Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that the impact on key views will be as follows:

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 283

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

The assessment finds that adverse and beneficial impacts are evenly balanced. Where negative impacts have been identified, there are three principal causes: ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of tall buildings in the commercial district cluster on the silhouette of the Three Graces when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay (Viewpoints 10 and 12). In these views, the tall buildings appear behind the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. Seen in 3D, however, the effect will be mitigated, whilst a kinetic treatment of views, which are not restricted to fixed points, will also avoid harmful impact.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wallasey Town Hall (Viewpoint 3). This, however, is a consequence of the location of these warehouses several blocks back from the riverfront, and if their all round visibility were to be maintained, it would sterilise much of the site, and unacceptably reduce the sense of enclosure to the central docks. For even three or four storey riverfront development would largely obscure the Tobacco warehouse; yet like the modern apartment blocks erected west of the Waterloo warehouse, such development would be out of scale with the setting. It is therefore inevitable that the warehouses will be partly obscured.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 284

Mitigation comes in the form of kinetic views from the Wirral promenade, where the Stanley Dock will be gradually revealed, and will be more effective as a conveyor of OUV, than the present largely featureless prospect. ď&#x201A;ˇ

The change in long views of the site from the Victoria Clock Tower and Regent Road (Viewpoints 43 and 45) as a result of development on the site of the Clarence Dock. The change in these views will be considerable, but largely as a result of the current artificial openness of the site. The present derelict state of the dockland and its featureless character is the abiding image in long views across the site, and is alien to its authentic character as working docks. Prior to the clearance of transit sheds, no connecting views between the docks and the city centre would have existed. Public access to the site and the waterfront views is a crucial mitigating factor.

Beneficial impacts are identified in kinetic views from the Wirral Promenade, and significantly along the Canal Corridor, passing through the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, where the transformation from an abandoned dockland site to a place of activity and vibrancy will recall the past history of busy quayside activity that characterised the docks until their closure in the 20th century. Positive effects will also result in views from a number of locations due to the additional tall buildings in the central commercial district, which will enhance the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity as a global maritime mercantile centre.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 285

6.4

IMPACT ON VIEWS AND SETTINGS OF THE LANDMARK BUILDINGS OF THE WHS AND BUFFER ZONE Introduction The buildings included in this section are taken from the list of landmark buildings in the WHS SPD. Their locations are shown in Figure 4. The assessment considers impact on their landmark status and setting, and views of them from modelled viewpoints, taking account of kinetic factors, as well as from other locations. These buildings contribute to OUV and the ability to view them from different viewpoints is important to understanding the significance of the WHS and the inter-relationship of its constituent parts. The landmark buildings all contribute to the intangible attributes of the WHS as evidence of the values identified in the Statement of Significance, authenticity and integrity. This assessment considers the impact on all the views of the landmark buildings holistically and the contribution that they make to the understanding of OUV.

6.4.1

STANLEY DOCK

Impact on visibility and setting in identified key views The Stanley Dock complex is visible from modelled viewpoints 1, 2, 3, 4, 25, 27, 34, 40, 41 and 45. In all these views the Tobacco Warehouse is the dominant landmark because of its size and bulk. 

From viewpoint 1 at Fort Perch Rock, the Tobacco Warehouse is currently visible in the far distance, its roofline following the level of the ridge of land beyond. The photomontage shows that it would be hidden by the proposed riverfront development.



From viewpoint 2 at Magazine Parade, the Tobacco Warehouse and the two Hartley warehouses are visible. The photomontage shows that the complex would similarly be obscured by the development on the riverfront.



Seen from viewpoint 3 at Wallasey Town Hall, the Tobacco Warehouse currently makes more of a statement by breaking the skyline, and the two Hartley warehouses can also be

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 286

seen in the background. The photomontage shows that the upper part of the Tobacco Warehouse would be visible above the roofline of the lower development that is proposed to front the Clarence Graving Dock. However, it should be appreciated that for a distance of 1 kilometre between viewpoints 2 and 3, in a series of kinetic views, looking through the wide gap in the river front development across the Salisbury and Collingwood docks, the whole of the Stanley Dock complex would be visible. This is considered in further detail in Section 5.5 of the report. 

From viewpoint 4 at the Birkenhead Ferry Landing Stage, the Tobacco Warehouse would again be obscured.



From viewpoint 25 at Everton Park, the visibility and setting of the Tobacco Warehouse together with the two Hartley Warehouses would be unaltered.



From viewpoint 27 at the junction of Old Hall Street and King Edward Street the Tobacco Warehouse is visible in the distance. The photomontage shows that the visibility and setting of the Tobacco Warehouse would be unaltered.



Viewpoint 34 at the Victoria Clock Tower is one of few positions from which the layout of the Stanley dock can be easily read. The brutal intervention caused by the construction the Tobacco Warehouse in 1900 on Hartley’s plan for the Stanley Dock is not easily understood either from more distant or closer viewpoints, and the relationship between the Victoria Tower and the Stanley Dock is therefore important to the OUV of the Site. From this viewpoint the gable ends of the three warehouses at the Stanley Dock are currently visible, set against the other water bodies. The photomontage shows that whilst the Tobacco Warehouse and the North Warehouse will remain unaffected, the end wall of the South Warehouse would be largely hidden by the proposed development of the south quay of Collingwood Dock. However, the whole complex including the South Warehouse would become visible were the viewer to move north east, either remaining on the central island or passing over the bridge to the spur of land beyond. In this view the height and massing of the proposed development is appropriate to the scale of the Stanley Dock.



From viewpoint 40 at the junction of Great Howard Street and Blackstone Street, the horizontal bulk of the Tobacco Warehouse is a distinctive element of the townscape. The other warehouses are concealed. The photomontage shows that whilst visibility of the Tobacco Warehouse would not be affected, the proposed clusters of tall buildings in the existing commercial district and the site of the former Clarence Power Station would introduce a new vertical background. In the case of the commercial district, the tall

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 287

buildings are more distant and form a group with the existing tall buildings (which are obscured in the view by foreground features) and would thus have a limited impact. The secondary cluster has more of an impact on the horizontality of the Tobacco Warehouse by its greater proximity. However, the precise location of this viewpoint is of no special significance, and the relationship of horizontal and vertical scales would change were the viewer to move further north or south where the tall buildings would no longer form the background. It should also be appreciated that the extent of visibility of the Tobacco Warehouse from the viewpoint is due to the lack of frontage development on Great Howard Street, which is likely to change once wider regeneration of the area takes place. 

From viewpoint 41 at the junction of the canal system the proposed development would have no impact on the setting of the Stanley Dock.



Viewpoint 45 is taken from the Bascule Bridge looking south, where the Tobacco Warehouse is immediately to the left. The view is focussed on the Waterloo Warehouse and the emerging cluster of tall buildings, and the field of vision does not allow the Stanley Dock to be taken into account. Whilst the photomontage shows dramatic change to the view, this would have limited impact of on the setting of the Stanley Dock.

Assessment of Impact The understanding of the Stanley Dock is important for the protection of the Site’s OUV. It strongly represents the innovative techniques and methods of dock construction and port management which are principal criteria of WHS inscription, as well as being an outstanding example of world maritime culture. Whilst the Stanley Dock lies outside the Liverpool Waters site, and therefore will not be directly affected, riverside development has the capacity to affect its authenticity and integrity when seen from the Wirral shoreline and locations in the northern part of the city. In the four panoramas that have been modelled to assess the impact, it is clear that the Stanley Dock complex is currently only readable because of the enormous bulk of the Tobacco Warehouse and the fact that the dockland between it and the river is now open, cleared and derelict. The Stanley Dock is unusual in having been constructed inland and not on land reclaimed from the river, with the consequence that it is set several blocks back from the river edge. The Stanley Dock warehouses are therefore background buildings, and it is inevitable that any riverfront development will have an impact on oblique views from the opposite side of the river, where at present the whole dockland site is vacant. This point is clearly illustrated by the way that the Echo Arena and Conference Centre at Kings Dock, although modest in height, entirely obscures the massive Wapping Warehouse which is set back behind the Wapping Dock. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 288

Photomontage 3 shows that by reducing the height of development it is possible to catch a glimpse of the parapet of the Tobacco Warehouse, but the visual benefits of doing this are questionable. Firstly the height reduction required to achieve any meaningful view of the background warehouse above the roofline would result in riverfront development of an inappropriately small scale to command the necessary presence on such a wide river, and secondly, a view of the parapet of the warehouse would not in itself provide an understanding of the Stanley Dock complex and its OUV from the Wirral shoreline. For example, a partial glimpse of the top of the building would not help the viewer to understand the layout and planning of the Stanley Dock in relation to other docks or to the river. Nor would it reveal the sophisticated arrangement of the dock with its pioneering technical facilities, security systems or other management operations which contribute to OUV. What seems preferable is to allow a view of the Stanley Dock to be captured from a series of kinetic viewpoints along the promenade at the opposite point on the river. Magazine Parade is widely used for strolling and viewing the river, and appropriate interpretation at the point where the vista of the Stanley Dock starts to unfold, stretching for a distance of 1 kilometre where it remains visible would best explain the unique character of the Site. This distance could only be increased by removing more of the riverfront development. To the north this would be undesirable since it would result in a loss of enclosure to the Nelson Dock. To the south it would affect the continuity of the riverfront and also involve the loss of enclosure on the south side of the Collingwood Dock. The views of the Stanley Dock from the modelled viewpoints within Liverpool are generally benign. The only adverse impact is at viewpoint 40 where there is a tension between the horizontal massing of the Tobacco warehouse and the verticality of the secondary cluster. This relationship, however, would change as the viewer moved direction north or south along Great Howard Street. Similarly the adverse impact identified in the case of viewpoint 34, would be addressed by a shift in position of the viewer. In views across the site, the present openness that allows the Tobacco warehouse to dominate the scene will be lost as a result of development. But this was formerly the case, as can be seen from the quaysides of the Bramley-Moore Dock from where the Tobacco warehouse is obscured by the surviving transit shed. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 289

One significant tangible benefit that the development of Liverpool Waters would bring to the Stanley Dock is a rise in property values in the north shore area. This could lead to the regeneration of Stanley Dock becoming economically viable. Without this catalyst, there is little prospect of Stanley Dock, and the Tobacco Warehouse in particular, being renovated and brought into beneficial use. This is a factor that must be balanced in considering the cumulative impact of the Liverpool Waters proposals on OUV.

Overall impact on OUV In considering these issues cumulatively the overall impact on OUV of the Stanley Dock is moderate adverse. 6.4.2

PIER HEAD COMPLEX

Impact on visibility and setting in identified key views The Pier Head complex is visible from viewpoints 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 22, and 43. In most of these views the Liver Building is the dominant landmark because of its height and striking outline. 

From viewpoint 2 at Magazine Parade the Pier Head complex is clearly visible, with the towers of the Liver Building outlined against the sky. The impact of development at Princes Dock will obscure the main body the Liver Building, but this would be caused by development that already has consent, and would not be intensified by the Liverpool Waters proposal. The consolidation of the commercial cluster of tall buildings and the secondary cluster at the site of the Clarence Dock would provide additional landmarks, but would not detract from the setting of the Pier Head complex.



From viewpoint 3 at Wallasey Town Hall there would be a similar impact as in the case of viewpoint 2, where the Liver Building would be largely obscured by the approved scheme for Plot 7 Princes Dock. The top floor of the building and the towers with the liver birds, however, would remain visible.



From viewpoint 4 at Birkenhead Ferry Landing Stage the Pier Head complex would remain the focal landmark, with the proposed development strengthening and giving coherence to the existing commercial cluster of tall buildings and the secondary cluster providing a subsidiary and complementary vertical focus down river.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 290



From viewpoint 5 at Bidston Hill Observatory, the Pier Head complex can be picked out as the dominant landmark on the riverfront. The two clusters of tall buildings are sufficiently far distant from the Pier Head to challenge that dominance, though they would become landmarks in their own right.



From viewpoint 8 at the Echo Arena the towers of the Liver Building can be seen above the roofline of the Albert Dock together with the West Tower. In this view, however, the Pier Head complex has little significance, and the introduction of additional tall buildings in the background would not adversely impact on its setting.



From viewpoint 10 at the Albert Dock, the Pier Head complex is seen through the gap between the north and west blocks of the Albert Dock warehouses. The new Museum of Liverpool and the Mann Island development have both been carefully designed to protect this view. The photomontage shows the Shanghai Tower and two other proposed tall buildings in the commercial district breaking the skyline behind the Pier Head complex. The Shanghai Tower stands directly behind the western tower of the Liver Building and would have a harmful impact. Treated kinetically, however, with the viewpoint taken a few metres further to the west the impact would be reduced.



From viewpoint 11 at the Colonnades, the view of the Pier Head complex would be unaffected, since the proposed tall buildings are almost completely screened by the Museum of Liverpool. This view again is one of a kinetic sequence that will offer differing perspectives on the Pier Head buildings and its relationship with the Liverpool Waters development.



From viewpoint 12 at Hartley Quay, a view of the Pier Head complex is framed by the Museum of Liverpool and the Mann Island development. The roofline of the latter slopes down to reveal the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building. The photomontage shows the cluster of tall buildings rising behind the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building and the roofline of the Liver Building, with the Shanghai Tower set directly behind the western tower of the latter. The impact in this view is harmful.



From viewpoint 13 at the entrance to the Albert Dock from the Strand, the Pier Head complex is partially hidden by the Mann Island development. The proposed Liverpool Waters development will have no impact on its setting.



From viewpoint 14 from the central island at Wapping, the proposed cluster of tall buildings will have no impact on the setting of the Pier Head complex.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 291



From viewpoint 16 at the Liverpool Museum the Shanghai Tower is visible set behind the consented scheme for Plot 7 at Princes Dock. The proposed development would not harm the setting of the Pier Head complex.



From viewpoint 17, the focus of the view is the new development at Princes Dock, in particular the development at Plot 7 with the Shanghai Tower rising beyond. The field of vision is such that the Pier Head complex would not be taken into account, and the impact on its setting is not harmful.



From viewpoint 18 at the junction of Mann Island and the Strand, the proposed cluster of tall buildings would create a new focus. This view is framed by the Liver Building and the cliff-like frontage on the eastern side of the Strand, and the new development would have no significant impact on the setting of the Pier Head complex.



From viewpoint 22 at the top of William Brown Street the towers of the Liver Building are visible above St John’s Garden. The proposed cluster of tall buildings in the commercial district which would be visible in this view would have no impact on the setting of the Pier Head complex.



From viewpoint 43 at the Victoria Clock Tower, there is currently a distant view of the top of the Liver Building. The photomontage shows that this would be obscured by the proposed development. However, the approved scheme for Plot 3A at Princes Dock would hide the western tower and part of the roofline, leaving little of the Liver Building visible from this viewpoint.

Assessment of Impact The protection of the setting of the Pier Head complex is vital for the preservation of the OUV of the WHS. The three buildings, which were built after the Georges Dock was infilled, are a potent symbol of the mercantile maritime legacy for which Liverpool has been inscribed as a WHS. They strongly represent the maritime mercantile culture and are outstanding examples of a world mercantile city. Standing on the river edge at the centre of the city, fronted by a great public piazza, they enjoy an unparalleled setting. In the cross river panoramas that have been selected to test the impact of the Liverpool Waters development, the effect would be largely neutral. The additional tall buildings in the commercial district will create an additional visual focus when looking across the river, but this would not prejudice the setting of the Pier Head buildings or diminish their significance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 292

When seen from certain river front locations to the south, notably viewpoints 10 and 12, the Shanghai Tower stands directly behind the western tower of the Liver Building, and will have an effect on its skyline silhouette. In the case of viewpoint 10, the receptor location is not static and by moving to one side of the other, the effect will be diminished. The view from Viewpoint 12 is more focussed, and whilst a kinetic treatment will reduce the impression of one tower standing behind the other, the effect will remain to some extent. As discussed in the assessment on key views in Section 5.3, however, when seen in three dimensions, the impact will be less stark, since the eye adjusts to distance and the foreground features will remain dominant. In all the other views, the impact is neutral.

Overall Impact on OUV Whilst the impact on most views is neutral, the harm to the silhouette of the towers of the Liver Building in views from the south makes the overall impact on OUV of the Pier Head complex to be slight adverse. 6.4.3

ALBERT DOCK COMPLEX

Impact on visibility and setting in identified key views The Albert Dock complex is visible from viewpoints 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10. In most of these views the horizontal lines of the Hartley warehouses are the most characteristic feature of the dock, and the issue of horizontality and its contribution to the urban landscape of Liverpool is considered in Section 5.5 of this assessment. 

From viewpoint 2 at Magazine Parade the Albert Dock complex can just be picked out as a horizontal mass beyond the striking white form of the Museum of Liverpool. The proposed development is too far away from the Albert Dock to have any impact on its setting.



From viewpoint 3 at Wallasey Town Hall the relationship is similar and again the impact would be limited.



From viewpoint 4 at Birkenhead Ferry Landing Stage the Albert Dock is a major element of the riverfront skyline, but the Liverpool Waters site is well down river and would have little impact on its setting.



From viewpoint 5 at Bidston Hill Observatory, the Pier Head complex is visible, but is not a dominant feature of the view. Here the impact would be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 293



From viewpoint 8 at the Echo Arena the horizontality of the Hartley warehouses is very apparent, and the public space in front of the arena has been designed to be enclosed on the north side by the stark wall of the warehouses blocks. At present the Beetham West Tower protrudes slightly above the roofline. The photomontage shows that the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district including the Shanghai Tower would have a more disruptive impact, though treated kinetically, they would disappear as the viewer moves north towards the Albert Dock.



From viewpoint 9 at Kings Parade waterfront, the Liverpool Waters development is scarcely visible and would have no impact on the setting of the Albert Dock.



From viewpoint 10 at the Albert Dock, the Pier Head complex is seen through the gap between the north and west warehouse blocks. Whilst the photomontage shows that there will be some impact on the setting of the Pier Head complex, as discussed above, the affect on the Albert Dock complex will be limited.

Assessment of Impact The above assessment of views shows a harmful impact when the Albert Dock is seen from the piazza in front of the Echo Arena, but from this viewpoint, the Albert Dock is not functioning as a landmark.

Overall Impact on OUV In considering these issues cumulatively the overall impact on OUV of the Albert Dock is neutral. 6.4.4

LIVERPOOL TOWN HALL

Assessment of Impact The Liverpool Waters development will not be seen in conjunction with the Town Hall and so there can be no impact on its setting.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of Liverpool Town Hall is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 294

6.4.5

ST GEORGE’S HALL

Assessment of Impact St George’s Hall can be seen from viewpoint 21 at Lime Street Station and viewpoint 2 at William Brown Street. In the first, this view is dominated by the temporary media screen that wraps around the St John’s car park and shopping centre, with St George’s Hall on the right. In the second, the north entrance to St George’s Hall is to the left. The proposed Shanghai Tower and other tall buildings within the existing commercial district would become prominent features on the distant skyline in both views, but they will have no impact on the setting of St George’s Hall.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of St George’s Hall is neutral. 6.4.6

WILLIAM BROWN STREET COMPLEX

Assessment of Impact The group of cultural buildings that make up the William Brown Street complex, together with the north entrance of St Georges Hall can be seen from viewpoint 22. The proposed Shanghai Tower and other tall buildings within the existing commercial district would become prominent features on the distant skyline, but they will have no impact on the setting of the William Brown Street complex.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of the William Brown Street complex is neutral. 6.4.7

LIME STREET STATION

Assessment of Impact The Liverpool Waters development will not be seen in conjunction with the frontage of Lime Street Station and so there can be no impact on its setting.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of Lime Street Station is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 295

6.4.8

MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS

Assessment of Impact Whilst the top of the spire of the Municipal Buildings may be visible from St Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gardens or possibly from Haymarket in conjunction with the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district, this will have no impact on its setting.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on the OUV of Municipal Buildings is neutral. 6.4.9

ANGLICAN CATHEDRAL

Assessment of Impact Of the cross river panoramas, the Anglican Cathedral can surprisingly only be seen from viewpoint 4 at Birkenhead Ferry Landing Stage. In the other panoramas it is concealed either by the Liver Building or existing buildings on the waterfront or in the commercial district. In the case of viewpoint 4, where the cathedral is a distinctive feature of the skyline, the Liverpool Waters development is so far to the north that it will have no significant impact on its setting. Viewpoint 7 from Hope Street has the cathedral in the foreground with a distant view of the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district cluster. This would have no impact on the setting of the cathedral. The cathedral is scarcely visible from any point on the Liverpool Waters site, in spite of its cleared state. This is because it is obscured by buildings on the east side of Regent Road and beyond. From viewpoint 43 at the Victoria Clock Tower there is a glimpse of the tower of the cathedral the Vulcan Street Warehouse, which would be obscured by almost any form of development on the site or on the vacant land beyond. Whilst there are other points within the cleared site where the tower can equally be seen, it would be wholly unrealistic to expect them to be protected.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of the Anglican Cathedral is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 296

6.4.10

METROPOLITAN CATHEDRAL

Assessment of Impact The Metropolitan Cathedral is generally less visible in the cross river panoramas, and makes a more muted contribution to the skyline of Liverpool in the view from the Birkenhead Ferry Landing Stage. It is also just visible from the Victoria Clock Tower. Whilst there would be some impact to the visibility of the Cathedral lantern from New Brighton, the same conclusions can be drawn as with the Anglican Cathedral.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of the Metropolitan Cathedral is neutral. 6.4.11

ST LUKE’S CHURCH

Assessment of Impact None of the selected viewpoints show St Luke’s Church. Whilst it is possible that the cluster of tall buildings will be visible from Lecce Street, this would have no impact on the landmark status of the church and its tower

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on OUV of St Luke’s Church is neutral. 6.4.12

ST NICHOLAS’ CHURCH

Assessment of Impact Once a major feature of the Liverpool waterfront, as seen in marine paintings of the 18th and 19th centuries, the tower of St Luke’s Church has now to a great extent lost its former landmark status in the shadow of the Liver Building, the Unity Building and other recent developments. It can currently be picked out from viewpoints 3 and 4 across the river, from where its setting will not be affected by the proposed development. From viewpoint 18 at the junction of Mann Island and the Strand the church is partially visible behind the taller Tower Building. From this view, one of the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district will rise behind the tower of the church, but since the church is scarcely visible Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 297

the impact would be slight. Treated kinetically the church would become more visible were the viewer to move northwards along the Stand. As the viewpoint shifts, more of the Liverpool Waters tall buildings would become visible, but so too would other existing tall buildings such as the Atlantic Tower, the Unity Buildings and the West Tower.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on the OUV of St Nicholasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Church is neutral. 6.4.13

WAPPING WAREHOUSE

Assessment of Impact The Wapping Warehouse is not visible from any of the selected viewpoints from the Wirral shoreline since it is concealed either by the Albert Dock warehouses or the Echo Arena.

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on the OUV of Wapping Warehouse is neutral. 6.4.14

WATERLOO WAREHOUSE

Assessment of Impact Like the Stanley Dock, the West Waterloo Dock is a background building situated some distance back from the riverfront. Nonetheless it is currently prominent when seen from across the river, from Regent Road and from other modelled viewpoints. From viewpoint 2 at Magazine Promenade and from viewpoint 3 at Wallasey Town Hall the warehouse will be partly concealed by riverfront development. In the latter, however, sufficient will remain visible to understand its scale and size. From viewpoint 4, the warehouse is already concealed by development at Princes Dock. The secondary cluster will have some affect on the setting of the warehouse when viewed from Regent Road and Waterloo Road, but will not obscure it or reduce the ability to understand it. The setting of this building has changed markedly over time. Originally it was seen in the context of two other warehouses of equal height and scale, and later against the bulk of the Clarence Dock Power Station with its tall chimneys. Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 298

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on the OUV of Waterloo Warehouse will be slight adverse. 6.4.15

VICTORIA CLOCK TOWER

Assessment of Impact The Clock Tower marks the entrance to the north docks complex and is crucial to the understanding of the area. Its location on the island at the river entrance is an important aspect of its setting. Being on the riverfront, the building is visible from up and down river as well as from the Wirral coastline. The development will not cause any obstruction to the view of the tower from these locations, and amendments to the masterplan have provided greater space around the building as well as a significant reduction in the height of adjoining development. The key view from the Stanley Dock is also unaffected, and new framed views across the nearby water bodies have been set up to give the tower greater prominence. From further away, the building will be obscured, for example from parts of the Nelson Dock, from the Clarence Graving Dock and from the area of the buffer zone to the south. The Heritage Places OUV assessment suggests that the Clock Tower was a symbol of dock management and an aid for mariners within the dock estate, including the earlier docks built to the south of the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks. This is a false assumption, since the tower relates in management terms only to the group of northern docks where its function was to mark the entrance from the river. Furthermore, transit sheds around the quaysides would have totally obscured the tower from any viewpoint within the docks, as is demonstrated today by the existing shed on the south quay of the Bramley-Moore Dock. The tower, in fact, would only have been visible from the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks, and to a very limited extent from the Clarence Basin and the Clarence Graving Docks. It is also fanciful to suggest that the Clock Tower would have â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;dominated the working lives of dock hands as it would have been used to time the start and end of their working dayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, since stevedores generally worked piece rates and time would therefore not have been a critical factor in their working lives. The clock is also placed so low down the tower that it would only been visible from close vantage points in the Salisbury Dock.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 299

Overall Impact on OUV The overall impact on the OUV of Victoria Clock Tower will be neutral. 6.4.16

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACTS ON VIEWS AND SETTINGS OF THE LANDMARK BUILDINGS OF THE WORLD HERITAGE SITE AND BUFFER ZONE Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that the impacts on

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Slight adverse

Large adverse

Neutral

Slight beneficial

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

views and settings of landmark buildings of the Liverpool WHS and Buffer Zone will be as follows:

The majority of landmark buildings will remain unaffected by the development. The three that are affected are the Stanley Dock complex, where the impact is assessed as moderate adverse, and the Pier Head complex and the Waterloo warehouse, where impact will be slight adverse. The reasons for these impacts and the mitigating circumstances have already been discussed in relation to impacts on views, and are considered again in the concluding section of the report.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 300

6.5

IMPACT ON TOWNSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND SETTING OF CHARACTER AREAS The WHS contains six character areas, each of which contributes to the OUV of the WHS in differing ways. The character areas are located on Figure 1. The inter-relationship of the character areas is an important aspect of OUV and the ability to understand these relationships is a key management aim of the WHS. The methodology used in the assessment takes account of the townscape analysis in the Evidential Report (2009) to the WHS SPD, which describes the characteristics of the areas and their cumulative contribution. It also quotes the vision defined by the City Council for each of the areas. An assessment of significance and contribution to OUV is made, against which the assessment of impact is considered.

6.5.1

PIER HEAD CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The area is characterised by the group of monumental early 20th century buildings that were designed as the centrepiece of the waterfront at the time when Liverpool was the second city of the British Empire. Originally a transport hub with ferries, trams and buses, the space between the river and the Pier Head buildings has recently been transformed by the introduction of the canal link, comprehensive re-landscaping and relocation of monuments and enclosure by the new Museum of Liverpool and ferry terminal. The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Home to the three iconic landmark buildings of the Royal Liver Building, Cunard Building and Port of Liverpool Building



Impressive aesthetic appeal and skyline contribution of the architecture



Visual primacy of the Pier Head Group which is the main focus of views of the city from the Mersey and is visible from a distance along the waterfront is an important aspect of the WHS and wider cityscape.



Portland stone the dominant building material



Liver Building is the tallest and most prominent building



Good sense of enclosure across the Strand



Architectural composition complemented by the 1930s ventilation tower

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 301



Significant barrier created by The Strand/Wapping Street



Change in character on the southern edge of the are from an early 20th century designed area to a 19th century dockyard and early 21st century landscape



High quality contemporary landscape to assimilate its traditional use for civic events

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Limited, if any, scope for any further significant development within the area



New development in Princes Dock must not significantly compromise views of the key buildings/ skyline/ the river



Need to protect the integrity of the historic skyline created by the Pier Head group from the River Mersey



Need to protect the defined views such as that of the classical facade of the former Bank of England building on Castle Street along Brunswick Street



Poor pedestrian access across The Strand needs to be further addressed

Vision for the Area The City Council’s vision for the area as set out in the WHS SPD is based on its role as the centrepiece of the WHS waterfront, serving as an events space, international gateway and visitor destination. Development in the surrounding areas is required to respect the visual dominance of the Pier Head group.

Contribution to OUV The infilling and development of the George’s Dock after 1900 was intended by Liverpool Corporation to give the waterfront a new image. Whilst the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, which controlled dock estate, was focussed on efficient management of the docks and rejected any notion of municipal improvement, the Corporation wished to proclaim the international status of the port city. The Pier Head was the only point on the waterfront where the Corporation owned land, and their success in acquiring the George’s Dock, persuading the Dock Trustees to build their offices there, and marketing the remainder of the site for additional prestige buildings was to result in the remarkable complex that is now known as the Three Graces. The three buildings act as a symbol of Liverpool’s maritime mercantile success and the city’s wealth at the turn of the 20th century. Influenced by American technology and architecture, they demonstrate the values of advanced engineering and architectural magnificence that are crucial aspects of OUV. The Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 302

George’s Dock Ventilation Tower is a worthy addition to this group, both in terms of technology and art. The Pier Head itself had been the point of departure and arrival for cross river ferries from early times, and after the construction of the floating landing stage in the mid 19th century, it also became the arrival point for passenger vessels from further afield. Until recently a transport hub for buses, it has recently been transformed as a major public space and home to the new Museum of Liverpool, which interprets the city’s social, cultural and economic history.

State of Conservation The Royal Liver Building, Cunard Building and Port of Liverpool Building are all in active commercial use and in a good state of repair. There are no buildings at risk within the character area. The condition of the public realm is also good, with high quality surface treatments, providing a setting for important monuments, memorials and public art.

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV The chief threat posed by the Liverpool Waters development to the OUV of the WHS represented by the Pier Head character area is to the pre-eminence of the building group which currently symbolises Liverpool’s status as an outstanding world mercantile city. The visual impact of the proposed development is considered in paragraph 5.4.2 above, where it is concluded that the impact will be neutral when viewed from across the river and from most viewpoints to the south and south east of the Pier Head. The exception is in views from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay where the Shanghai Tower will be visible behind the western tower of the Liver Building, though in the former view any harm will be reduced when treated kinetically. It is also important to consider the view of the Pier Head area looking south from the Princes Half Tide Dock, where the Liver Building is currently the focus. This view will change to some degree when the approved scheme for the former Plot 7 is implemented, though the Liver Building will remain the focus. The proposed scheme sites any tall buildings on the eastern side of Princes Dock, where they will not affect the view of the Pier Head. Whilst the tall buildings including the Shanghai Tower will have an impact on the character of the Pier Head, they are well separated from it, and represent a continuing tradition in the development of the city centre. The Liver Building was at one time the tallest commercial building in the UK, and exploited new technology

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 303

and architectural display, which is a key attribute of OUV. This is also an objective in the design of the Shanghai Tower. Increased development of the Princes Dock in accordance with the masterplan, together with the introduction of a riverside walkway will bring greater activity to the Pier Head in accordance with the vision for the character area. This is also manifested in the public realm improvements to the Princes Jetty which was a point of embarkation for emigrants, and offers an opportunity for interpretation of the values of the WHS. The development of plot A-01 (formerly Plot 7) at the southern end of Princes Dock provides enclosure to St Nicholasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Place and will frame the Pier Head more effectively, in accordance with long held urban design objectives. This will be beneficial. Considered against the five key issues defined above, there is a neutral impact in the case of all but the requirement that New development in Princes Dock must not significantly compromise

views of the key buildings/ skyline/ the river. Here there is a negative impact on the skyline as seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay where the Shanghai Tower will be visible behind the western tower of the Liver Building.

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the Pier Head Character Area will be neutral. 6.5.2

ALBERT AND WAPPING DOCKS CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The area is characterised by the surviving elements of the 18th and 19th century growth of the docks to the south of Mann Island. The principal features are the docks and water spaces, together with the monumental Albert Dock and Wapping warehouses, which represent a high degree of integrity and authenticity. The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: ď&#x201A;ˇ

Docks display a high degree of authenticity and integrity and represent evidence of the development of design and materials of dock construction, growth and adaptation

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 304



Principal features are the docks and water spaces themselves, which are built with granite with iron, steel and timber fixtures and furniture



As well as the docks themselves, the most significant elements are Albert Dock, which preserves a complete dock landscape with its complete group of warehouses, offices and ancillary buildings and is a major landmark on the waterfront



Large expanse of docks and large development parcels result in a series of buildings sat within space rather than a continuous street frontage



Building heights generally between 4-7 storeys



Albert Dock complex adds significantly to the character and OUV of the WHS



Urban quality to open spaces

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Significant barrier created by The Strand/ Wapping Street



Need to protect the docks from further infilling



Need to improve the southern gateway to the zone



Need to ensure high quality development that does not detract from the character of the WHS



Large parcels of land need to be broken down in Kings Dock/ Queens Dock into a more permeable street pattern to aid ease of movement for pedestrians



Character of dockside paving and street furniture, which is distinctive should be replicated and extended consistently across the conservation area



Need to protect long distance views of Anglican and Metropolitan Cathedrals



Need for Conservation Management Plan for Albert Dock



Need for masterplan for the re-use of water spaces and redundant quaysides



Opportunity to further improve pedestrian permeability around quaysides, especially along west quay of Canning Dock

Vision for the Area The City Council’s vision for the area as set out in the WHS SPD is that it will remain a major tourism, retail and cultural destination, benefitting from links with Liverpool One and the Kings Dock waterfront.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 305

Contribution to OUV The area contains important surviving elements of the 18th to mid-19th century growth of the docks when Liverpool was established as a vital engine of the industrial revolution. The import of raw materials and export of manufactured goods made Liverpool the second city of the emerging empire. Although some of its historic character has been lost, the surviving docks, dockyard buildings and spaces combine to evoke the scale and nature of handling of bulk goods. The Albert Dock and its immediate setting is the best and most complete example of a bonded warehouse complex in the UK, and a testament to the engineering skill and innovation of the Dock Engineer, Jesse Hartley. The construction of the warehouses, the Dock Office, the dock retaining walls and the river wall and the minor buildings such as watchmenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s huts is of consistently high standard. These latter buildings, the historic surfaces, and ancillary items provide the context of authenticity that is an essential aspect of OUV. Within the Albert Dock, the Canning Dock and the Canning Half Tide Dock, the presence of visiting and permanently moored vessels, including tall-masted ships add to the sense of place. From within the Albert Dock area there are important views out towards the Pier Head, which are part of the character of the area and its contribution to OUV. In particular the views from the south quayside of the Albert Dock and from Hartley Quay, where the connection between the dockyards and the commercial life of the city is made.

State of Conservation The Albert Dock warehouses have been fully restored and converted to a variety of uses, making the dock it one of the primary tourist destinations in the north west. The Wapping warehouse has been converted to apartments. The granite and sandstone setted quaysides around the Albert Dock are almost all authentic and in a good state of repair. Items of dock furniture have been restored and populate the quaysides. The buildings and public realm are currently wellmaintained.

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV The principal threat posed by the Liverpool Waters development to the OUV of the WHS as represented by the Albert and Wapping Docks character area is to the appreciation and understanding of the dockland environment. The visual impact of the proposed development is considered in paragraph 5.4.3 above, where it is concluded that the impact will be neutral when viewed from across the river and from most viewpoints. An exception is a minor adverse effect on Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 306

the view from the Echo Arena, where the proposed tall buildings in the Princes Dock and King Edward site will protrude above the roof line of the Albert Dock warehouses. There will also be an adverse impact on the view out from the Albert Dock towards the Pier Head, where the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool will be partly silhouetted against the tall buildings rather than against the sky as at present. This will have some impact on the experience of the view, though as both of these are kinetic viewpoints, the juxtaposition of skyline features will change as the receptor moves around the quaysides, and they will not affect the understanding of the values of the dockland environment which is the key attribute of OUV associated with the Albert Dock.

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the Pier Head Character Area will be slight adverse. 6.5.3

STANLEY DOCK CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The area, much of which lies within the Liverpool Waters site, is characterised by surviving historic docks, the Leeds and Liverpool Canal and the dock boundary wall. The tangible heritage assets and the contribution they make to OUV are described in sections 3.6 above. The docks and historic structures that lie outside the WHS but within the buffer zone contribute to the setting of the character area. The area is currently vacant and publically inaccessible, except by narrow boat through the Leeds and Liverpool Canal link. The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Surviving elements of historic docks that retain dockside buildings and the dock boundary wall



Stanley Dock and Waterloo Dock retain their warehouses, and Salisbury Dock retains operational buildings



Stanley Dock is connected to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal by a series of four locks



Docks within the buffer zone form part of the general dockland landscape and contribute to the character of the WHS



Stanley Dock warehouses are currently the tallest buildings in the area and are between 8 and 13 storeys high

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 307



Majority of buildings in the buffer zone are 1 to 3 storeys high



Lack of positive/ active street frontages



Typologies of buildings are varied and range from multi-story historic warehouses of brick to single storey industrial sheds in the buffer zone



Currently a lack of high quality public spaces



Large areas of derelict land adjacent to the River Mersey



Dominance of north/south vehicular routes has an impact on ease of movement for pedestrians



Physical barrier created by railway line



Visual dominance of the monumental warehouse in panoramic views of the area



Lack of public access to the riverfront and historic quaysides

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Absence of east west pedestrian links from the River Mersey through the Stanley Dock complex to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, and lack of north-south pedestrian and cycle links from the Pier Head though the Stanley Dock character area



Essential to secure regeneration of the area. This will require improved east-west pedestrian and vehicular access through the dock boundary wall, which should be achieved with minimum impact on the dock boundary wall



Surviving historic gates are an important feature of the wall and would benefit from conservation and re-use as the main east-west access points through the wall



Surviving areas of historic paving and fixtures are important and contribute to its historic character



Need for better sense of enclosure to streets



Lack of activity nodes/ designated places for people to go



Lack of pedestrian crossings across main roads and of pedestrian access to river front and quaysides. General lack of diversity, mix of land uses and density



Need to define a clear function to the area in the future through more detailed site specific guidance that meets the aspirations of the owner and protects the OUV of the WHS



Need to ensure proposals in the area do not compete with the function of the city centre for office and retail development



Need for a masterplan for the r-use of the redundant docklands

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 308



Need to find sustainable uses for the Stanley Dock complex

Vision for the Area The City Council’s vision for the area as set out in the WHS SPD is for long-term mixed use development of the Liverpool Waters site in accordance with an agreed strategic masterplan, creating a unique sense of place, taking advantage of the site’s cultural heritage and integrating it with exciting and sustainable new development. The vision states that this will be achieved by setting parameters for the scale of development and will be informed by a thorough analysis of the past and present landscape of the docks and surrounding area. The vision includes aspirations for improved pedestrian, cycling and vehicular connections, with the canal link becoming a high quality continuous and fully accessible recreational corridor for boaters, walkers and cyclists. The implementation of the masterplan is intended to deliver a new waterfront for Liverpool that reflects its world status.

Contribution to OUV Today the Albert Dock character area and the Stanley Dock character area combine to convey the importance of the docks to Liverpool’s mercantile status, and exist as a legible dockland landscape. Whilst the integrity of the Stanley Dock area as working docks has been lost and cannot be reclaimed, the survival of original dock structures contributes to the wider urban landscape which retains a high degree of intactness. In the part of the site that is within the WHS, the docks survive largely intact, together with operational buildings such as the Clock Tower, the hydraulic engine house and the dockmaster’s office, and historic surfaces and dock furniture. Whilst most of the docks in the Buffer Zone have been infilled or altered, substantial sections of dock wall remain below ground, and have the potential to inform the nature of future development, and thus the understanding of OUV. The surviving dockland buildings within and surrounding the site, such as the Stanley Dock, the Waterloo warehouse and the Victoria Clock Tower are prominent in the urban landscape and have strong visual links with the river. It is important to understand, however, that the visual relationships that exist between the buildings and structures today are quite different to those when the docks were in active use. For the clearance of transit sheds and other buildings, and the absence of vessels, cranes and gantries give the area a sense of openness that reflects a gradual erosion of integrity. Whilst the transit sheds were relatively low and horizontal in outline, Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 309

they contained the dock water spaces and prevented long views across the site. Furthermore, for over 50 years during the 20th century, the Clarence Dock Power Station was a dominant structure, as were the two other Waterloo warehouses which were demolished after the Second World War. The principal heritage assets that contribute to OUV are the inter-linked historic docks, the river wall, the dock boundary wall and the warehousing at the Stanley Dock and the Waterloo East Dock, together with the Victoria Clock Tower, the Dock Master’s Office and the Hydraulic Engine House. Whilst these are authentic structures, all need conservation and effective management to ensure their long term survival. The surviving historic surfaces, rail tracks and quayside furniture also have the power to convey OUV. Attributes of OUV that are significant to the Stanley Dock character area also include: 

Landform – the topography of Liverpool is influenced by a steep sandstone escarpment which frames the city centre and allows for views on the open side facing the Mersey.



Varied skyline with buildings rising up the sloping ground and landmark buildings on the ridge.



Waterfront – the dockyards formed a broad band along the river front, insular in design with dock walls forming a protective ring around them and separating them from the rest of the city.



Relationship between river and WHS.



Large expanses of water, including the Mersey and the dock spaces.



Warehouses and their settings.



The Pier Head as a principal focal point on the riverfront.



The city centre as the heart of a wider urban area



Varied nature of urban grain and street form, and lack of uniformity in height of buildings and architectural treatment.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 310



Juxtaposition of buildings of different periods along waterfront that demonstrate the evolution of the mercantile city.



The increasing size and scale of engineering structures and buildings taking advantage of innovation and advances in technology to meet the demands of economic growth.



Architectural excellence, reflecting the wealth, aspiration and civic pride of the merchant class and civic leaders.



High quality and durability of materials and construction techniques in engineering and architecture.



Hard surfaces and edges reflecting the functional nature of the dockland estate.

The section of buffer zone between the Waterloo East Dock and the Clarence Graving Docks contains infilled and altered docks which represent significant phases in the development of the central docks. It is known from desk top research, map regression, archaeological and geotechnical investigation (as set out in the Baseline Archaeology and Cultural Heritage report, the Environmental Statement, and the Archaeological Deposit Model) that substantial sections of dock retaining walls survive below ground. Whilst the absence of an adequate state of integrity and authenticity of these former docks clearly ruled out inclusion in the WHS, the area makes an important contribution to the dockland landscape which is an aspect of OUV. When in use as docks, the areas would have been active with vessels, transport, goods and people. Loading and unloading of ships, coming and going of barges, trains, carts and wagons would have filled the area with noise and bustle. Outside the Liverpool Waters site were warehouses, works, pubs and shops (only a few of which survive) that served the working population in the service of commerce and leisure.

State of Conservation The Stanley Dock character area is unused and largely unmaintained. Although some notable buildings such as the Waterloo warehouse have been restored and converted, most of the area is in a poor state of conservation and much of the land is derelict. However, the owners and agencies with management responsibility are committed to securing the sustainable regeneration of the area in a way that respects the WHS values of this part of the Site.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 311

It was recognised at the time the Liverpool WHS was inscribed that conservation of the Stanley Dock character area could only be delivered through major regeneration8. The heritage assets such as the dock structures, the warehouses and other buildings will continue to decay unless a viable use can be found for the land and major investment secured. The low value of the land, combined with the costs of new infrastructure and conservation, require a substantial scale of development, which will inevitably have an impact on character. For this reason specific guidance is provided in the WHS SPD relating to protection of OUV.

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV Compliance with guidance in the WHS SPD for the Stanley Dock character area is considered in detail in Section of 5.6, so is omitted from this section of the report, but the principal impacts can be summarised as follows:

Impact on Urban Grain ď&#x201A;ˇ

The area currently has no conventional streets and only a few isolated buildings. It is dominated by large orthogonal water spaces with hard edges and surfaces. The introduction of an urban grain to the area of infilled docks, derived from and related to the existing grain of the area east of the dock road, will provide a new structure to the townscape that will give form and character to the site. The sense of openness, which is a vital part of its current character will consequently be lost. As previously explained, this sense of openness is artificial, since the docks were, from inception, compartmentalised by boundary walls and transit sheds, which ran along most of the quaysides.

ď&#x201A;ˇ

In the northern part of the site, the development proposals respect and maintain the orthogonal layout of the docks and follow the former layout of transit sheds and rectangular structures that ran parallel to the edges of the water spaces. Whilst the proposed buildings are generally higher than the previous dockland sheds, they maintain the overall horizontality that defined the character of the area. The entrances between the interconnected docks are left open and unobstructed by buildings, and the historic communication routes between the docks have been preserved. In this respect, the contribution made to OUV by the dock water spaces and their setting is not compromised in terms of dockland landscape, layout or historic footprint.

Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City, Nomination document, 2003, p.226; Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City, Management Plan, 2003, p. 3 Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 312



The former dock layout of the central part of the site, prior to 20th century changes, is reflected in the proposed urban grain, where the street frontages follow the lines of the dock walls. Taller buildings are sited on the east side of the canal link in the area that was occupied by the Clarence Power Station with its three tall chimneys. Lower buildings are sited south of the Clarence Graving Docks and west of the canal link, the latter reflecting the linear form of the 20th century Trafalgar and West Waterloo Docks. Two interlinked areas of public open space are introduced, one running north-south, and one east-west.



The comment has been made in the Heritage Places report, that the new urban grain is longitudinally-orientated and not transverse from river to road, as was the original dock layout in this part of the site. This interpretation, however, is based on a misreading of the masterplan grid, which in fact runs both longitudinally and transversely across the site. It also fails to take into account the changes made to the dock layout in the early 20th century, when the Trafalgar Dock was remodelled to run north south. This longitudinal axis indeed was always there in Hartley’s interlinked arrangement of the original docks which allowed vessels to move between the docks without having to go out into the river. The canal link is also criticised by Heritage Places for being a longitudinal corridor, yet its form is derived from the Trafalgar and Waterloo Docks which ran from the Salisbury Dock to the Princes Half Tide Dock in a single long narrow basin. The canal link, which is an important step in the evolution of the docks as a water resource, is now the only visible element of urban grain within this part of the site, and should not be discounted. It has rightly been used as a primary urban design generator of the masterplan.

The impact of the proposed development on urban grain will be moderate beneficial.

Impact on Physical Fabric 

The dock boundary wall is maintained unaltered apart from the creation of one new opening opposite the end of Dublin Street that will allow for the enhancement of the Clarence Graving Docks free from traffic. Existing historic gateways will be reopened and given greater visual and strategic importance within the urban grid.



The quayside historic features such as capstans, bollards and mooring posts, the areas of setts and rail tracks will all be restored and retained in situ as part of the public realm wherever possible, and otherwise reused in appropriate locations across the site.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 313



All designated and undesignated heritage assets within the site will be protected and conserved in accordance with the Conservation Management Plan.



The proposal to partially infill the West Waterloo Dock and its river entrance for the construction of the cruise liner terminal will not cause physical harm to historic fabric, but will involve a loss of water space and compromise its visibility. The justification is in accordance with Policy 4.7.7 of the WHS SPD which allows for further infilling where permission has already been granted.



The provision of pontoons across the Bramley-Moore and Nelson Docks together with moorings for sailing vessels and other water sports and leisure activities will help to animate the water spaces in accordance with guidance in the WHS SPD, and will have no physical impact on the dock structures.



The part of the Stanley Dock Conservation Area with the highest level of integrity is the Stanley Dock itself. This, however, is in very poor condition, and is unlikely to be restored unless land values rise to overcome the huge funding gap that currently exists for the approved conversion scheme. This is dependent on development taking place at Liverpool Waters.

The impact of the proposed development on physical fabric will be large beneficial.

Impact on Setting 

The impact on the setting of heritage assets is assessed in 5.2 above, where setting and fabric are considered on a 1:1 basis.



Out of 44 assets considered, an adverse impact on setting is found in the case of 22 individual assets: Victoria Clock Tower (negligible adverse); Dockmaster’s office (negligible adverse); Clarence Graving Dock (negligible adverse); Gate to Clarence Graving Dock (minor adverse); Trafalgar Dock (negligible adverse); Dock Boundary Wall (minor adverse); Gate to Victoria/Trafalgar Docks (moderate adverse); Victoria Dock (negligible adverse); North Gate to Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks (moderate adverse); Waterloo Warehouse (minor adverse); Waterloo Dock West (moderate adverse); Dock Gate opposite Robert Street (minor adverse); Sprague Bros Works (minor adverse); River Entrance to Princes Half-Tide Dock (moderate adverse); Princes Half-Tide Dock (minor adverse); Princes Dock boundary wall (negligible adverse); Former Police Station NE of Clarence Graving Dock (moderate adverse); Other Structures around

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 314

Clarence Graving Docks (moderate adverse); 27 Vulcan Street (negligible adverse); water front archaeology (minor adverse). 

Beneficial impact on setting of heritage assets was found in three cases: Princes Dock jetty (moderate beneficial); Princes Dock (minor beneficial); historic surfacing (negligible beneficial).



In most cases, the adverse impact on setting is outweighed by the beneficial impact on fabric.



Building heights in the proposed development are varied across the site in response to protecting the setting of heritage assets and areas of townscape value. Buildings are lower within the WHS and in close proximity to significant features such as the dock boundary wall, the Clarence Graving Docks, the Victoria Clock Tower, the Stanley Dock, and the Waterloo Warehouse. Heights are lower around the historic docks to the north of the site than in the area of the former Clarence Dock where the power station was previously sited. The height of mid-rise buildings is greater on the waterfront to provide enclosure to the site and give scale to the river edge.



Tall buildings on the King Edward site and the Princes Dock, including the Shanghai Tower, are an expansion of the existing commercial cluster and will reinforce the city skyline.



The tall buildings at the former Clarence Dock are subservient in number and height in comparison to the primary cluster and are treated as a distinct and secondary cluster.

The impact of the proposed development on setting will be moderate adverse.

Impact on Views 

Since the site is currently open and undeveloped, the proposed development will have a considerable impact on the views into, out of and across the site. These are assessed in detail in Sections 5.3 and 5.4 above.



Out of 57 key views, a major adverse impact is found in one case: Clock Tower towards Liver Building (43). A moderate adverse impact is found in five other cases: Liverpool from Wallasey Town Hall (3); City Centre from Everton Park (25); Hartley Bridge over Canning Half-Tide Dock looking to Pier Head (12); Albert Dock looking to Pier Head (10); Bascule Bridge looking south along Regent Road (45).



Large beneficial effects are found in one case: Canal corridor from Stanley Dock to Pier Head (kinetic view). Moderate beneficial effects are found in four other cases: Woodside

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 315

Ferry Terminal looking to Liverpool (4); Wirral Promenade from New Brighton to Seacombe (kinetic view);; Mann Island/Strand looking north (18); William Brown Street looking towards the river (22). The impact of the proposed development on views will be slight adverse.

Impact on Access and Permeability 

The site is currently inaccessible, hidden behind a high boundary wall, and wholly on private land. Development offers an opportunity to enhance the understanding of OUV through reinforcing and interpreting the attributes of authenticity that have been affected by loss and decay.



All the historic gateways and other entrances to the site will be opened to create east west connections with the neighbouring areas, allowing access to the riverfront and the water spaces within the docklands.



A river side promenade will be created, linked to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal at the north, and the Pier Head to the south, with on site interpretation and visitor facilities.

The impact of the proposed development on setting will be large beneficial.

Impact on Key Issues identified in the WHS SPD Evidential Report 



Surviving historic gates are an important feature of the wall and would benefit from conservation and re-use as the main east-west access points through the wall – large beneficial



Surviving areas of historic paving and fixtures are important and contribute to its historic character – large beneficial



Need for better sense of enclosure to streets – moderate beneficial



Lack of activity nodes/ designated places for people to go – large beneficial

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 316



Lack of pedestrian crossings across main roads and of pedestrian access to river front and quaysides. General lack of diversity, mix of land uses and density – large beneficial



Need to define a clear function to the area in the future through more detailed site specific guidance that meets the aspirations of the owner and protects the OUV of the WHS - neutral



Need to ensure proposals in the area do not compete with the function of the city centre for office and retail development - neutral



Need for a masterplan for the re-use of the redundant docklands - neutral



Need to find sustainable uses for the Stanley Dock complex - neutral

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the Pier Head Character Area will be moderate beneficial. 6.5.4

CASTLE

STREET/DALE

STREET/OLD

HALL

STREET

COMMERCIAL

DISTRICT

CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The area includes the historic commercial and civic centre of the city, with a dense concentration of historic buildings reflecting the development of the city over several centuries. The architecture is generally of high quality, in a range of architectural styles and often innovative in design and use of technology. The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Area forms the historic commercial and civic centre of the city



Majority of buildings are 4-7 storeys high



Dale Street, Tithebarn Street and Victoria Street carry the most vehicular traffic through the city core, which create barriers to pedestrian movement



Narrow streets in irregular patterns preserve the medieval street pattern



Castle Street, Water Street Dale Street and Old Hall Street have been widened in the late 18th and 19th centuries, and Victoria Street in the 1860s



18th century Town Hall the focus of the commercial centre



Pressure for development led to significant buildings on relatively narrow plots at high densities

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 317



Buildings directly on to the pavement



Range of architectural styles adds to the variety of the city centre and its skyline



20th century development has enriched the character of the WHS



Street layout and quality of buildings means many views are closed by significant features



Historic materials include red brick, stone, terracotta, faience, glass, iron and steel

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Small number of poor buildings and open spaces that degrade the historic character



Background to views closed by significant facades are sensitive to new development that rises behind them



Significant opportunities to improve the public realm



Historic plot sizes form a significant aspect of the area’s character, which could be altered by modern development



Existing narrow streets are important aspect of the area’s character, where future development could pose a threat to the retention of these streets



Development in the area east of Exchange Street should respect the historic scale and grain of the area

Vision for the Area The City Council’s vision is for continued regeneration bringing vibrant mixed-use developments into the area to enhance its appeal as a place to live, work and visit.

