By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Tallest tower in Liverpool redesigned again

[FIRST LOOK] The AJ can reveal these images of Leach Rhodes Walker’s latest attempt to build the tallest building in the north of England

The proposed 165m-tall, 54-storey skyscraper is at least the third design to have been drawn up by the practice for the site close to Liverpool’s historic waterfront at the junction of the Strand and Leeds Street. 

The new £130 million plans are 5m-shorter than the previous proposals – again backed by Y1 Developments and Richmont Properties – that were submitted for planning in 2007 (pictured below).

Despite the trim, the ‘completely redesigned’ mixed-use tower would still edge above the North’s current tallest-building-title holder – Ian Simpson’s 157m-high Beetham Tower in Manchester – and Liverpool’s own skyscraper champion, Aedas’ Tower West.

Replacing the former King Edward Public House, the building has been sited to ‘provide a continuation of the pedestrian link from Old Hall Street through to the proposed Liverpool Waters and the waterfront’ and the base of the tower will house shops, cafés and bars.

The project backers claim the scheme has been developed following ‘productive negotiations’ with CABE. The developers will be hoping for a better review of the tower than its previous plans (click here to read the full 2008 review).

Subject to planning, work could start on site early 2011 with the building completed in 2014.

2007 proposals - Leach Rhodes Walker's 'King Eddy' tower - set to be the tallest in Liverpool

2007 proposals - Leach Rhodes Walker’s ‘King Eddy’ tower - set to be the tallest in Liverpool


Readers' comments (13)

  • Scrap it and forget it. Hubris is last century. Liverpool has suffered enough of this sort of nonsense.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Maybe they should have a 4th try...

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Shove

    It's a bit early for April 1st jokes surely.. The Liverpool skyline needs this like a spotty teenager needs another mars bar..

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • It just keeps on getting better and better.....

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Can it get any worse.
    Another stretched shoebox in the sky.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Firstly..lets give the tower its 'correct title'
    namely King Edwards Tower.Not Eddy's Tower.
    Once again we find quite a few snipers aiming
    at any proposition for Liverpool that exceeds
    twelve stories...well its time to get used to the
    fact that we do not live in a museum..
    unlike the members of CABE etc.This will be
    the first of hopefully a North Liverpool clutter
    of modern build..I wish the project a
    resident of North Liverpool

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Ken Dodd is a comedian but even Ken would have difficulty coming up with a bigger laugh than this. Well done, good joke, now let's see the real proposal.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Its strange that the development Cabal of Liverpool always seem to hit out at anyone who poses a threat to their boring schemes this time its CABE they themselsves who have been instrumental in destroying Liverpools Skyline with bad advice. George McIver uses the correct term "clutter" , so why would any city want to "clutter" its World Heritage Site. It does not seem to be the correct architectural ambition.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • feriHa  ozTURK


    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Not against towers but this one is just Pig Ugly.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • george mciver - 'clutter' is about right.

    And 'modern' doesn't have to equal 'tower'.

    I'm sure Paul Finch will be interested to hear CABE being described as 'living in a museum' though!

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Paul Finch chaired a symposium on Liverpools architectural ambition where all the usual suspects were rounded up and given a stage.
    As editor of the Architectural Review in Jan uary 2008 responsible for giving the whole issue over to Liverpool calling it work in progress. He was acosted at the end of the symposium at Liverpools boring Crowne Plaza hotel by heritage campaigners who described him as a disgrace for his attitude to Liverpools World Heritage Site. His arrogance was called in to question and he was told that his opinions do not mirror the people of Liverpool who he has never consulted and never will. I think the views above show what his ramblings lead to ..........architectural clutter. As a representitive of CABE he has let Liverpool down badly.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • I have no idea why Wayne Colquhoun has chosen anonymity to record what I recall as a polite and temperate exchange of views at the end of a very inspiring conference. AR devoted an entire issue to the city because of the remarkable transformation which has taken place there, which we welcome. My reception in Liverpool has always been welcoming, and completely unlike the sour tone of Mr Colquhoun's missive. I doubt if his attitude contributes much to constructive discussion about the future of this great city. - Paul Finch

  • Isnt 'clutter' the architectural term used
    often by you an ordinary
    individual living in this city I used the
    word hoping you would digest it better
    but as an after thought I will say
    'gathering'...hows that ??

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters