The thread for this seems to have disappeared into the ether and I've not seen any updates on it for a while, so when I was in town I took a piccie of it. Anyway...

Skyline Central
Under construction
Heights 21 & 10 floors
Dates 2005-2007
Usage Residential
Notes Development by AAG. Scheme includes 21 storey tower(Phase 2) and 10 storey lowrise on industrial land in the Northern Quarter of the city centre, close to the CIS Tower. There are 110 flats in the lowrise and 182 flats in the highrise.

Project render:
http://aag.co.uk/xpics/SKYLINE-EXT-2%20(2)_250.jpg

Latest construction pic:
http://eb.cx/q2/2005-08-20/car-park.jpg

....

Its pretty plain until the Glass spire which gives it that extra umphh, Its a good one ...

Taken yesterday!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture034.jpg

Skyline Central today

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/2sept009.jpg

Nice one highriser :)
It will be very interesting to see how the glass blade spire turns out. If its just plain glass it wont show up too well, so I assume they will tint it.

..edited

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic6.jpg
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic7.jpg

Can you spot her?
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b292/caw1234/P9060043copy.jpg

The West Properties site says its only 18 floors. It's 19. But where did 21 come from? :?

Hmmm. The core says 20 floors on it. West Properties say 18. Ta phook?
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic8.jpg

I counted 21 but thats including the ground floor. I aint complaining if its taller.

Bit more to this project than meets the eye. Seems to be two projects in one (Skyline Central and Goulden Square) enclosing a public garden in the middle.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_1.jpghttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_3.jpghttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_2.jpg

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_text.gif




http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_1.jpghttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_2.jpghttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_3.jpg

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_text.gif

Actually you can see an ariel view of the development on the following image.


The same architects seem to have produced a masterplan for the area between Oldham Road, Rochdale Road and the edge of the Northern Quarter. Skyline Central can be seen to the top of the image, just to the left. You can clearly make out the squre, central garden area with the path running through it. There looks to be 3 different entrances into the central garden area. Im looking forward to this project more now I can see the whole scheme.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_stats.gifhttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_text.gif




I wonder therefore if West Properties own most of the land in this area and are considering developing this large area along the lines of this masterplan? I hope they do. The area is far too peacemeal, very derelict and down-at-heel at present. It would benefit greatly from some good urban design and a stronger street network.

Looks good.

I like this tower because of the glass spire it makes it stand out and thats a bloody good thing plus it will be tall with that spire on it very nice surprise!

More meaty than I previously thought ;)

looks brutalist

Brutalist is all about rough exposed concrete, 9462. This is all about everybody's favourite 21st Century material...

Terracotta.

I'm not fond of terracotta, but what the heck, it'll be a whole lot better than what's there now.

What are the two towers on either end of swan st?!

What towers? Oh gosh, I didn't notice them. They look interesting.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg

Good find again Sleepfan.
You can't knock that swimming pool though eh?
I must admit I'm a little lost on the masterplan though - I've never really ventured past that second hand book shop (underneath Rambo's tattoo parlour).
Could anyone slap a bit of red paint on it bearing directions?

Here you go Northbeach

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/cottonopolis/northern-quarter-map.jpg

Cheers Cotton - I can picture Skyline Central's location but it's the rest of the masterplan I'm a little unsure of (like that freakin Southern Gateway map which seems to box people).

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg

OK - thought it was swan street you were unsure about. I´ll see if there´s any well known buildings in the area and slap them on in photoshop if I can.

http://www.jonreid.co.uk/stuff/skylineplan.jpg

Think that on the bottom right of the pic you have the express networks development on the corner of Great Ancoats Street and Oldham Road. Further up you can make out the victorian tenements and terraces. Further up Oldham Road just off the map would be the wing yip business centre.

To be honest Im not sure how relevant this materplan is but its interesting none the less - especially if you have one large land owner here intent on developing in a large scale, co-ordinated way.

thanks jon.

Cheers fella's.

Band Waggon - anytin 4 Northy..


http://www.manchester.gov.uk/visitorcentre/images/maps/city_high.gif

...

You little star Monkmed!!
Cheers.

I really hope this masterplan is for real,,Swan St needs some urgent redevelopment for such a busy street the place is a dump

Swan St is a one-way bit of the inner ring road, so I wonder whether traffic will continue to use Addington St (the other way) once this development is finished....?