Contribution to OUV The area strongly evokes the mercantile life of the port city and the wealth created in the 18th, 19tyh and early 20th centuries. The streetscape is exceptional, the result of planning improvements over three centuries, the spectacular riverside topography and the grandeur of its architecture and monuments.

State of Conservation The area has reasonable levels of occupancy and has the character of a thriving regional centre. However, there are a number of problem buildings where new uses and conservation are a priority.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 318

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV The Liverpool Waters project will contribute substantially to the growth and economic development of the city, allowing ease of movement and strong connections between Northshore, its hinterland and the city centre. It will accommodate expansion of the city’s business district and economic activity, thus strengthening the appeal of the city centre in accordance with the vision for the character area. The proposal involves strengthening the existing cluster of tall buildings in accordance with policies in the WHS SPD. Viewpoints 18, 19, 20 and 26 have been selected to assess the impact of the proposed development on the character of the Castle St/Dale St/Old Hall St/Commercial District area. 

The view from viewpoint 18 at the junction of Mann Island and the Strand has already been considered in relation to the Pier Head complex and St Nicholas‘ Church. The photomontage also shows how the cluster of tall building will effectively close off the wide vista that is framed by the Liver Building and the cliff of commercial buildings on the eastern side of the Strand.



The West Tower is currently the focus of the view from viewpoint 19 at the junction of Fenwick Street and Brunswick Street. Whilst the streets contained by Castle Street, St James’ Street, Strand and Water Street form a grid, further north, the medieval street pattern is preserved, and in this view, the line of Rumford Street swings slightly to the left. The result is that one of the proposed tall buildings on the King Edward site will be seen above the group of unlisted early 19th century buildings beyond the West Tower. The contrast of scale, however, is no greater than already exists with both the Unity Building and the West Tower.



Looking from viewpoint 20 at Exchange Flags north along Old Hall Street, the photomontage shows the vista closed by another of the proposed tall buildings on the King Edward site. Treated kinetically, this will be seen in conjunction with the West Tower, the Radisson Hotel and the Post and Echo Building.



From viewpoint 26 at the junction of Brook Street and Old Hall Street the photomontage shows that there will be a distant view of the secondary cluster of tall building over the King Edward traffic junction. This will form an effective focus to the vista.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 319

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the Castle Street/Dale Street/Old Hall Street Commercial District Character Area will be slight beneficial. 6.5.5

WILLIAM BROWN STREET CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The formal arrangement of cultural and educational buildings, together with St John’s Gardens and Lime Street Station form a fittingly grand entry into the city and express the importance given to culture in the 19th and 20th centuries. The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Classical arrangement of mostly cultural buildings, spaces, gardens and monuments with St George’s Hall as a centre piece



Buildings generally stone-faced, of monumental proportions. Paving and street furniture complements the buildings



Dominance of highway infrastructure, including the Hunter Street flyover



Lime Street Station provides key arrival point and landmark building



Lime Street itself a barrier to pedestrian movement



Majority of buildings between 4-7 storeys with the exception of taller buildings to the south of Lime Street Station

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Late 20th century has seen some diminution of character in the form of inappropriate development outside the WHS and a modern road system that has introduced a break in character



Some of the paving and ironwork should be better maintained and many monuments require conservation



Flyover detracts from the character of the WHS



Opportunities to reduce the barrier created by traffic on Lime Street should be pursued

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 320

Vision for the Area The Council’s vision is that it should remain as the cultural centre of the city and continue to act as a high quality gateway for visitors.

Contribution to OUV The group of neo-classical civic and cultural buildings on William Brown Street and St George’s Plateau is unequalled in England. The Picton Library, William Brown Museum, Walker Art Gallery and Sessions House are strung out in a line to form a magnificent backdrop to St George’s Hall. Other important buildings include Lime Street Station, Lime Street Chambers and the Empire Theatre. The concentration of monuments and statues also contribute to the values of civic splendour and cultural pride in the city.

State of Conservation The buildings within the area are mostly in public ownership and are in a good state of conservation.

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV The impact of the proposed Liverpool Waters development on the William Brown Street complex relates only to views. An assessment of views from two fixed points and kinetic view is made in paragraphs 3.3.30, 3.3.33 and 3.3.46 above, where the impact is found to be either neutral of negligible beneficial.

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the William Brown Street Character Area will be neutral. 6.5.6

LOWER DUKE STREET CHARACTER AREA

Key Characteristics of the Area The Lower Duke Street area is a dense concentration of former merchants’ houses, warehouses, works and business premises. Modern developments have been successfully integrated into the old fabric of the area.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 321

The key characteristics defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Mixed use historic warehouses



Diversity of land use



Tight-knit linear urban grain



Number of high quality urban spaces



Good sense of enclosure to streets



Building heights are predominantly between 4-7 storeys



Number of derelict warehouses and vacant sites



Mixture of new infill residential development



Significant change in character to the south created by low density residential development



Significant views to the Anglican Cathedral and St Luke’s Church and relationship between warehouses on the south west side of the character area and the warehouses in the Baltic Triangle



Red brick the predominant material with stone and stucco also evident



Manner in which buildings are arranged along slopes that dominate the topography of the character area creating a stepped effect



Contrast between quiet backstreets and main active streets

Key Issues The key issues defined in the WHS SPD Evidential Report are: 

Large linear blocks within the Ropewalks area adjacent to Seel Street result in a lack of permeability east west



Derelict sites and disused warehouses and other vacant buildings detract from the vibrancy of the area



Need to protect significant long views towards the Anglican Cathedral

Vision for the Area The Council’s vision is to create a distinctive and diverse quarter of the city, building on its history and heritage, working towards Liverpool’s new economic future.

Contribution to OUV The development of the Duke Street area was linked to the growth of the port. It was developed following the construction of the Old Dock in 1715 with merchants’ houses, often incorporating Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 322

warehouses, with roperies, shops and premises that served the needs of ship owners, traders and mariners.

State of Conservation The area has suffered seriously from economic decline for a long period, and many properties have been vacant and fallen into a perilous condition. In recent years, significant progress has been made in regenerating the area for a mix of retail, leisure, commercial, cultural and residential uses, with a major public investment initiative.

Impact of Liverpool Waters Proposal on OUV The proposed development of the Liverpool Waters site is remote from the tight knit Lower Duke Street area. The distinctive character of the area and its mix of uses is unlikely to be threatened by new development in the city and there will be no impact on its townscape character.

Cumulative Impact on the Character Area The cumulative impact of the proposed development on the Lower Duke Street Character Area will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 323

6.5.7

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON TOWNSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND SETTING OF CHARACTER AREAS Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that the impacts on

Slight adverse

Very large adverse

Neutral

Large adverse

Slight beneficial

Moderate adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

the Townscape Characteristics and Setting of Character Areas will be as follows:

The assessment finds that the development will have a beneficial impact on character areas overall. The most significant positive effects will be to the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, which will benefit in terms of urban grain, physical fabric, access and permeability, as well as the key issues that are identified in the SPD. These positive results will be balanced to some degree by adverse impacts on setting and key views. There will also be a positive impact on the Castle Street/Dale Street/Old Hall Street character area as a result of the strengthening of its identity by additional tall buildings. A slightly adverse impact on the Albert Dock character area will result from the skyline of the Three Graces being silhouetted against the proposed tall buildings in the commercial district.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 324

6.6

COMPLIANCE

WITH

GUIDANCE

LIVERPOOL

WORLD

HERITAGE

SITE

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT Introduction 6.6.1

The introduction to the Council’s SPD states that:

The overarching aim of this Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) is to provide guidance for protecting and enhancing the outstanding universal value (OUV) of the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site, whilst encouraging investment and development which secures a healthy economy and supports regeneration. 6.6.2

The SPD expands on saved policies contained in the existing Unitary Development Plan (adopted November 2002), and will inform the City Council’s emerging Local Development Framework, including its Core Strategy and other Development Plan Documents. The SPD has been subject to public participation.

6.6.3

The guidance set out in the SPD is categorised in three parts: 1. General Guidance for the WHS and its Buffer Zone 

Design guidance for buildings and public realm



Views



Riverside development



Tall buildings



Dock water spaces

2. Guidance Specific to the WHS 

Building heights in the WHS



Replacement of existing buildings



Reuse of historic buildings



Heritage at risk



Roofscapes and attic extensions



Archaeology

3. Guidance Specific to Character Areas

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 325

6.6.4

The degree of compliance with the guidance set out in the WHS SPD is assessed in terms of the following seven categories: 

Full compliance



Medium compliance



Low compliance



Neutral



Low significance non-compliance



Medium significance non-compliance



High significance non-compliance

SPD 4.2: GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE 6.6.5

Paragraph 4.2.3 states that the varied character of the urban landscape both within the WHS and buffer zone is an important aspect of the ‘sense of place’, and contributes to the Site’s OUV. The SPD requires that applicants for development must demonstrate that they have understood the

characteristics of the site and its environs and that the design proposals have responded to the OUV of the locality in terms of materials, layout, mass, relation to street, architectural detail and height. 6.6.6

For the Peel team the process of understanding the heritage values of the 60 hectare historic dockland site began with the preparation of the archaeological and cultural heritage baseline study. This identified that the construction of the central docks was a key phase in the development of Liverpool as an international port city, with three phases of construction, culminating in Hartley’s group of five docks at the northern end of the site planned as a single entity enclosed, interconnected and with a single opening onto the river, opening in 1848. This was a high point of engineering achievement and exemplifies the technological innovation, pioneering methods of construction and port management that contribute to OUV. Research of the history and development of the site led to the compilation of a gazetteer featuring over 100 items, and an assessment of significance across the site, both within WHS and the buffer zone.

6.6.7

Understanding of the dockland landscape in its totality was an important aspect of investigation, which led to the identification of the essential elements of landform and topography that characterise the attributes of OUV. Four essential topographical characteristics were identified:

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 326



The series of continuous and connected water spaces, resulting from notions of functional efficiency, and producing a strong visual structure. Whilst the sequence of docks is now interrupted by the infilling of the central part of the Liverpool Waters site, the sense of place depends on the continuity of water running through the site, joining together the two groups of historic water bodies at each end.



The dockland strip was built on land reclaimed from the River Mersey, and is therefore flat in contrast with the land that rises gently from the former shoreline beyond. This provides a horizontality of land form, which is reflected in the architectural forms of buildings on the waterfront such as the Albert Dock warehouses, the Echo Arena and the Museum of Liverpool.



The vistas that a wide river affords provide a remarkable panorama of a city in which the rising land form contrasting with the horizontality of the reclaimed dockland is enhanced by the contribution of tall buildings. These commenced in the late 19th century with ‘skyscrapers’ such as the White Star Line offices, and then in the 20th century with the Liver Building, and more recently with the cluster of emerging towers in the commercial district.



The built form which is characterised by a strong geometrical layout, heroic scale of construction and robustness of surface and materials. The distance of view that a wide river affords demands development of a scale sufficient to make an impact. This point is demonstrated by comparing the cross river view of Liverpool with that of Birkenhead which is disappointing in spite of have a similar topography.

6.6.8

The baseline research and analysis led to the development of a set of conservation principles, related to seven key heritage issues, which formed a focus of the urban design framework and underpin the design of the masterplan.

6.6.9

These demonstrate an informed level of understanding of the characteristics of the site and its environs to which the design proposals have responded. However, the result of this process is difficult to assess in the case of an outline application, where matters such as architectural detail and materials have not been addressed. The degree of compliance with the guidance is therefore considered to be medium compliance.

6.6.10

As well as setting out design principles for development in the WHS, the SPD points out that the historic character of the WHS sometimes extends beyond its boundaries into the buffer zone.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 327

Paragraph 4.2.8 states that all development in the buffer zone, whether in an area of surviving

historic character or not, will need to respond to and reflect the characteristics of the area around. 6.6.11

In the case of the Stanley Dock Character Area, the infilled areas of historic dockland within the buffer zone forms part of the historic dock landscape, and care has been taken by the Peel team to ensure that the design and scale of developments have responded to and respected their context. This refers in particular to the proposal for tall buildings in the area of the former Clarence Dock Power Station, the impact on key views or key landmark buildings, impact on buildings and structures of architectural or historic interest such as the Stanley Dock and the Waterloo Warehouse, and below ground archaeology. All these issues are considered in the following paragraphs.

6.6.12

Paragraph 4.2.10 requires that Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tradition of architectural excellence be maintained by the provision of prestigious and innovative buildings of the highest quality design and materials. This accords with Peelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aspiration which is to provide architecture of international importance, and is reflected in the proposal for the establishment of a design panel and the engagement of architects of high standing and for procurement through architectural competition.

6.6.13

As above, the result is difficult to assess in the case of an outline application, and the degree of compliance with the guidance is therefore considered to be medium compliance. SPD 4.3: MOVEMENT AND PUBLIC REALM

6.6.14

The public realm is a notable element of OUV, and paragraph 4.3.5 sets out a checklist of issues that applicants should address in their Design and Access Statements.

6.6.15

Whilst the Liverpool Waters site has never been accessible to the general public, and with the exception of the Princes Dock is not therefore currently part of the public realm, a priority has been placed on creating public spaces and connections of high quality, reflecting the historic character of the area in order to develop a sense of place. The range of public spaces and their variety will be extensive, from the vast water bodies to narrow alleyways and squares. The water spaces are considered as public realm and treated accordingly with an emphasis on creating activity and animation. All existing historic surfaces including setts, paving and rail tracks have

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 328

been surveyed, as well as quayside artefacts such as capstans, bollards and mooring posts. These features will all be retained, restored and reused, preferably in situ or otherwise in appropriate locations within the public realm to create distinctive character areas. 6.6.16

In this respect the proposal is medium compliance with the guidance on public realm. SPD 4.4: VIEWS TO, FROM AND WITHIN THE WHS

6.6.17

Views of the site are an important aspect of visual character and directly contribute to OUV. The principles adopted for assessing views have been referred to in paragraphs 3.4.2-3.4.10 of this report and individual views are assessed in Section 5.3: Impact on Key Views, Section 5.4: Impact on Views and Setting of Landmark Buildings of the WHS and Buffer Zone, and 5.5: Impact on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of Character Areas. Impact of development on particular views has been demonstrated through a series of accurately rendered images in accordance with the SPD.

6.6.18

As demonstrated elsewhere in the report, the proposal is compliant with the guidance in respect of most of the modelled views, but some adverse impacts have been identified, and on balance it must be considered to be low significance non-compliance. SPD 4.5: RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT

6.6.19

The relationship between the River Mersey and the WHS is a fundamental aspect of its OUV, representing the values associated with the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role in worldwide mercantile culture, as well as port management and pioneering technology. In this respect, it is important that key focal points and the varied skyline of the city centre are respected. The SPD also requires that the opportunity provided by juxtaposition of buildings of different periods along the waterfront which demonstrate the evolution of the city be preserved and enhanced to create an exciting visual interplay.

6.6.20

The design principle that underpins the riverfront design at Liverpool Waters is the understanding of the horizontality of the land form in the dockland strip referred to in paragraph 5.6.5 above, and the need to maintain a balanced but essentially horizontal run of buildings along the waterfront. The proposed buildings are of sufficient height and mass to command presence in cross river views, and to provide enclosure and protection for the large dock basins behind and

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 329

respect the scale of the existing dockland architecture. Riverfront landmarks on the site will consist of the Victoria Clock Tower, the proposed cultural building and, when in port, visiting cruise liners at the new terminal. The Tobacco warehouse, which is identified in the SPD Evidential Report as a background building, will remain a landmark, but it will be seen framed by riverfront development, and thus will not be visible as extensively as at present. The Pier Head Buildings will remain the focal landmark of the waterfront in the city centre, though there will be competing landmarks on the skyline in respect of the clusters of tall buildings set back from the river front. 6.6.21

In view of the impact of riverside development on the visibility of the Stanley Dock from the full length of the Wirral promenade, the proposal is considered to be low compliance. SPD 4.6: TALL BUILDINGS

6.6.22

The SPD states that the impact of tall buildings on the WHS and its assets should be minimised. Tall buildings are recognised by the City Council as symbols of regeneration and can contribute positively to urban landscape by providing legibility, can enable business specialisation and increase employment density. But conversely it is recognised that they can create a confusing landscape and over-dominate a sensitive inherited landscape.

6.6.23

Additionally, it was a condition of inscription by the WH Committee that the heights of any new construction in the WHS should not exceed that of structures in the immediate surroundings and that the character of any new construction respect the qualities of the historic area.

6.6.24

There is a strong presumption against high-rise buildings within the WHS, an exception being made in the SPD for the area north of Collingwood and Salisbury Docks where medium rise buildings will be considered if they reflect the form of the dockland landscape; retain historic fabric, features, paving materials and street furniture; and comply with other guidance on protection of key views, integrity of dock water spaces and setting of listed buildings.

6.6.25

Within the buffer zone, three locations are identified as suitable for tall buildings. The location for the dominant cluster is to be an extension of the existing commercial quarter; with subsidiary clusters at the southern gateway around the junction of Parliament Street and Chaloner Street,

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 330

and around the former Clarence Dock within the Liverpool Waters site. Criteria are provided in the SPD relating to each of these locations. 6.6.26

The criteria that relate to the cluster forming an extension of the existing commercial quarter are: 

Ensuring that development relates both physically and visually to the existing commercial core.



Providing a key landmark cluster that stands separate from the Pier Head complex and does not have a significant impact on views of the Pier Head group from the river and the Albert Dock Area.



Ensuring that each subsequent development in the cluster contributes to the creation of a cohesive and balanced group that contributes positively to the overall city skyline.



