Manchester and Liverpool - a contrast

[Phil Blinkhorn]

I was in both Liverpool and Manchester last weekend and took the opportunity to walk around both.

Over the last 40 years Manchester has changed dramatically, sometimes not always for the better but, in general, in the post bomb period the redevelopment in the centre has given the city a better feel.

Liverpool, after a a truncated building boom in the early 1970s, stagnated. Only now is the city pulling itself out of decades of a poor reputation in just about every department. The amount of cranes, new buildings and the air of confidence has to be experienced to be believed. Whilst all this has come late - and the work hasn't been finished in time for the Capital of Culture year, the scale of redevelopment and its execution, especially along the waterfront, is stunning.



It has long been said that a river or lake front makes for a great city and Liverpool has re-found the truth of this and has added, and is adding, to the gems of the MD+HB, Cunard and Royal Liver buildings in superb style and on a scale and use of space not often seen in UK cities - and certainly not in Manchester.

The waterfront area will give Liverpool a large, accessible and user friendly focal point. The area around the Shambles and Corn Exchange and Piccadilly Gardens apart which are rather small, Manchester lacks a focal point and, unlike Liverpool which will have a superb frontage when viewed fron the Mersey or the Wirral, lacks a view which gives the visitor and Mancunian alike a stunning vision of the city.

We can't change geography but what do you think can be done, or perhaps could have been done, in Manchester to provide a focal point and a view which would sum up Manchester in the eyes of the world?

[SLOWLYBECOMINGNORTHERN]

I totally agree that Liverpool could have the edge on Manchester with having the water front which really exaggerates a cities presence. Manchester has many amazing buildings but due to the massively different styles can loose cohesion. As we don't have a water front to give us a view of the city we need a concentration of beautiful and tall buildings in one area of the city. Spinningfields was a wasted opportunity for the city to show the world a Mancunian take on the 21st century skyline. I'm not sure we have the room left in the city for such a development again. Instead of dotting the skyscrapers around the city they should be grouped.

[aidanorourke]

There is a location where you can see the Manchester skyline over water. It's the view along the River Irwell from Old Trafford.

It may not quite be the river Mersey, but it gives a tantalising glimpse of how Manchester might look if it had a waterfront.

Actually, it does have a waterfront - Salford Quays, or... The Quays.

But there's another waterfront area, potential, that could fulfil many of the things. It's the disused Pomona Docks area, which runs along the east side of the River Irwell / Manchester Ship Canal between the city centre and The Quays. It's just visible on the right of this image.

This area has fantastic potential, is in a great location - I'd love to see a group of skyscrapers here.

As for the issue of grouping tall buildings, Manchester City Council's policy has been to leave things to the market. It's difficult to group skyscrapers when land is privately owned and plots are dotted around the city.

The main tall building to appear in Manchester in the 60s are all on blitzed sites. So thanks to enemy action for creating Manchester's post-war skyline.

[mr angry]

I see the point being made but, unfortunately, I hate modern architecture and glass buildings with a vengance.

There seems to be a sort of competition between architects to design the ugliest, most obtrusive and offensive things they possibly can, with no regard for their surroundings. If anything, I think architecture now is even worse than it was in the 60s, the previous low point.



To be fair, some buildings of the late 70s and 80s were brick and made some attempt to harmonise with their surroundings, two examples are the buildings in Albert Square, opposite the town hall. If more of this had been done, with the historic buildings being refurbished, I think Manchester would now be an outstandingly attractive city, but no.

If you cant design something attractive, and architects now obviously cant, then build something which is inoffensive

[aidanorourke]

The trouble is that since the dawn of the era of modernist style architecture, there has been no consensus about what constitutes good and bad architecture.

Those at the cutting edge, critics, pioneering architects, will hail a radical style of architecture, whilst the population at large is either indifferent to them or hates them.

Many people have criticised the Beetham Hilton Tower, and I've also heard bad things said about the Civil Justice Centre.

There have actually been many inoffensive buildings, and generally speaking they are bland and uninteresting.

The Civil Justice Centre has won awards, I think it's great, but I know a lot of people don't like it.

[Phil Blinkhorn]

Some of the most stunning city views in the world are provided by glass and concrete buildings:

Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, NewYork, Boston, Chicago and many others look stunning - possibly because the buildings form cohesive visual groupings - and look even more stunning at night.

[Sparkly]

Phil, most of the cities you mention have an iconic single view from a waterfront, which is missing in Manchester - I think that was your point in the first post anyway Manchester does lack a good viewpoint to take in the skyline, and few buildings are positioned with others to make anything cohesive. However, I do still get a buzz from going on the Mancunian way and seeing the city from there, and Bury New Road into the centre also gives a good overview of the city from ground level.

The brick buildings opposite the Town Hall, as shown on Mr Angry's post remind me of a small-town insurance or building society office block, but to be fair, some of the other buildings around the Town Hall are not exactly stunning either. The Justice Centre has grown on me, the Hilton Tower has not.

Was Pomona docks one of the proposed sites for the BBC before Salford Quays was picked? It is ripe for a good development.

Back to the original Phil, a lot of other cities lack or have lacked an iconic skyline or building(s), so they create them, like the arch in St Louis, or the tall but distinctive buildings like the petronas towers in Kuala Lumpur. For me, the Beetham Hilton isn't unusual enough to stand out, so we need either another tower with a more radical design, or a very very big piece of public art with a visitor lift inside and astride a few other buildings and roads!

[monstera]

After the IRA bomb, there was plenty of talk about opening the Irwell up by making park areas alongside it and offering an alternative pedestrian pathway through the city. I remember seeing illustrations to this effect too.

What happened?