Found this on the city council website,sounds like West Properties are going to be busy around this area .


Exe/04/97 Disposal of land within South Collyhurst
(Public excluded, Paragraphs 7, 8 and 9, Schedule 12A, Local Government Act 1972)

A report of the Chief Executive and City Treasure was considered in relation to proposals for the development of land and strategy for the area bounded by Oldham Road/Swan Street/Rochdale road and Thompson Street and to report the first phase being the disposal of land at Goulden Street/Mason Street, Collyhurst. The inner part of Collyhurst next to the City Centre and extending either side of Rochdale Road to Livesey Street has a distinctly different character to the rest of the Collyhurst area. Once entirely industrial and commercial it now contains a number of apartment developments and there is substantial developer interest in the area bounded by Rochdale Road, Olham Road and Swan Street.

Development here needs to be driven in a positive manner which addresses the number of property ownerships in the area, in a proactive fashion to deliver high quality and sustainable regeneration.

Discussions have been taking place with West Properties who are promoting a high quality development on a site in the area and are also committed to rolling out further development proposals within the wider South Collyhurst area. They are keen to work with the Council on planning and master planning issues and to formalise working relationships through a development agreement.

This would enable the Council to provide direction and influence as land owner in addition to its role as planning authority. Key principles and terms for the preparation of a master plan and development agreement have now been provisionally agreed and as part of the first phase, agreement has been given for disposal of land at Goulden Street and Mason Street to assist with the development of apartment buildings on this and adjacent sites.

Decision
To confirm the principle of a Development Agreement with West Properties Ltd., and the first phase disposal of land at Goulden Street/Mason Street, Collyhurst and incorporating, if possible, the County Records Office.
To authorise the Head of Valuation and Property Services and City Treasurer, in consultation with the Executive Member for Finance and Human Resources, to approve terms and conclude negotiations for the Development Agreement addressing the wider area of Oldham Street/Swan Street/Rochdale Road and Thompson Street.
To authorise the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Head of Valuation and Property Services and City Treasurer, to approve terms and conclude negotiations for the first phase disposal of land at Goulden Street/Mason Street, Collyhurst.
To authorise the City Solicitor to conclude the legal documentation

So, if Skyline Central is 20 storeys, just how big is that cylinder on the junction of Swan Street and Oldham Road?

http://www.jonreid.co.uk/stuff/skylineplan.jpg

Sexcitin!

very interesting thanks highriser. That piece gives some real credibility to this masterplan now.

We might have our own Rotunda eh?!

This could go in the Northern Quarter thread, the East Manchester thread or the Ancoats Urban Village thread but instead Ill post it here. Reason being this planning app sits right in the middle of that West Properties masterplan I posted the other week.


Ancoats And Clayton Ward 076950/FO/2005/N1 05/10/2005 Land At Junction Of Marshall Street/Oldham Road And Goulden Street New Cross

Erection of a part six, part seven, part eight storey building to form mixed use development comprising 84 residential apartments, and 784 sqm of commercial floorspace at ground floor level comprising, Class A1 (retail), Class A2 (offices), Class A3 (restaurant), Class A4 (pub), Class A5 (hot food take away), Class B1 (offices), Class B8 (storage & distribution), Class D1 (Non residential institutions) and Class D2 (Assembly & Leisure) with provision of car parking at ground and basement level

Heres one of Skyline Central today , its shooting up now

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/upnundernight006.jpg

..edited

Don't we need to decide on a name for this area? I know that sounds daft but is it New Cross or Ludgate Hill or what? Or is it just gonna be classed as The Northern Quarter ?

Historically it's New Cross. Ludgate Hill is a bit to the left of the pcituyre I think. Where the Rotunda type building is a very very nice Edwardian Bank, so little chance to that being knocked down. Also Gtr Manchester County record office is (I think) listed so they'll not be able to knock that down (our county record office is moving to the other side of Swan Street soon, but I still don't think they'll be able to demolish the old building).

All in all though, it's a great little area, right in the centre and with a strict grid plan. Could be very promising!!

CALL IT NEW CROSS!!

..edited

Today
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic9.jpg

SC with old man
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic10.jpg

Looks more like a bouncer than an old man ;). This building seems to make quite an impression from some angles, lets hope it looks as good as that Co-op sculpture.