Phasing of delivery, with Princes Dock being developed and completed as a city quarter to provide a context for any tall building proposals in Liverpool Waters.



Reducing the impact of severance created by the road hierarchy, with full pedestrian accessibility and permeability to the new area of development.



Protection a long distance view northwards to the Stanley Dock complex from the junction of Great Howard Street and King Edward Street so as to maintain the visual relationship between the city centre and the Stanley Dock complex.



Achieving a balanced mix of heights and designs within the cluster.

Compliance with each of these criteria is considered in the paragraphs below. 6.6.27

At present the commercial district cluster consists of a scattering of tall buildings to each side of Old Hall Street, with two existing towers and a further consented project (Plot 3A) at Princes Dock. The proposal for additional tall buildings on the King Edward site together with the Shanghai Tower on the eastern side of the Princes Dock will link the existing cluster together with strong physical and visual linkage to the existing commercial district.

6.6.28

The cluster stands separate from the Pier Head and the impact of the tall buildings on the complex has been assessed in the views analyses in 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 above, where it has been found to be slight adverse because of the effect on the view of the Pier Head group from Hartley Quayside.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 331

6.6.29

The proposed grouping of buildings on the King Edward site and Princes Dock creates a cohesive and balanced group. This will not be achieved simultaneously, and there may be proposals for other tall buildings on sites in separate ownership which would produce a different configuration. The final effect will therefore be controlled by the local planning authority in accordance with national and local policies and guidance.

6.6.30

Princes Dock forms the first phase of development of the Liverpool Waters site.

6.6.31

An improved highway junction is proposed at the northern end of Old Hall Street incorporating enhanced pedestrian accessibility and environmental standards.

6.6.32

Protection of a view northwards to the Stanley Dock complex is not in the gift of the applicant, since Peel does not own the land on the direct view corridor.

6.6.33

A balanced mix of heights is set out in the parameter plans. Detailed design will be the subject of reserved matters applications.

6.6.34

The criteria that relate to the cluster on and around the former Clarence Dock are: 

The need for this group to be visually and numerically subservient to the commercial district cluster.



Achieving a sensible balance with the larger commercial district cluster and the central docks cluster, being seen as distinctly smaller in terms of its number, scale and height from the former.



Ensuring that the height of the group does not interrupt views to and from the WHS or the visual relationship between the Anglican Cathedral, the WHS, the river and Wirral.



Reduce the impact of severance created by the road hierarchy.

Compliance with each of these criteria is considered in the paragraphs below. 6.6.35

The group is subservient both visually and numerically to the commercial district cluster. It also takes up a much smaller footprint, thus being less dominant in panoramas and long range vistas.

6.6.36

The group is sensitively balanced with the dominant cluster, being distinctly smaller in terms of its number, scale and height of buildings.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 332

6.6.37

As suggested in the SPD the secondary cluster will form a new landmark when seen from the river approaches and from the Wirral peninsula. It will also be visible from Everton Park and the higher ground to the north east of the city. It will not, however, be visible from any viewpoints within the WHS other than the Stanley Dock character area. The impact on OUV of the secondary cluster therefore relates principally to its impact on panoramas and river views, and to its impact on attributes of OUV within the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, as assessed in 5.3 and 5.5. Together with the medium rise buildings on the riverfront, it will obscure views of the Stanley Dock from viewpoints on the Wirral coastline, and is therefore considered non-compliant.

6.6.38

Improvement of the highway crossing at the northern end of Old Hall Street, together with the implementation of a wider transport plan, are key elements of the masterplan for Liverpool Waters.

6.6.39

Finally, the SPD includes specific design criteria for tall buildings. These encourage mixed use schemes to maximise economic and social regeneration, which is a principal objective of the Liverpool Waters proposals. They require that the location of tall buildings should take account of the grain of the city, which is relevant to Liverpool Waters only in that a new compatible grain has had to be introduced since the original grain has been obliterated in the area around the Clarence Dock. The importance of the public realm in relation to tall buildings is stressed, as well as opportunities for public access to possible viewing galleries. Major new public spaces have been developed within the masterplan that relate to both clusters of tall buildings to ensure a humane and accessible environment surrounds them, and it is intended that the Shanghai Tower will incorporate a roof top public viewing gallery. A number of criteria relate to detailed design, which will be the subject of reserved matters applications, but the commitment to design of the highest quality is integral to the project and set out in the implementation strategy that accompanies the application.

6.6.40

In respect of the tall buildings in the extension to the existing commercial district, the proposal is therefore found to be non-compliant in respect to the impact on the Pier Head when viewed from Hartley Quay, but when assessed against other guidance criteria it complies, and on balance it is regarded as low compliance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 333

6.6.41

In respect of the tall buildings in the cluster on and around the former Clarence Dock, the proposal is found to be non-compliant in respect to the impact on views of the Stanley Dock complex, but when assessed against other guidance criteria it complies, and on balance it is considered to be neutral.

6.6.42

In the case of tall buildings, however, detailed consideration has been given to the design development which has been through a number of iterations to avoid non-compliance. Commercial viability requires a certain development density, and any significant reduction in floorspace would make the project unviable. The balance of regenerative advantage must therefore be taken into consideration. SPD 4.7: DOCK WATER SPACES

6.6.43

The complex of interlinking docks that run along the river frontage and the surviving water spaces within them is a crucial aspect of Liverpoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historic landscape and its cultural heritage. The docks make a significant contribution to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sense of place and are an important part of its OUV. The surviving docks in the WHS and the buffer zone represent a significant part of the

biggest and most complete system of historic docks in the world. The SPD therefore requires that the fundamental integrity of the docks as open water spaces be retained. 6.6.44

Infilling of existing water bodies is considered by the Council to be inappropriate, except where permission has previously been granted for partial infilling and where circumstances have not changed sufficiently for any similar proposals to be resisted in the future. Additionally proposals to reduce the depth of water through partial infilling will be resisted.

6.6.45

Historically the docks would have been places of frenetic activity and the presence of tall sailing ships and other vessels during river festivals, albeit only temporarily, demonstrates something of the past character and potential for re-activation of the docks.

The SPD offers guidance on

suitable active uses to berth vessels and non-permanent structures in the water bodies, and also states that proposals for permanent structures may be acceptable subject to certain criteria and provided they only occupy a small proportion of the overall water space and do not dominate it. There is also encouragement for public access to the existing water spaces and surrounding quaysides.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 334

6.6.46

In accordance with the guidance in the SPD, the water spaces within the Liverpool Waters site will be retained and actively used. It is proposed only to infill a small section at the northern end of the West Waterloo Dock, which has already been partially infilled, to create a site for the cruise liner terminal building. This is within the buffer zone and its form, even before partial infilling, dates only from 1949. The Bramley Moore Dock will be used as a yacht marina with a suspended or floating walkway crossing at the central point. The Nelson Dock too will have a walkway and active leisure uses grouped around a central ‘island’. Other more temporary leisure activities will be encouraged in all the water spaces.

6.6.47

The proposals are low significant non-compliant in the case of the infilling of part of the West Waterloo Dock, but otherwise fully compliant. The overall assessment is therefore considered to be medium compliance. SPD 5.2: BUILDING HEIGHTS IN THE WHS

6.6.48

The SPD guidance states that there is no uniformity of building heights within the WHS and that a variation of height is an aspect of character. It refers to one of the conditions imposed at the time of inscription of the WHS that ‘the height of any new construction in the WHS should not exceed that of structures in the immediate surroundings’. This has led to the policy that new buildings in the WHS should not generally exceed the height of the tallest building in the immediate vicinity of the street(s) that they address. Importantly, an exception to this rule is made in the case of the area north of Salisbury and Collingwood Docks where there is very little pre-determined form of development, though it is stated that there is a strong case for limiting the height of new development along the quaysides of these two particular docks in order to ensure that the Victoria Clock Tower and the Stanley Dock complex are not overshadowed.

6.6.49

In respect of the Liverpool Waters site, which has no conventional streets and only a few isolated buildings, there is no definition of what ‘the immediate surroundings’ constitute. Regarding the Stanley Dock, no new buildings are proposed in close proximity to it, the nearest being those on the north and south quaysides of the Collingwood Dock which do not exceed 30 metres in height, which is considerably less than the Tobacco warehouse. Indeed the nearest buildings that match or exceed the Tobacco Warehouse in height are the riverfront residential blocks overlooking the Nelson Dock, which are well beyond its immediate surroundings. These could not be regarded as affecting the prominence of the Tobacco warehouse. The Victoria Clock Tower stands proud on

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 335

its island at the entrance to the Salisbury Dock. The closest new buildings are 71m to the north and 40m to the south of the tower, which are respectively 30m and 9m in height. The height of the tower is 35m, and in spite of being physically separated by the river entrance, these buildings may be considered to be within the immediate surroundings of the tower. The one to the south is intended to be a two storey cafe building, and will be lightweight in construction so as not to affect the entrance to the dock, and would have little impact on the setting of the tower. The one to the north, will not challenge the clock tower as a landmark on the waterfront, and is lower in height, and the overall assessment is therefore considered to be full compliance. 6.6.50

A further SPD policy states that where new development is proposed adjacent to or with a close visual relationship to listed buildings, special attention will need to be paid to the potential impact of new development in terms of its height and other factors on the setting of those listed buildings. The policy does not clarify what is meant by a ‘close visual relationship’ but setting is defined in PPS5 as the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not

fixed, and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve’. It is stated that elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of a heritage asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance, or may be neutral. The guidance in the Historic

Environment Planning Practice Guide that accompanies PPS5 points out that whilst the extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations, the way in which we experience an asset in its setting is also influenced by other environmental considerations such as noise, dust and vibration; by spatial associations; and by our understanding of the historic relationship between places.

6.6.51

Account has also been taken of the English Heritage draft guidance on the setting of heritage assets and assessing the impact of any changes affecting them, which recommends that any assessment of impact should sequentially address three questions: 1

Is the development of a particular type, scale, massing or prominence within the setting of an asset likely to be acceptable or unacceptable in terms of the degree of harm to its significance?

Is the precise location of the development likely to be a critical factor in determining whether the degree of harm to significance is acceptable or unacceptable?

Are more detailed aspects of the development’s design likely to be a critical factor in determining whether the degree of harm to significance is acceptable or unacceptable?

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 336

6.6.52

Looking at each of the listed buildings in turn so as to assess the impact on their setting, the following conclusions are reached:

Hydraulic Engine House, Bramley-Moore Dock At present the building stands as an isolated structure. Historically it had a functional relationship with the group of northern docks since it supplied power to operate various items of quayside machinery. It was also concealed by the overhead coal railway, cranes and other structures in this part of the docks. The development has been planned so as to connect the building back into a structured form that relates to the dockland morphology allowing views of the accumulator tower from across the Bramley-Moore Dock. When linked with on-site interpretation, this will help to reveal the OUV of the building and enhance its setting. The proposal is full compliance.

Victoria Clock Tower The tower was designed to stand alone as an isolated landmark. Because it is on the riverfront it will not be obscured by new development in cross river views. Development has also been located around the northern docks so as to protect key views of the tower from within the site. The significance of the tower demands a generous setting, and this will be maintained with the proposed placement of new buildings. Recent amendments have resulted in reducing the height of the building immediately north of the tower, which makes the proposal full compliance.

Dock Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office The office is a small-scale isolated building on the riverfront. It is too small to read from the cross river views, and can only be understood from close by. The closest building is 30m to the east. Whilst this is taller than the office, it is not out of scale and is set back from the river front to allow the listed building to read within its wider setting, making the proposal medium compliance.

Dock Boundary Wall The function of the wall was to enclose the site, so as to control entry and exit of personnel and goods, and thus restrict theft and criminality. The wall is generally 5.5 metres high, sufficient to prevent access. The height relationship between the wall and buildings within the dockland estate was not therefore a matter of any aesthetic or functional significance as far as management of the port was concerned. The Stanley Dock boundary wall contains the Tobacco Warehouse which is 38m high, or seven times the height of the wall. Although it is the dominant feature of the Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 337

Stanley Dock, it does not harm the significance of the wall. New development along the eastern side of the site, however, has been reduced in height so as to avoid dominating the wall, and is typically 27m high, dropping to 21m in the area of the Clarence Graving Docks and rising to 33m in the secondary cluster on the site of the Clarence Power Station. In other words considerably lower than the Tobacco Warehouse. Only one building alongside the wall rises higher, and that is the southernmost block in the secondary cluster which is 58m, a height that relates to the cluster of tall buildings and the large public open space that it encloses. With the exception of this building, all taller buildings at set back a distance of at least one block west of the wall, and are not therefore in the immediate setting. As with the walls of a medieval fortified town, understanding of its significance depends on views from outside the walled enclosure where its meaning can be appreciated and enjoyed. Views of the wall from inside the site, which were largely obscured by transit sheds, by the overhead railway and by operational plant and equipment, have never been important. Thus the new development preserves the views of the wall from outside the site for its full length, and whilst buildings will be seen rising above the wall just as the buildings at the Stanley Dock do, this will not adversely affect its setting or its OUV. The proposal is therefore medium compliance.

Stanley Dock Warehouses As discussed in paragraph 3.4.41 above, all the proposed new buildings within the immediate surroundings of the Tobacco Warehouse are significantly lower in height. It is only on the riverfront and in the area that was occupied by the Clarence Power Station that they are higher. The riverfront buildings are part of the setting of the Stanley Dock, when seen from across the river, where the impact has already been analysed in paragraphs 5.2.1 - 5.2.4. The cluster of tall buildings on the Clarence Power Station site can also be considered to be within the setting when seen from viewpoint 40, which is assessed in paragraph 5.2.1 and 5.2.6. In accordance with this previous assessment, the impact of building heights on the views and setting of the Tobacco Warehouse is found to be low significance non-compliance.

Waterloo Warehouse Like the Tobacco Warehouse and the Wapping Warehouse, the Waterloo Warehouse is set far back from the riverfront and is therefore a background building in cross river views. Its setting has already been harmed to some extent by the small-scale residential development around the north and west quays of the East Waterloo Dock. The proposed new buildings that stand between the warehouse and the river are low to medium rise and will not obscure it or harm its setting Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 338

when seen from the Wirral coastline. From viewpoints 30 and 45, the warehouse is seen looking north and south along the dock road in the context of the proposed development.

From

viewpoint 45 at the Stanley Dock, the building is seen in the distance with the secondary cluster of tall buildings over to the right in the middle foreground and Shanghai Tower as a backdrop. Whilst the verticality of the Shanghai Tower contrasts with the horizontal lines of the warehouse, this will not prevent the listed building being appreciated and understood in its historic setting or harm its OUV. Seen from viewpoint 30, the warehouse is in the left foreground with the cluster of tall buildings behind it. Here too there is a contrast of scale, but the separation of the tall buildings on the opposite side of the area of public open space, and back behind the rear face of the warehouse would mean that they would not be over dominant. The effect on the setting of the Waterloo Warehouse is therefore considered to be low significance non-compliance. 6.6.53

Because of the partial screening of the Stanley Dock and the Waterloo warehouse in views from the Wirral, on the issue of buildings heights overall, the proposal is considered to be low significance non-compliance. SPD 5.3: REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS

6.6.54

Whilst there are few existing buildings on the site, a small number of buildings that currently detract from the character of the area will be replaced and large areas of derelict land will be brought into beneficial use.

6.6.55

This represents full compliance with the guidance. SPD 5.4: RE-USE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS

6.6.56

Whilst there are few existing buildings on the site, there are a small number of significant listed buildings and other buildings that make a positive contribution to character of the area. Although no specific uses for the buildings with the exception of the Hydraulic Engine House have yet been defined, these will all be retained, restored and brought into beneficial use, as set out in the Conservation Management Plan.

6.6.57

Bearing in mind the outline nature of the application, this is in medium compliance with the guidance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 339

SPD 5.5: HERITAGE AT RISK 6.6.58

The following heritage assets within the Liverpool Waters site are included in the Assessment of

Heritage Merit and Heritage Need study carried out for the City Council in 2005. The category of risk is given as either A, B or C: 

Boundary wall and gate piers to Princes Dock



Princes Dock wall



Entrance to Bramley-Moore Dock



Retaining walls to Bramley-Moore Dock



Entrance gate to East Waterloo Dock



Gatepiers to Collingwood Dock



Retaining walls to Princes Half-Tide Dock



Dock wall from opposite Sandhills Lane to Collingwood Dock



Hydraulic Engine House at Bramley-Moore Dock



South entrance to Collingwood Dock and Salisbury Docks



Entrance to Nelson Dock, North Collingwood Dock and North Salisbury Dock



Retaining walls to Collingwood Dock



Sea wall to south of entrance to Salisbury Dock



Retaining walls to Salisbury Dock



Retaining walls to Nelson Dock



Retaining walls to Bramley-Moore Dock



Bascule Bridge



Sea wall to north island at entrance to Salisbury Dock



Sea wall to island at entrance to Salisbury Dock



Two structures on south side of Collingwood Dock



Dock Master’s Office



Victoria Clock Tower



Entrance to Waterloo Dock



Entrance to Princes Half-Tide Dock



South Gate to Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks



North gate to Victoria, Princes and Waterloo Docks



Gatepiers to Victorian and Trafalgar Docks



Gatepiers to Clarence Docks

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 340

6.6.59



Gatepiers to Clarence Graving Docks



Clarence Graving Docks

The proposed development includes the repair and restoration of all these buildings and structures. Already four of the Category B buildings at risk have been either fully restored (Bascule Bridge) or made wind and watertight (Two buildings south of Collingwood Dock, Dock Master’s Office and Victoria Clock Tower) and part of the Princes Dock boundary wall has been repaired.

6.6.60

This is in full compliance with the SPD. SPD 5.6: ROOFSCAPES AND ATTIC EXTENSIONS

6.6.61

This section of the advice is not relevant to the development site. Compliance is therefore neutral. SPD 5.7: ARCHAEOLOGY

6.6.62

The guidance requires early engagement in the development process with the City Council’s planning officers and their archaeological advisors to determine the scale of pre-determination investigation required and assess the nature of any buried or standing archaeological remains.