(Yes 100 posts, double figures at last)

I got the brochure through for this one yesterday, and they are set to be doing lots of water features and landscaping at the base. Looks like it will be really nice and hopefully set the standard for the parcel of land bounded by Oldham Rd & Rochdale Rd.

Its nice to know the developers will be taking the effort to actually make the are surrounding the tower look good. Does it show how much space/green areas there will actually be around the building?

Not really, I don't think that there will be all that much, but what there is looks good. I especially like the water features, for me there's a shortage of those in our city and it's a definite step up from what is happening on the opposite side of Rochdale Rd.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_1.jpg





It looks to be a good sized pocket park created between Skyline Central and Goulden Square. Im not 100% sure if both developments are being built simultaneously. Can anybody confirm?

There are more details and renders below, together with the West Properties masterplan all of which can be seen on post #11 and #12.


http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_text.gif

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_2.jpghttp://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/gs_3.jpg

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg



All taken from the architects website http://www.jacobswebber.com

Skyline Central today
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic11.jpg
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic12.jpg
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic13.jpg
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic14.jpg
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/707SkylineCentral_pic15.jpg

Nice high density development... just how I like 'em!

Love that next to last photo. Do I spot the town hall spire in front of Beetham in that said photo?

Looks like it will eventually block out Beetham from that angle though, when it tops out.

Couple of good pics there CAW cheers, this and Tempus are really making a bigger impact on the skyline than i thought

Looks like it will eventually block out Beetham from that angle though, when it tops out.

No, the section of building in front of Beetham from that angle is as high as it is going to get.

Sorry guys but that banner of Manchester is awful

^ What has that go to do with Skyline Central?

Sorry guys but that banner of Manchester is awful
Take your spam elsewhere next time...

touchy you mustn't be proud of it

proud of what? what are you talking about?

All i said was that i thought the banner of Manchester wasn't very good. i got the impression from above comments that they thought that this was just some scouser slagging us off which it isn't because some of my best mates are mancs but hay ho

great?

But it's completely the wrong thread to say it in. This thread is about Skyline Central, this is not the Banner Opinions Thread, you've sent it off topic. Have some etiquette dude. Anymore off topic posts will be deleted. Nobody gives a shit if you're scouse, loiner or brummie, you're fucking up one of our project threads with spam.

When a mod gets here, can he delete all these posts, including this one?

Please?

Taken today.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture255.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture278.jpg

Thanks for all these pics jrb. Your feet must ache!

Skyline Central is making a big impression now

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/december13th008.jpg
And from Corporation St
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/december13th015.jpg

A bit fatter than I expected.

Making an appearance from Ashton New, or possibly Old, Road.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/caw123/PC060024copy.jpg

Cheers for them caw.

I went to Brussels last year and I was amazed at how much it reminded me of Manchester. To the north, there is a 'skyscraper' cluster (of similair build and quality of CIS), with an older/student hostel/cool area right next to it. Its just like Shudehill and the Northern Quarter.

Im trying, very badly, to put a few imaginary renders on this image. Pointless, I know, but can you imagine walking down Miller st being surrounded bya load of Beetham quality towers. WOW. Its the only space available to ever do it in Manchester.

Feel free anyone to play around with the image.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b184/mezmail/cluster.jpg

Those big spaces are just asking for massive Skyscrapers.

Could easily fit 5-6 beasts in that area :cheers:





Or FC United's New Stadium......................just kidding Andysimo

Remember that rendering of those three brownish apartment blocks located next to the CIS about a year ago or so? Is that render still floating about?

We could'nt work out where those apartment blocks were going to be located. It may have been that site?

Hopefully those plans have been revised and we will get a taller development? That site is huge.

What i dont understand is why no1 has ever built there

No idea where to find them Jerb but I remember them. It was some kind of design competition staged by CIS for visionary development on the empty carparks. The one image we were shown of this had 3 or 4 midrise apartment blocks that weren't much different from St George's/Spectrum pap.

They weren't actual plans for anything though. Just somebody with a pen and a £20,000 cheque to win.

No idea where to find them Jerb but I remember them. It was some kind of design competition staged by CIS for visionary development on the empty carparks. The one image we were shown of this had 3 or 4 midrise apartment blocks that weren't much different from St George's/Spectrum pap.

They weren't actual plans for anything though. Just somebody with a pen and a £20,000 cheque to win.

Spot on as usual dgnr8! Caw might have that render still?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture156.jpg

Thanks for the picture mate...Looking good...

hope cladding turns out good...Fingers crossed

That wood effect bullshit they have going up on the bottom floors looks terrible close up, like woof-effect wallpaper has been plastered on. I hope that's some temporary thing and nothing to do with what we'll actually see externally.

Surely that aint the final exterior facade because it doesn't go over the floorplates.. It seems be sat slightly inside the floors??? Maybe I'm wrong mind.

Skyline Central + cranes appearing over Ancoats.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture013.jpg

thats such a lovely retail park :puke:

There loads of shitty building's around this development that need bulldozing.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0611.jpg

sorry about this wrong thread :)

Done it now!

There loads of shitty building's around this development that need bulldozing.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0611.jpg

There is a lot of shit round here. Ripe for demolition and some more high density developments. One good building (one police station I think) burnt down last year. Not far from here down Shudehill (opposite Icon24 and adjacent to the new Interchange) is a nice looking Edwardian bldg. There is scaffoldind there. Anyone know what's happening? It would be a shame to demolish this.

There loads of shitty building's around this development that need bulldozing.



plus some nice little reminders of the past

http://freake.demon.co.uk/sscpics/man092.jpg

plus some nice little reminders of the past

http://freake.demon.co.uk/sscpics/man092.jpg

Have to say architecture-wise this has little merit. I guess we should keep it for historical reasons, but only because it is the only ragged school left in Gtr Manchester, otherwise I'd have no problem if they knocked this down.

Lets not forget that West Properties (developers of Skyline Central) own most of the land in this district and there is this indicative masterplan floating around.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg

Lets not forget that West Properties (developers of Skyline Central) own most of the land in this district and there is this indicative masterplan floating around.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/add_1.jpg

Let's hope it all comes off like the plans. Nice high density blocks on a gridplan.Yes please.

IMHO that Sharp Street Ragged School is a mundane (or even ugly) cheap brick/slate reminder of yesteryear. I'd be unhappy if it ended up spoiling a beautiful new 21st Century district because somebody wanted to impose some "heritage" on everybody else. OK, if the developer want to keep it and smarten it up, that's up to them. But I'd be pissed off If they got their arm twisted.

Yeah, a plaque and a photo would suffice for a 'ragged school'. Pull the fucker down. At least the reclaimed bricks and other materials can be used by some rich gets for their 'projects'.
Ironically people who would be quite 'amused' at the very concept of 'ragged schools', and surprised that they ever existed at all.

If it really is the last Ragged School in Manchester then it should be preserved.

Take this quote from the Pevsener Guide:

"In neighbouring ANGEL MEADOW, one of the most notable survivals is in Sharp Street: the former Ragged School, founded in 1853. It was built in 1869, an early and remarkably intact example of a purpose-built ragged school which is said to retain a little-altered interior with a ground floor partition which divided the reception class of wild street children from those who had been subdued!"

Also sounds like there may be restrictions on its development:

From the MEN in 2004:

"THE family of a benefactor who set up a refuge for poor children in Victorian Manchester has vowed to fight plans to turn the building into a business centre.

Sharp Street Ragged School, in Ancoats, served as a sanctuary for under-privileged boys for more than 100 years.

The school and the road it stood on were named after Christopher Sharp, a philanthropist who set up the refuge in the 1850s.

His descendents have been horrified to learn that the listed building has been sold by the Dean and canons of Manchester Cathedral for £250,000.

Brothers Charles and Herbert Sharp-Sacanni have written to the Charity Commission - which oversaw the sale to London-based developers Rowan Ramsay - to determine whether the deal is legal.

They believe the building should be redeveloped only for use as a charitable organisation, according to the terms by which it was handed over to the church by their family.

Charles, 31, a recruitment worker, from Stockport, said: "The building has been a vital part of Manchester's heritage for 150 years and I believe it should continue to serve some charitable purpose."

A Charity Commission spokeman said the decision to sell had been taken in the "best interest of the charity" and because "no charitable purpose was being carried out in the building and it was falling into disrepair".

Ken Riley, Dean of Manchester Cathedral, said money from the sale would be used for "charitable causes".

No one from Rowan Ramsay was available for comment."

Like I said, it's either remembered with a plaque and a photo or it will just perish. Without regular maintenance it will dilapidate so fast that it will become a danger to the public and will have to be pulled down.

If Sharp's decendents feel so stronly about it, why don't they buy it and turn it into what their progenitor wanted for it's (continued) use.