6.6.63

Following the preparation of the Archaeology and Cultural Heritage baseline report, there was engagement with the

Council and English Heritage concerning further archaeological

investigation. This led to the preparation of an ‘Archaeological Deposit Model’, which maps and documents historic features evidencing the topography, dock structures, wharfs, transit sheds and related dock furniture (bollards, swing bridges, cranes, rail tracks etc) on an interactive GIS database. Geotechnical data has also been added, as has a gazetteer of archaeological assets. The database has been created in EsrisArcMap and incorporates historic maps as Jpegs, existing site information from AutoCAD drawings and Shapefiles created in GIS. 6.6.64

Following construction of the GIS database, which comprises the Archaeological Deposit Model, areas of ‘high, medium and low archaeological potential’ have been identified and, subsequently, the basement car parks set out on the illustrative masterplan supporting the outline application

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 341

have been tested against the Model to identify those areas where proposed basements might impact on areas of high and medium archaeological potential. This led to certain adjustments in the masterplan provision of below ground structures, removing all potential conflict with areas of high archaeological potential. 6.6.65

The Environmental Statement makes provision for archaeological evaluation and survey to precede any ground works associated with development within or adjacent to former dock water spaces. This would be necessary to inform the precise location of proposed development and ensure that any buildings located immediately adjacent to dock walls that will be preserved in-situ should be set back far enough to avoid damage to these structures. Such evaluation will also allow additional data regarding the profile and extent of the battered walls to be compiled, and to build up a digitised database of the sub-surface extent of the walls to be established.

6.6.66

The procedure is in full compliance with the guidance. SPD 5.8: CONSERVATION WORKS

6.6.67

A programme of conservation works is provided within the Conservation Management Plan. Works will be carried out to a high standard, as illustrated by the first phase of repairs to the dock boundary wall (which is illustrated in the SPD as an example of good practice in conservation) and the restoration of the Bascule Bridge.

6.6.68

Bearing in mind the outline nature of the application, this represents medium compliance with the guidance. SPD 6.4: CHARACTER AREA 3 – STANLEY DOCK CONSERVATION AREA

Vision for the Stanley Dock Conservation Area 6.6.69

The Council’s vision is that the currently redundant Liverpool Waters site will be subject to a major long term mixed-use development in accordance with an agreed strategic masterplan. The development will create a unique sense of place, taking advantage of the site’s cultural heritage and integrating it with exciting and sustainable new development. This will retain historic buildings, structures, water spaces and features and their settings, in accordance with

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 342

conservation principles and policies to be agreed in a Cultural Baseline Study and with good urban design principles to be agreed in the strategic masterplan. 6.6.70

The proposals are in full compliance with the vision.

The Dock Wall 6.6.71

The guidance requires that the Dock Boundary wall be retained, repaired and preserved in its entirety, complete with associated features of interest. Whilst interventions are not ruled out, they will need strong justification.

6.6.72

The applicant has demonstrated commitment in undertaking a first phase of restoration of the dock wall to a high standard, and has indicated a firm intention to continue the programme of repairs. This is full compliance with the guidance.

Urban Grain 6.6.73

The guidance requires that where the historic pattern of urban grain survives, development proposals should respect and reinforce this grain. Where the historic urban grain no longer exists, developments should re-introduce a pattern that provides a framework of clearly defined streets, blocks and squares.

6.6.74

The impact on Urban Grain is considered in Section 5.5.3 above, where it is assessed as moderate beneficial. It is therefore in medium compliance with the guidance.

Active Street Frontages 6.6.75

The guidance states that active frontages which provide enclosure and animation at street level

will be supported throughout the area. 6.6.76

The Design and Access Statement and the Public Realm Strategy indicate that there will be active frontages onto principal pedestrian routes, including squares and spaces, with leisure uses in the dock water basins, visitor facilities located in heritage structures and on-site interpretation. This is in full compliance with the guidance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 343

Road Corridor Environmental Improvements 6.6.77

The

guidance

suggests

that

developments

should

contribute

towards

environmental

improvements along the dock road. 6.6.78

The CMP makes provision for conservation of the dock boundary wall and the historic gateways which will provide access to the site. Whilst no details of surfacing materials, highway management methods or signage is available at this point, the Public Realm Strategy indicates a commitment to high quality design.

6.6.79

This is in medium compliance with the guidance.

Water Spaces 6.6.80

The policies on retention and re-use of water spaces are assessed in 5.6.41-45 above where the proposal was found to be in medium compliance. Public Realm

6.6.81

The SPD requires that a network of high quality public rights of way should be established across

the area, along the riverside and around all quaysides to promote pedestrian and cycle accessibility and permeability. 6.6.82

The Public Realm Strategy explains the hierarchy of pedestrian and cycle routes through the site and how they connect with the city centre, adjoining neighbourhoods and the wider networks. Whilst it is not within the gift of the developer to provide access to the Stanley Dock in line with the Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aspiration, the proposal is in full compliance with the guidance.

6.6.83

The SPD requires that historic paving materials, fixtures and street furniture should be preserved,

conserved and replicated where the historic character of the docks survives. Areas of rail track should be preserved in situ. 6.6.84

The CMP sets out a programme for the protection, maintenance and conservation of all paving materials, fixtures and street furniture. In most areas it will be necessary to take up and relay paving materials on a satisfactory sub-base, and in a small number of areas, paving materials will have to be relocated. The proposal is therefore in medium compliance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 344

Stanley Dock 6.6.85

The Stanley Dock is not within the Liverpool Waters site and therefore the compliance is neutral. Dublin Street/Saltney Street

6.6.86

The Dublin Street/Saltney Street block is not within the Liverpool Waters site and therefore the compliance is neutral. Land Parcels east of Stanley Dock

6.6.87

The land parcels east of the Stanley Dock are not within the Liverpool waters site and therefore the compliance is neutral. Liverpool Waters Site

6.6.88

The SPD requires that the masterplan that is being prepared in close co-operation with the City Council and other stakeholders should be supported by a Conservation Management Plan. This should be used to inform the masterplan and detailed development proposals.

6.6.89

The application proposal includes a Conservation Management Plan which is in full compliance with the guidance.

6.6.90

Paragraph 6.4.27 of the SPD refers to the general guidance in Section 4 relating to the provision for two secondary clusters of mid rise and high rise buildings within the Liverpool Waters site 1) on or around the site of the former power station and on some of the quaysides north of Salisbury and Collingwood Docks. Key design considerations are set out as follows: 

Being part of a long term phased masterplan to regenerate the derelict docks within the strategic framework for North Liverpool



Being part of an overall waterfront regeneration strategy, reinforcing Liverpool’s image as an international gateway



Providing significant additional employment opportunities



Capitalising upon the dockland heritage of the Site



Ensuring that there is no significantly detrimental impact on key views or the setting of historic buildings



The protection and enhancement of the integrity of dock water spaces



The need for this group to be visually and numerically subservient to and separate from the commercial district cluster

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 345



Achieving a sensible balance with the larger commercial district cluster and the southern gateway cluster, being seen as smaller in terms of its scale and height than the former



Integration with the wider strategic objectives of the Liverpool First Sustainable Communities Strategy, Mersey Heartlands Growth Point and the New Heartlands Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder to ensure that there is social cohesion and adequate choice at all levels of the housing market and that there are adequate facilities and infrastructure to create sustainable mixed communities

6.6.91

Considering each of these issues in turn: 

The Liverpool Waters planning application is supported by a long term phased masterplan to regenerate the derelict docks within the strategic framework for North Liverpool



It complies with the City Council’s waterfront regeneration strategy, reinforcing Liverpool’s image as an international gateway



The employment opportunities are set out in the Environmental Statement and other supporting information



The project is conservation-led and capitalises on the dockland heritage of the Site as set out in the CMP



The assessment of views indicates that there will be some detrimental impacts on key views and the setting of historic buildings



It is proposed to partially infill the West Waterloo Dock in compliance with the SPD policy relating to dock water spaces



The cluster of tall buildings on the site of the power station will be visually and numerically subservient to and separate from the commercial district cluster



The balance with the larger commercial district cluster is reasonable, and will be seen as smaller in terms of its scale and height



The integration with the wider strategic objectives of the Liverpool First Sustainable Communities Strategy, Mersey Heartlands Growth Point and the New Heartlands Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder is set out in the supporting information

6.6.92

The application proposal includes a Conservation Management Plan which is in medium compliance with the guidance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 346

6.6.93

Paragraph 6.4.28 of the SPD requires that the masterplan should be informed by the comprehensive survey of all features, buildings and structures of historic interest within the site. It should include a commitment to giving a high priority to the conservation and re-use of the key heritage assets. The integration of the continued use of Clarence Graving Dock for ship repairs should be fully considered.

6.6.94

A survey of all buildings and features has been carried out and a commitment to conservation is set out in the CMP. Consideration will be given to the possibility of using the Graving Docks for ship repairs. The proposal is in full compliance.

6.6.95

Paragraph 6.4.29 of the SPD requires that the completion of Princes Dock should be a priority. The principles for development of the Princes dock should be i) strong urban form with active frontages and an ordered overall perspective; ii) enhanced linkages and connectivity; iii) comfortable relationships with surroundings, especially important will be Plot 7 which is most visible from the Pier Head; iv) protection of view corridors; v) increased activity, and vi) respect for heritage and response to historical context.

6.6.96

The completion of Princes Dock falls into Phase 1 of the masterplan and is therefore the priority. The principles set out in the SPD have been reflected in the masterplan. The proposal for Plot 7 has already been granted planning permission.

6.6.97

The proposal for Princes Dock is in full compliance. Victoria Clock Tower

6.6.98

The SPD states that proposals should ensure the sensitive conservation and sustainable re-use of the clock tower, possibly as a viewing tower/visitor centre. Proposals for the surrounding area should not have significantly detrimental impact on views of the clock tower from the river or from Stanley Dock.

6.6.99

The proposals affecting the clock tower and its setting are in full compliance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 347

SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE WITH GUIDANCE IN THE LIVERPOOL WHS SPD 6.6.100 Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that compliance with

High significance non-compliance

Low significance non-compliance

compliance

Neutral

non-

Low compliance

significance

Medium compliance

Medium

Full compliance

the guidance set out in the Liverpool World Heritage Site SPD is as follows:

The effect of tall buildings in the commercial district cluster on the silhouette of the Three Graces when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Bridge



The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wirral



The change in long views of the site from the Victoria Clock Tower and Regent Road as a result of development on the site of the Clarence Dock

The single factor relating to Building Heights in the WHS is the effect on visibility of the Stanley Dock and Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wirral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 348

These issues have been discussed in the summary sections of earlier chapters, and are explored further in the report summary and conclusions.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 349

6.7

CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON OUV

5.7.1

In the previous five sections assessments have been made of impacts on specific aspects of OUV. In the following section an assessment is made of the cumulative impact of the Liverpool Waters proposals on the value-based criteria upon which the WHS inscription is based. The impacts are considered in relation to each of the principal attributes that contribute to OUV. Criterion (ii): Innovative techniques and methods of construction 

Layout and planning of docks in relation to each other, to the river, to the city and to other transport modes



Dock structures including dock gates



Warehouses



Technical buildings



Dock wall and security



Innovative port management



Spirit of innovation



International mercantile systems

Criterion (iii): Maritime Mercantile Culture 

Dock structures, Victoria Clock Tower, boundary wall



Commercial offices and banks



Prestigious display buildings



Lives of merchants



Lives of dock workers



Lives of sailors



Role in the slave trade



Role in emigration

Criterion (iv): Outstanding Example of World Mercantile City 

Dock landscape



Docks and urban plan



Relationship of commercial centre, docks, river and sea



Civic pride manifested in grand architecture



Commercial offices, shipping offices and banks

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 350

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Cultural display

VALUE Criterion (ii): Innovative Techniques and Methods of Dock Construction and

Port Management 6.7.2

Two areas of historic dockland are included in the WHS, the Albert Dock and Stanley Dock character areas. It is within these areas that the layout and planning of the docks and their relation to other transport modes can best be viewed and understood. The Albert Dock area has been fully restored and is publicly accessible; the Stanley Dock area is unused, deteriorating and inaccessible.

5.7.3

In the planning and construction of the central docks, Jesse Hartley pioneered the development of inter-linked enclosed docks, connected to other transport systems, which influenced the design of ports worldwide. Later Liverpool Dock Engineers such as Lyster adapted the system and introduced further innovative concepts. The evidence of this period of innovation survives well in the Stanley Dock Conservation Area, which covers the group of five northern docks, the Clarence Graving Docks, the dock boundary wall, the East Waterloo Dock and the Princes Half-Tide Dock.

6.7.4

This area is unknown to most of the people of Liverpool as it has never been publicly accessible. Its historic buildings and structures are gradually falling into decay. The dockland landscape, visible only from a mile away across the River Mersey, or through the limited openings in the fortress-like dock boundary wall is not easy to understand.

6.7.5

In the proposal to regenerate, open up and activate the area, the Liverpool Waters project thus offers an exceptional opportunity to protect, promote and interpret the values for which the WHS was inscribed. Layout and planning of docks in relation to each other, to the river, to the city and other transport modes

6.7.6

The layout and planning of the docks best can be understood by traversing the site, preferably by boat, but also on foot. The siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s topography and flat landscape is an aspect of OUV that can be appreciated from across the river, but the sense of inter-connectivity and detailed layout requires closer analysis. This demands public access and the ability to observe the inter-relationships on

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 351

site. Evidence of transport links survives in the Leeds and Liverpool canal link, the remnants of train tracks and overhead railway stanchions, and historic surfaces throughout the site. 6.7.7

The layout of the Liverpool Waters masterplan is based on an analysis of the historic grain of the area, the functioning of the docks and an understanding of its original planning. The site will become fully accessible and legible for the first time, with pedestrian and cycle links along the riverfront and across the site, connecting with the city centre, the Leeds and Liverpool Canal and the adjoining neighbourhoods. On-site interpretation and celebration of the historic importance of the site will be embedded within the design of the public realm as described in the Liverpool Waters Destination Strategy, the Public Realm Characterisation report, and the Conservation Management Plan.

6.7.8

The assessment of views in sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the report has shown that the impact on understanding of the layout and planning of the docks looking into, out of and within the site will be mixed, although the overall balance will be positive.

6.7.9

A better understanding will be achieved through views due to the following measures: 

Stronger definition to the river front through the creation of a robust band of development reflecting the horizontality of the warehouse typology at the Albert Dock



Protection of riverfront landmarks such as the Royal Liver Building and the Victoria Clock Tower in views from the river and the Wirral peninsula



Framed views of landmark buildings such as the Tobacco warehouse, Waterloo warehouse and hydraulic engine house as seen from across the site



Enclosure of the water bodies by perimeter development following the footprint of former transit sheds, focussing on linkages and creating a more legible framework



Re-opening of historic gateways into the site with framed and kinetic views



Creation of a hierarchy of public spaces, linked visually and through design to draw people through the site



A clearer emphasis given to the commercial centre by additional tall buildings which will reinforce the existing cluster

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 352

6.7.10

Adverse impacts on understanding in views will result from the following effects: ď&#x201A;ˇ

Partial concealment of landmark structures set back from the riverfront in views from the river and the Wirral peninsula such as the Stanley Dock warehouses and the Waterloo warehouse

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Concealment of the city centre in views from across the site due to the concentration of tall and mid rise buildings on and around the Clarence Dock

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Weakening of skyline silhouette to towers of Liver Building and dome of Port of Liverpool Building when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartley Quay due to background tall buildings

6.7.11

The assessment has found that all the significant historic assets within the Liverpool Waters site will be retained and conserved, including the minor items such as quayside artefacts and historic surfacing, as well as below ground archaeology. Whilst the effect on setting has been found to be more mixed, the overall impact is positive.

6.7.12

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of layout and planning of the docks in relation to each other, to the river, to the city and other transport modes will be moderate beneficial. Dock Structures including dock gates

6.7.13

The dock water spaces in the northern part of the site, together with the Princes Half-Tide Dock and East Waterloo Dock to the south, transmit the most powerful messages about innovation and construction of all the structures found within the Liverpool Waters site.

6.7.14

With the exception of the infilling of a small part of the West Waterloo Dock which has already been partly infilled, all the remaining docks will be retained as water spaces and treated as part of the public realm. The structures will be fully restored, including the dock gates, all the quayside dock furniture such as capstans, mooring posts and bollards, and actively used for leisure and recreation. Below ground remains of infilled docks will be protected from impact by development through layout, design and mitigation, as defined in proposed conditions relating to planning consent.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 353

6.7.15

Assessment of views of the dock structures has not indicated that there will be any adverse impacts. Public access will hugely benefit public appreciation and understanding of the dock structures which will be open to detailed view.

6.7.16

Taking account of the adverse effect on the West Waterloo Dock, the overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of dock structures including dock gates will be moderate beneficial. Warehouses

6.7.17

Since no warehouses stand within the site, so there will be no physical impacts on warehouse structures. The listed Stanley Dock and Waterloo warehouses, however, are within the setting of the Liverpool Waters site, and the views assessment shows that development will have an adverse effect on the visibility of these important warehouse structures from certain cross river views, and from some locations within the site.

6.7.18

The discussion on views has considered how far concealment of the warehouse structures will impact on understanding their role in the transmission of OUV, and it is clear that this will vary from viewpoint to viewpoint. For example, when viewed from the promenade which stretches from New Brighton to Seacombe, where the views are kinetic, the gradual opening up of the view to the Stanley Dock across the Salisbury and Collingwood Docks will focus attention on the warehouse buildings, where they will be framed by other development as they were when the docks were operational. This dynamic process will compensate to a considerable degree for the loss of all round visibility that is currently possible. Likewise the concealment of the warehouses from Woodside is compensated by the clear visibility of the Albert Dock warehouses which are much closer to the viewer, and therefore a more powerful conveyor of OUV.

6.7.19

Taking account of these conflicting issues, the overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of warehouses will be moderate adverse. Technical Buildings

6.7.20

The operational buildings within the site are the listed Hydraulic Engine House at the BramleyMoore Dock, the Victorian Clock Tower and the Dock Masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office, as well as a number of smaller unlisted buildings around the Clarence Graving Docks. All these buildings will be fully

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 354

restored and brought back into beneficial use, many for public purposes, for visitor information and interpretation. 6.7.21

The views assessment shows that there will be no significantly adverse impact to any of these buildings, and understanding of their relative functions and contribution to the operation of the docks will be greatly enhanced.

6.7.22

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of technical buildings will be moderate beneficial. Dock Wall and Security

6.7.23

The dock wall runs the full length of the site, and restricts views and connectivity with the wider Northshore area. Whilst this has been perceived as a potential problem, no proposals are made for interventions in the wall apart from one new opening opposite Dublin Street where advantages can be secured for the setting of the Clarence Graving Docks, and a pedestrian opening at the Princes Dock, which replaces an unimplemented proposal that already has listed building consent.

6.7.24

The dock wall will be fully restored, including all the gateways and remaining gates, the police huts, drinking fountains and overhead railway stanchions. The surviving areas of historic pavings and rail tracks that run parallel with the wall will be retained, and the areas between development and the wall be used for a mix of private and public uses.

6.7.25

The views assessment shows that there will be an adverse impact on the setting of the dock wall and gateways where they adjoin the secondary cluster of tall buildings. However, the security function of the wall, which is its principal contribution to OUV, will remain clear and understandable, and the wall and gates will not be obscured from outside the site.

6.7.26

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of the dock wall and security will be slight beneficial.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 355

Innovative Port Management 6.7.27

Hartley’s innovative concepts of port management can be understood in the physical layout of the docks, the relationship of the river and reclaimed dockland strip, the interconnectivity of the enclosed water bodies and the development and use of new technology.

6.7.28

Redundancy of the central docks has resulted in a lack of active management, which is likely to continue without new uses. Whilst there is no prospect of the dockland being used again for port activities, the Liverpool Waters project includes the use of the docks for water-based leisure. This will animate the water spaces, reintroduce management systems, and incorporate interpretation to promote the history of innovation throughout the site.

6.7.29

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of innovative port management will be moderate beneficial. Spirit of Innovation

6.7.30

Innovation was a key to Liverpool’s success as a maritime mercantile world city in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. It allowed the city to outperform its national and international rivals in efficiency and productivity, and so to expand its share of trade in global markets. Aspects of innovation can be seen in: 

Use of advanced technology in the design and construction of docks



Introduction of pioneering methods of transport



Efficient management systems for dock operations and handling of goods



Use of fireproof construction for warehouses and commercial buildings



Development of information networks which enabled traders to establish a reputation for credit-worthiness and business solvency, giving them a competitive advantage

 6.7.31

Readiness to test new ideas in technology, management and business communications

Aspects of innovation can currently be seen and understood in the dockland layout and structures, the warehouses and commercial buildings of the city, and in the legacy of transport infrastructure. The Liverpool Waters project will promote greater understanding of innovation in the following ways: 

Conservation of dock water bodies, river wall and all operational buildings



Interpretation of dock planning, layout, construction, management and international influence

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 356

 6.7.32

Re-activation of water spaces for leisure uses

It is also intended to transmit OUV through innovative regeneration of the site. The elements of innovation embedded in the planning application proposal are as follows: 

The use of a masterplan for a development of un-precedented scale, phased over a long timescale and with ambitious social and economic objectives



International investment from China and the Far East to create new jobs and businesses



High-density, sustainable development in accordance with government policy



High standards of energy efficiency in energy production and usage, waste management, water, building construction and transport

6.7.33

Peel is a leader in research and development of sustainable energy and has established a high reputation for its work at Media City, Salford which is the first scheme in the country to become a BREEAM approved sustainable community, and other current development projects. At Media City, water from the Manchester Ship Canal is used to power, heat and cool buildings on a 36 acre site, buildings benefit from a combined heat and power plant energy system known as TriGen which reduces CO² emissions. Mixed-use development is designed around specific needs of creative and digital industries, incorporating high-speed digital connectivity, changing production workflows and ever-increasing customer demand for interactivity.

6.7.34

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of innovation will be moderate beneficial. International Mercantile Systems

6.7.35

Liverpool has looked outwards to Ireland, North America, Africa and the Far East, and continues to do so. It has welcomed immigration, and is one of the country’s most cosmopolitan cities, with a legacy of buildings that express cultural diversity. Today it is twinned with Shanghai and San Francisco.

6.7.36

‘Internationalism’ is a main theme of the Liverpool Waters Destination Strategy submitted as part of the planning application and will be used to establish a distinctive sense of place. The role of the docks as a fulcrum of international trade, movement of people and exchange of ideas and technology is central to its identity and its historic significance.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 357

6.7.37

The idea is to make internationalism a predominant theme in the Liverpool Waters brand and in the way that different character areas are created, perhaps with particular focus on links to other great waterfront cities. The theme might be delivered through many ways, such as: 

Naming of streets, squares, buildings and parks etc.



Using artists from other great waterfront cities for public art.



International themed events.



An international food market.

It would tie into the letting strategy, and is already reflected in calling and theming the landmark tall building at Princes Dock Shanghai Tower. 6.7.38

Peel’s vision for the redevelopment of the site is also international in terms of investment and job creation. This will build on the links being actively created with China and other developing nations by Peel in association with LCC, which will restore Liverpool’s place in international markets.

6.7.39

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of international mercantile systems has the potential to be moderate beneficial. VALUE Criterion (iii): Maritime Mercantile Culture

6.7.40

The distinctive aspects of mercantile culture relating to the Stanley Dock Conservation Area are seen chiefly in such features as the grandeur of the river wall, the dock retaining walls, the Victoria Clock Tower and the dock boundary wall. The warehouses at Stanley Dock and the Waterloo Warehouse too are statements of confidence and civic pride. Within the adjoining Pier Head character area are the three prestigious waterfront buildings that evoke Liverpool’s supremacy as a maritime mercantile city. Dock structures, Victoria Clock Tower, Boundary wall

6.7.41

As assessed in 5.7.13-26, the overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of dock structures is moderate beneficial. Commercial offices, banks

6.7.42

The commercial centre is relatively compact and is historically concentrated around the Exchange in the old medieval streets of the city. It contains many high quality office buildings and banks in

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 358

Dale Street, Castle Street and Water Street, some of which have been adapted to alternative uses. 6.7.43

The proposed development will have no effect on these buildings, and the impact on the aspect of commercial offices and banks will therefore be neutral. Prestigious display buildings

6.7.44

The prestigious display buildings include the Pier Head complex, the buildings in the cultural quarter, Municipal Buildings in Dale Street, and the two Cathedrals.

6.7.45

The views analysis demonstrates that there will be an impact on the Pier Head complex when seen from the Albert Dock and Hartleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Quay. In these views, the proposed tall buildings will be seen as a backdrop to the towers of the Liver Building and the dome of the Port of Liverpool Building, thus affecting their skyline silhouette.

6.7.46

There will also be an impact on the current visibility of the two cathedrals when seen from the river, though since this is a fast moving view, the impact is not significant.

6.7.47

The developer is committed to erecting buildings of exceptional quality and distinction. The Shanghai Tower will be the subject of an architectural competition, and the development of detailed masterplans and other individual buildings will overseen by a design panel with representation from LCC and other national and local stakeholders.

6.7.48

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of prestigious display buildings will be slight adverse. Lives of Merchants

6.7.49

The impact is neutral. Lives of Dockers

6.7.50

The impact is neutral. Lives of Sailors

6.7.51

The impact is neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 359

Role in Slave Trade 6.7.52

The impact is neutral. Role in Emigration

6.7.53

The impact is neutral.

6.7.54

In the case of the five attributes listed above, whilst the impact will be neutral, there is an opportunity for conveying information that will lead to greater appreciation and understanding through on-site interpretation, museum display, public art, festivals, installations and on-site theatre. VALUE Criterion (iv): Outstanding example of World Mercantile City

6.7.55

The outstanding aspects embodied most forcefully in the Stanley Dock Conservation Area are the characteristic form of the dockland landscape and its relationship with the river, the layout of the docks, and the monumental dock architecture and the way that it manifests confidence and civic pride. Dock Landscape

6.7.56

The development proposals maintain the layout of the group of northern docks and the Clarence Graving Docks, reinforcing the orthogonal layout of the water spaces and following the historic pattern of quayside structures. The footprint of the proposed building blocks is compatible with the rectangular transit sheds and warehouses that are associated with the docks, and although many of the buildings are taller than those that preceded them, they maintain the overall horizontality that is characteristic of the dockland landscape.

6.7.57

In the central part of the site where the docks have been altered and infilled in the 20th century, the layout reflects the pattern of the original docks and has been designed to avoid impact on below-ground heritage assets.

6.7.58

Both the tall buildings in the extension to the commercial district cluster and those in the secondary cluster on the site of and around the former Clarence Power Station have been set

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 360

back from the riverfront behind a ribbon of mid rise development that reinforces the horizontality of the dock landscape. This serves to strengthen the river edge and enclose the water spaces. 6.7.59

The assessment of views in sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the report has shown that the impact on understanding of the dockland landscape is mixed, but is generally neutral.

6.7.60

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of dock landscape will be neutral. Docks and Urban Plan

6.7.61

The assessment in paragraphs 5.7.6-12 shows that the layout of the Liverpool Waters masterplan is based on an analysis of the historic grain of the area, the functioning of the docks and an understanding of its original planning. The site will be fully accessible and legible, and the design of the public realm has been developed to encourage exploration and understanding.

6.7.62

6.7.63

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of docks and urban plan landscape will be slight beneficial. Relationship of commercial centre, docks, river and sea

6.7.64

The relationship of the differing character areas and their contribution to OUV is vital to understanding the WHS. These relationships rely on visual evidence, functional considerations, communications, and the overall sense of place.

6.7.65

In views from across the river where the relationship between the constituent parts can be seen, the development proposals maintain a sense of connection between the Pier Head, the Albert Dock and the northern docks. This is seen in the way that the horizontal form of the Albert Dock is reflected in the riverfront development at Liverpool Waters, and the Pier Head group of buildings remains the focal point of the city centre. Visual permeability between the northern docks and the city centre from within the site will, however, be lost, and this will have a harmful effect on OUV.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 361

6.7.66

The commercial centre will be strengthened and expanded by the additional tall buildings at Princes Dock and the King Edward site. Development of the Princes Dock as the first phase of Liverpool Waters will complete and improve the character of this area, whilst implementation of the previously approved scheme for Plot A-01 will enhance the interface between the Pier Head and Stanley Dock character areas.

6.7.67

Communications between the Pier Head and the northern docks are enhanced by the creation of a riverfront walkway and cycle route that will open up the waterfront and promote access to the dockland as an extension of the city centre. Links are also made with the towpath of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal and the Northshore neighbourhoods.

6.7.68

The masterplan layout provides enclosure of the docks from the river, creating a sheltered microclimate, suitable for a new residential and business district, with visual permeability to the river and Wirral peninsula.

6.7.69

The masterplan approach that is the optimum way of ensuring that the relationships between the heterogeneous elements of the WHS are maintained within a coherent framework over the long period of development.

6.7.70

The overall impact of the proposed development on the relationship between the commercial centre, docks, river and sea will be slight beneficial. Civic pride manifested in grand architecture

6.7.71

The architectural vision for Liverpool Waters is bold, and underpinned by a commitment to design quality. Whilst this cannot be demonstrated through the outline application process, quality standards can be secured through appropriate planning conditions. A co-ordinated approach to development, phased over a 30 year period in accordance with an approved masterplan offers a secure means to achieving development of high quality that will promote and sustain civic pride.

6.7.72

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of civic pride manifested in grand architecture will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 362

Commercial offices, shipping offices and banks 6.7.73

The proposal for Liverpool Waters includes mixed use development of residential, visitor attractions and supporting uses, office/commercial and local shops and services.

It will

accommodate city centre expansion and will further stimulate economic and social regeneration and integration with the adjoining areas of the city centre, north Liverpool and the wider subregion. A cultural centre is to be provided at the heart of the site. 6.7.74

Successful delivery of the scheme will offer the opportunity to complement and enhance the cultural values that are manifested within the WHS.

6.7.75

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of commercial offices, shipping offices and banks will be neutral. Cultural Display

6.7.76

Provision has been made on the site for a new cultural building. Whilst the nature of use has not yet been determined, this, combined with the commitment to interpretation, will enhance the cultural status of the city.

6.7.77

The overall impact of the proposed development on the aspect of cultural display will be neutral.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 363

SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON OUTSTANDING UNIVERSAL VALUE Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that the cumulative

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Slight beneficial

Large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

impact on OUV will be as follows:

The assessment of cumulative impacts takes into account intangible as well as tangible attributes of OUV, and also assesses the way in which the development might actively develop the criteria for which the WHS was inscribed. It focuses on how aspects of OUV are transmitted and understood. In this respect the gift of public access to the site which the development will bring offers the opportunity to experience the heritage assets and attributes for the first time in their history. As stated in the introduction to this report, transmission of OUV relies not only on visual receptors, but also on an appreciation of the sense of place. The assessment of cumulative impacts, which is informed by intangible factors, demonstrates a strongly beneficial outcome.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 364

7.0

SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

7.1

ASSESSMENT PROCESS

7.1.1

The report provides a detailed assessment of the likely significant impact of the revised development proposals on the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the Liverpool WHS.

7.1.2

The assessment has been based on the revised masterplan, which has been changed in response to comments made during the consultation process since the application was submitted in October 2010.

7.1.3

The methodology used follows the guidance published by ICOMOS at the request of the World Heritage Committee for Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties.

7.2

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

7.2.1

Direct and Indirect Impacts on Heritage Assets The assessment shows that the impact on the physical fabric and the setting of heritage assets

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 365

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

(scored on a 1:1 basis) will be as follows:

7.2.2

Summary of Impacts on Key Views

7.2.3

Slight beneficial

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Very large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large adverse

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

The assessment shows that the impact on key views will be as follows:

Summary of the Impacts on Views and Settings of the Landmark Buildings of the World Heritage Site and Buffer Zone The assessment shows that the impacts on views and settings of landmark buildings of the

Moderate adverse

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 366

Very large adverse

Slight adverse

Large adverse

Neutral

Slight beneficial

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

Liverpool WHS and Buffer Zone will be as follows:

7.2.4

Summary of Impacts on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of Character Areas The assessment shows that the impacts on the Townscape Characteristics and Setting of

7.2.5

Slight adverse

Very large adverse

Neutral

Large adverse

Slight beneficial

Moderate adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

Character Areas will be as follows:

Summary of Compliance with Guidance in the Liverpool WHS SPD Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that compliance with the guidance set out in the Liverpool world Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document is as

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 367

compliance

non-

High significance

Low significance non-

non-compliance

Neutral

significance

Low compliance

Medium

Medium compliance

compliance

Full compliance

follows:

7.2.6

Summary of Cumulative Impact Assessment on Outstanding Universal Value Assessment of the revised planning application for Liverpool Waters shows that the cumulative

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 368

Very large adverse

Slight beneficial

Large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Large beneficial

Very large beneficial

impact on OUV will be as follows:

Neutral

Slight adverse

Moderate adverse

Impact on Key Views

Impact on Views and Settings of Landmark Buildings Impact on Townscape Characteristics and Setting of Character Areas Compliance with Guidance in Liverpool WHS SPD Cumulative OUV

impact

assessment

Grand Total 14

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 369

Very large adverse

Slight beneficial

Large adverse

Moderate beneficial

Direct and Indirect Impact on Heritage Assets

Large beneficial

Summary Matrix of Impacts

Very large beneficial

7.2.7

8.0

MEASURES TO AVOID, TO REDUCE OR TO COMPENSATE FOR IMPACTS

8.1

INTRODUCTION

8.1.1

8.1.2

Impact assessment is an iterative process, and since the planning application was submitted it has been possible to make a number of changes to the proposals that would avoid potentially harmful consequences. Nonetheless, a small number of adverse effects have still been identified in the final assessment, for which mitigating measures are suggested. Where such measures are proposed, it is intended that they will be secured through appropriate planning conditions.

8.1.3

The potential adverse effects can be summarised as follows, together with mitigating factors: ď&#x201A;ˇ

ď&#x201A;ˇ

The effect of the riverfront blocks on visibility of the Stanley Dock Tobacco warehouse and the Waterloo warehouse when viewed from Wallasey Town Hall. This effect is an inevitable consequence of the location of these warehouses several blocks back from the riverfront. If their all round visibility were to be maintained, it would sterilise much of the site, and unacceptably reduce the sense of enclosure to the central docks. Mitigation comes in the form of kinetic views from the Wirral promenade,

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 370

where the Stanley Dock will be gradually revealed, and will be an effective as a conveyor of OUV. ď&#x201A;ˇ

8.1.4

Further measures that will reduce and compensate for potential adverse impacts of proposed development on aspects of OUV are listed below.

8.2

MITIGATION MEASURES Archaeology

8.2.1

Whilst the assessment does not identify any potential harm to below ground archaeology, it is clear that without adequate safeguards, there could be significant risk of damage. As a result mitigation measures are set out in the Environmental Statement. These are summarised in Section 6.2.42 of this HIA. The result of detailed archaeological evaluation at the reserved matters stages will greatly increase knowledge of the site and its public dissemination. Conservation of Heritage Assets

8.2.2

The future monitoring, maintenance and repair of all heritage assets in the ownership of the applicant will be a major benefit of the project, and will mitigate any adverse effects on the setting of individual heritage assets. The programme for conservation is set out in the Conservation Management Plan. Interpretation

8.2.3

The OUV will be actively transmitted through on site interpretation, local centres, education work, festivals and community engagement in accordance with an Interpretation Strategy which will be

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 371

developed at the reserved matters stages. Public access to the site will bring huge benefits in terms of understanding the role of the docks in the history of the city and its global reach. Riverside Promenade and Cycle/Pedestrian Routes connecting the City Centre with the Leeds and Liverpool Canal and the Northshore area 8.2.4

The proposed promenade and cycle routes will open up more of the waterfront and create improved connections between the different character areas of the WHS. Details are set out in the Transport Statement. Active Dockland Uses

8.2.5

The dock water spaces will be retained, together with their lock gates, quayside artefacts and historic surfaces; historic buildings will be restored; and the dock wall will be kept as a symbol of dock management and operation. The project includes active use of the water bodies for leisure; re-use of all historic buildings; and the provision of varied and lively areas of public realm, as set out in the CMP and other supporting documents. Urban Plan

8.2.6

The proposed grain of the site reinforces the historic urban form to create a new grid of streets, squares, parks and promenades that will help to transmit understanding of the dock layout that is a key attribute of OUV. The historic gateways through the dock wall will be restored and used to enhance the legibility of the dockland estate. Legibility

8.2.7

Liverpool is a highly legible city, and legibility is acknowledged to be a critical conveyor of OUV. It is therefore important that regeneration of the Liverpool Waters site should protect, enhance and transmit those signs that determine legibility. The study of semiotics demonstrates that meaning is not transmitted in a literal sense, but according to a complex interplay of codes or conventions many of which we may not normally be aware.

8.2.8

Viewed from afar, the current â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;signsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; that transmit meaning include the flatness of the site contrasted with the rising land beyond; the relationship between the dockland and the river, which is signified by the river wall; the security barrier created by the dock boundary wall; the landmark buildings such as the large warehouses and the Victoria Clock Tower; and the location

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 372

of the city centre in relation to the dock estate. There is little else that can be readily understood, and the conveyors of legibility are scattered and disconnected. 8.2.9

Once within the site it is the layout of the intact group of docks in the northern part of the site with their authentic setting, and the southern part that is also included in the WHS that are capable of being understood. The whole central part of the site has little meaning, and being outside the WHS does not in itself have OUV.

8.2.10

At present the site is not capable of being easily understood because of the lack of public access, and nor can the layout and management of the docks be appreciated from distant viewpoints such as the Wirral. It is therefore clear that public access and the creation of routes through the site will be beneficial. Regeneration with a critical mass of development will also encourage public access and open the site up to understanding.

8.2.11

Viewed from outside the site, and in particular from across the river, when developed, the current flatness of the site will be changed, and legibility will rely on other codes to transmit meaning about the landform, such as the horizontal strip of waterfront development, drawing on urban references from the Albert Dock. The visibility of the river wall and the entrances will continue to convey messages about the dockland beyond, and likewise the dock boundary wall will not be obscured. Loss of visibility of the warehouses from across the river is an adverse, yet inevitable, consequence of waterfront development, but as explained earlier, mitigation is offered in the form of kinetic views. The relationship between the commercial centre and the docks will remain understandable, and once the concept of the secondary cluster populating the site of the former power station is grasped as part of the evolving commercial city, the contribution to legibility will be enhanced and not diminished.

8.2.12

As to legibility within and throughout the extent of the site, this will be enhanced by the creation of an urban grid that follows the form of the existing and infilled docks, which will lead to a better understanding of the original layout, and act as an aid to orientation in what is currently a confusing environment. For, in its existing state, the area formerly occupied by the Clarence Dock has no recognisable urban grain, no pre-determined heights or historic landmarks which would act as immediate constraints.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 373

High Density Development and Tall Buildings 8.2.13

The principal reason for including tall buildings in the scheme is to create a new international business destination that will attract investment from around the world. There is therefore a clear need to create a development that will symbolise ambition and prestige, and provide the right quality of accommodation for international investors. Research published by the British Property Federation in 2008 also confirms that positive economic impacts can accrue from the development of tall buildings, for the following reasons: 

They increase productivity due to factors such as specialisation, knowledge transfer, time saving, increased competition, efficiencies of scale etc. Research concluded that doubling employment density within a given area could lead to 22% increase in productivity in service sector jobs.



Tall buildings better meet modern occupiers’ requirements and aspirations, especially international investors looking for space within commercial districts because they offer flexibility, choice and prestige that cannot be provided by lower density development.



The Government’s emphasis on the need for sustainable development and careful use of brownfield resources favours high density. The intensive use and recycling of brownfield land has been a key priority of the UK planning system for several years and is reinforced by PPS4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth. Furthermore, central waterfront locations are a finite and scarce resource, and are highly valued as commercial locations in cities across the world. Therefore it is crucial to make the most efficient use of the land through high density development. By using this finite resource carefully, tall buildings also provide more space for creation of high quality public realm.



The research recommends that high density development must take place in areas with good accessibility. In addition, high density development helps to create sufficient value to underpin the major investment required in public transport and other infrastructure such as high quality public realm. The research confirms that these locations should be in or close to commercial districts where private sector businesses can take advantage of existing agglomerations.

8.2.14

There are also reasons for welcoming high density development and tall buildings as an intangible expression of Liverpool’s spirit of place. The city was a pioneer of tall buildings in the 19th and 20th centuries, influencing the use of cast iron for prefabricated construction in Chicago and New York, and adapting North American building technology in the construction of buildings such as

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 374

the White Star Line offices, the Dock Offices, Tower Buildings and the Royal Liver Building. The further development of tall building technology is therefore part of Liverpool’s contribution to planning and an aspect of OUV. The commitment to high quality design set out in the Building Characterisation Precedent Study offers benefits for the promotion of OUV. 8.2.15

The process of making use of redundant docks for commercial expansion is similarly wellestablished. It was carried out first in 1828 with infilling the Old Dock for a new Custom House, then the city’s tallest building. The redevelopment of the George’s Dock from 1899 for the prestigious Pier Head offices involved the erection of the UK’s ‘first skyscraper’, the tallest commercial building in the country. More recently the partial infilling of Princes Dock as an extension of the commercial district is part of Liverpool’s history of economic growth. The Clarence Dock was used from 1929 as the site for the city’s major coal-fired power station, with three tall chimneys. Re-using the docks as statements of regeneration is therefore a tradition.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 375

Waterloo warehouse c.1950 with tall commercial buildings east of Waterloo Road

Grain silo, Brunswick Dock, demolished 1980s Tate and Lyle, Huskisson Dock, demolished 1981

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 376

8.2.16

Vision and Determination: Liverpool’s economic success was built on a spirit of optimism and innovation, and being bold has been a tradition for the city, willing to test new ideas and pioneer new technology. That underlying spirit remains, despite the massive difficulties of economic restructuring that have had to be faced in recent years, and is central to the Liverpool Waters project.



Commercial Astuteness: The development of the city was driven by astute commercial decisions. The banks, exchanges and office buildings were the product of the hugely successful trade which resulted. Peel similarly has a significant track record in entrepreneurial success.



8.3

OTHER BENEFITS In addition to the heritage benefits set out in 8.2.3 above, there are other benefits that should be considered in accordance with the ICOMOS methodology. These can be summarised in six broad categories as follows:

8.3.1

Strategic 

Sustainable development is the key planning objective of Central Government – LW is an outstanding example of sustainable development which seeks to recycle previously developed land in a highly accessible location close to the city centre.



Private sector led investment without the need for public sector intervention or ‘pumppriming’.



The development supports Liverpool as a key regional centre which is a major objective of the development plan.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 377



LW is a key component of the North Liverpool Growth Point which seeks to secure additional residential development. The Government’s prospectus confirms that this generation of Enterprise Zones is about allowing areas with real potential to create new business and jobs with positive benefits across the wider economic area and that economic growth and job creation should be led by the private sector.



LW is identified as a key opportunity and transformational project within the recently published North Liverpool & South Sefton Strategic Regeneration Framework (2010). The framework acknowledges that LW will generate tens of thousands of jobs and will reconnect the North Liverpool area with a transformed and reanimated waterfront.

8.3.2

Physical  Significant new development as part of an expanded city centre



•

9,000 new homes

•

300,000 sq m of high quality office development

•

Physically transforming North Liverpool and local perceptions

Creating new communities •

Providing a distinctive and attractive residential environment

•

Providing the necessary community/support facilities

High quality public realm •

New parks and public spaces

•

Public art / interpretation

•

Multi-use games areas

•

Active water spaces

Improved access for all •

New and improved pedestrian/cycle routes to and from the city centre/North Liverpool

• 8.3.3

New and improved River Walk

Socio Economic  Market raising



•

A true international investment destination

•

Meeting the office needs of the sub-regional and regional economy

Developing knowledge-based activity •

Assist the shift towards a knowledge-based economy

•

Help drive economic growth by attracting new investors

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 378



Potential to secure massive economic impact •

14,800 new jobs and £0.63 billion GVA per annum

•

28,000 man years of construction jobs

Helping to tackle economic exclusion and deprivation •

LW is at the heart of some of the UK’s most deprived communities

•

Significant opportunities for lower and intermediate skill levels

Developing social and community infrastructure •

8.3.4

Environmental  Providing an exemplar sustainable community/development 

8.3.5

To the benefit of new and existing residents

Enhancing the bio-diversity of the site • Ecological water space •

Green/brown roofs

•

Public spaces with landscaping and new greenspace



Renewable energy opportunities



Sustainable green building principles



Innovative technologies

Leisure & Tourism  Provide a significant new leisure resource for people who live and work within Liverpool and giving the waterfront back to the people 

Cruise liner terminal – creating a new destination for tourists



Provision of a new Culture Hub within the scheme



Provision of a number of ‘interest points’ and trails - greater interpretation of the WHS / story telling



Public Art



Animating the water spaces – creation of marinas, dockside features, open water events



Public spaces can be used for events, specialist markets, etc

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 379

9.0

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9.1

Whilst it is difficult to weigh the positive and negative impacts both in terms of protecting the historic environment and the wider socio-economic factors listed above, it is clear that the opportunities presented by the scheme for protecting, conserving and promoting the OUV of the WHS, its integrity and authenticity are very considerable. Amongst the opportunities and threats identified in the WHS Management Plan were inappropriate new development and preservation in â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;aspicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. These polarities often typify the popular debate about regeneration of historic areas, and Liverpool Waters is no exception.

9.2

9.3

Over the 12 months since the author of this report first assessed the impact on OUV, the scheme has been substantially amended to address concerns expressed by key heritage consultees, with the result that a number of harmful impacts have been eliminated or mitigated. Whilst some adverse effects remain, these are almost wholly concerned with the setting of heritage assets and attributes of OUV, rather than physical and therefore irreversible damage. Seen in the long term, this is important, since the core values of WHSs are intended to be timeless. The density of development has been considerably reduced, heights of blocks have been lowered, and the layout has been amended to improve legibility and mitigate any dominance of new buildings. Underground structures have been removed or restructured to avoid any conflict with belowground remains. There is now a danger that further reductions in the extent of development could make the scheme unviable and threaten the wider benefits.

9.4

Whilst some limited harmful impacts therefore remain, this assessment has demonstrated that these are greatly outweighed by the benefits offered, and that overall there is no risk to the inscription of the Liverpool World Heritage property.

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 380

10.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10.1

REFERENCES

10.1.1

Primary Sources Gregson’s map of Liverpool of 1565 (with later additions) Bowker’s map of Liverpool of c.1572 Okill’s map of Liverpool of 1650 Eye’s map of Liverpool of 1765 Eye’s map of Liverpool of 1785 Anonymous map of Liverpool of 1795 Horwood’s map of Liverpool of 1803 Gage’s map of Liverpool of 1807 Kaye’s map of Liverpool of 1816: Dwire’s map of Liverpool of 1823 J and A Walkers map of Liverpool of 1823 Map of Liverpool of 1829 taken from A Strangers Guide to Liverpool Henry Austin’s map of Liverpool of 1836 Gage’s map of Liverpool of 1836 Bennison’s map of Liverpool of 1841 Bennison’s map of Liverpool of 1848 Ordnance Survey map of Liverpool of 1848 Dower’s map of Liverpool of 1863 Philips map of Liverpool of 1881 Anonymous map of Liverpool of 1885 Ordnance Survey map of Liverpool of 1890 Bartholomew’s map of Liverpool of 1891 Bacon’s map of Liverpool of 1901 Ward-Lock’s map of Liverpool of 1904 Ordnance Survey map of Liverpool of 1908 Abel-Haywood’s map of Liverpool of 1924 Ordnance Survey map of Liverpool of 1928 Aerial photographs, NMR nos. SJ 39 SW1054; SJ 39 SW1062; SJ 39 SW1063, SJ 39 SW1064

10.1.2

Secondary Sources        

Belcham, J (ed), Liverpool 800, Liverpool, 2005

A Treatise on the Principles and Practice of Dock Engineering, Brysson Cunningham, Charles Griffin and Company, 1910 Adams, M, An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment of a Proposed Development of Land at Princes Dock, Unpublished Report, 2005 Australia ICOMOS, The Burra Charter, Burwood, Australia, 1999 Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) and English Heritage Guidance on Tall Buildings, London, 2007 Council of Europe, European Landscape Convention, Council of Europe Treaty Series, 176, Strasbourg, 2000 Cunard Building, The Building, 2010 Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), Circular 07/2009, Circular on the protection of World Heritage Sites, London 2009

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 381

                              

Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS), The Government’s Statement on the Historic Environment for England, Part 1, London, 2010 Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS), The Government’s Statement on the Historic Environment for England, Part 2, London, 2010 Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS), Policy Statement on Scheduled Monuments, London, 2010 Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment, London, 2010 English Heritage, Conservation Principles Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment, London, 2008 English Heritage, The Protection and Management of World Heritage Sites in England, London, 2009 de Figueiredo, P and Egerton Lea Consultancy Ltd, Liverpool Waters: Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Baseline Study, Unpublished Report, 2008 Giles, C, The Historic Warehouses of Liverpool, Unpublished Draft Report, 1999 Hodgkinson, D and Emmet, J British Waterways Liverpool Canal Link: Archaeological and Cultural Heritage/Architectural Heritage Impact Assessment, Unpublished Report, 2003 Hynes, J, Construction of the Liverpool Dock System During the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, BSc Thesis, 1996 ICOMOS, Nara Document on Authenticity, Paris, 1994 ICOMOS, Xian Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas, Paris, 2005 Jarvis, A, Princes Dock: A Magnificent Monument of Mural Art, Birkenhead, 1991 Jarvis, A, Liverpool Central Docks 1799-1905: An Illustrated History, Stroud, 1991 Liverpool City Council, Liverpool Unitary Development Plan, Liverpool, 2002 Liverpool City Council, Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City Management Plan, Liverpool, 2003 Liverpool City Council, Maritime Mercantile City: Liverpool: Nomination of Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City for Inscription on the World Heritage List, Liverpool, 2005 Liverpool City Council, Liverpool World Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document, Liverpool, 2009 Liverpool City Council, Draft Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy Preferred Options, Liverpool, 2010 Liverpool Museum, Liverpool Historic Warehouse Survey: Documentation, Unpublished Report, 1998 Liverpool Vision, Strategic Regeneration Framework, Liverpool, 2000 Milne, G J, Maritime Liverpool, in J Belchem (ed), Liverpool 800, Culture, Character, and History, Liverpool’ 257-310, 2006 North West Regional Assembly (NWRA), The North West of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021, Norwich, 2008 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development, Norwich, 2005 OA North, Liverpool Canal Link: Archaeological Evaluation Report, Unpublished Report, 2006 OA North, Liverpool Canal Link, Pier Head, Unpublished Report, 2008 OA North, Mann Island Canal Link, Unpublished Report, 2008 OA North, Central Docks, Unpublished Report, 2008 OA North, Chavasse Park Post Excavation Assessment, Unpublished Report, 2008 Peveley, S E and Adams, M, An Archaeological Watching Brief on Land at Princes Half Tide Dock, Liverpool, Unpublished Report, 2007 Pollard, R, The Docks, in Sharples, 2004

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 382

     

Sharples, J, Liverpool, Pevsner Architectural Guides, London, 2004 Stammers, M, Images of England: Liverpool Docks, Stroud, 1999 Stammers, M, The Industrial Archaeology of Docks and Harbours, Liverpool, 2007 UNESCO, Vienna Memorandum, Paris, 2005 UNESCO, Declaration on the Conservation of the Historic Urban Landscape, Paris, 2005 UNESCO, Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, Paris, 2008

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 383

11.0 PLANS FIGURE 1:

PLAN OF WORLD HERITAGE SITE WITH CHARACTER AREAS AND LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE

FIGURE

PLAN OF LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE SHOWING LOCATION OF HERITAGE ASSETS ASSESSED IN SECTION 5.2

FIGURE

LOCATION OF VIEWPOINTS ASSESSED IN SECTION 5.3

FIGURE

LOCATION OF KEY LANDMARK BUILDINGS ASSESSED IN SECTION

FIGURE

DEVELOPMENT PARCEL PHASING PLAN

FIGURE

INDICATIVE BUILDING PLOTS

FIGURE

UNDERGROUND PLAN (PLANS A-E)

FIGURE

BUILDING BLOCK HEIGHTS

FIGURE

AXONOMETRIC (SET UP AND PLANS A-E)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 384

5.4

FIGURE 1: PLAN OF WORLD HERITAGE SITE WITH CHARACTER AREAS AND LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 385

FIGURE 2: PLAN OF LIVERPOOL WATERS SITE SHOWING LOCATION OF HERITAGE ASSETS ASSESSED IN SECTION 5.2

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 386

FIGURE 3: LOCATION OF VIEWPOINTS ASSESSED IN SECTION 5.3

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 387

FIGURE 4: LOCATION OF KEY LANDMARK BUILDINGS ASSESSED IN SECTION 5.4

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 388

FIGURE 5: DEVELOPMENT PARCEL PHASING PLAN

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 389

FIGURE 6: DEVELOPMENT PLOTS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 390

FIGURE 7: UNDERGROUND PLANS (A-D)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 391

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 392

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 393

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 394

FIGURE 8: BUILDING BLOCK HEIGHTS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 395

FIGURE 9: AXONOMETRIC (SET UP AND A-E)

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 396

NORTHERN DOCKS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 397

CLARENCE DOCKS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 398

CENTRAL DOCKS

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 399

LINER TERMINAL

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 400

PRINCES DOCK

Liverpool Waters Heritage Impact Assessment

Page 401