When beautiful and ancient churches are converted into apartments and bleeding night-clubs, and old banks into fancy restaurants, what chance does an oul school-house have?

We can't hang on to everything, especially with the price of commercial real-estate.

^^^ true

Like I said, it's either remembered with a plaque and a photo or it will just perish. Without regular maintenance it will dilapidate so fast that it will become a danger to the public and will have to be pulled down.

If Sharp's decendents feel so stronly about it, why don't they buy it and turn it into what their progenitor wanted for it's (continued) use.

When beautiful and ancient churches are converted into apartments and bleeding night-clubs, and old banks into fancy restaurants, what chance does an oul school-house have?

We can't hang on to everything, especially with the price of commercial real-estate.

True * 2

I'm not necessarily saying it should be retained, but if it is the last such school in Manchester we should think very carefully before demolishing it. It is a very important piece of social history. Like it or not there are many, many abandoned curches around Manchester but this would appear to be the last such school.

It could certainly be converted to flats or offices by the looks of it.

Also I fell it's a little harsh to be criticising the Sharp family after all the good they did for Manchester and the fact that they originally donated the building to the church.

If an open debate is had on the issue and it is decided that the best thing to do is to knock it down, then fine.

What I don't like is what seems like a behind the scenes stitch up between the church, the devlopers and the Charities Commission.

I love all the modern development going on in Manchester, but it would be nice to retain some of our Victorian heritage relatively unscathed. Particularly in an area as historically important as Ancoats.

I'm not necessarily saying it should be retained, but if it is the last such school in Manchester we should think very carefully before demolishing it. It is a very important piece of social history. Like it or not there are many, many abandoned curches around Manchester but this would appear to be the last such school.

It could certainly be converted to flats or offices by the looks of it.

Also I fell it's a little harsh to be criticising the Sharp family after all the good they did for Manchester and the fact that they originally donated the building to the church.

If an open debate is had on the issue and it is decided that the best thing to do is to knock it down, then fine.

What I don't like is what seems like a behind the scenes stitch up between the church, the devlopers and the Charities Commission.

I love all the modern development going on in Manchester, but it would be nice to retain some of our Victorian heritage relatively unscathed. Particularly in an area as historically important as Ancoats.


I think you're right about the Sharp family. They've done lots of charitable works for Mcr and no one need criticise them for not doing more about preserving this building - I guess they've done more than enough in the past. I just think that the building itself is of little merit. History books and archives will preserve the work of the charitable schools. If the building was better then I'd say convert into apartments and put a plaque up (you could still put a plaque up on the new building). If this was a bluecoats school in say an attractive Georgian style, I'd want it preserved, but it's nothing. It's like some people want to preserve smokestacks. Why? If a building is useless and ugly, then preserve it in pictures in history books, don't scar modern Manchester with nasty buildings from the past. If the old building has architectural merit then it should be spruced up and preserved.

I'm not saying this building is awful. It's OK, but of little real merit and shouldn't hold up development of taller modern buildings. The fact it is the last ragged school has some historical merit, but not enough to hold up development IMHO.

I agree with skymann. Well said skymann. I feel it's wrong to preserve an ugly/mundane/depressing building that shackles our bright beautiful 21st Century future. The whole notion of preserving the grim parts of the past because it's somebody's sentimental idea of "heritage" is anathema to me. If somebody wants to buy this Ragged School and do it up, that's up to them. Fine. But not if they're those vociferous high-minded heritage types who want to saddle our beautiful future with their ugly past and want us to pay for it.

Now this is the sort of building that's worth keeping:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/caw123/P1030027copy.jpg

Tart it up a bit and hey presto, a city centre Primary School (something desperately needed and won't require finding new land).

Besides, it looks like a cat. How can you want it demolished?

Well said dgnr8,

that building has character, who wants to live in some North American replica where all the buildings are pulled down every 30 years. The new and the old if well planned can live perfectly well side by side.

Have we learnt nothing from the 1960's where so much was pulled down in the name of progress.

All this building needs is a clean up, 60 years of car fuems and dirt have not done it any favours, but you would be amased Farsight how it would look if it was cleaned up.

Alot of the pavements and roads in manchester need replacing...

You only have to look at the quality of tarmac used on London roads to see what a dramatic improvement it would make, if the same was replicated up here.....

Look down oxford road...Not good atall... :(

that building has character, who wants to live in some North American replica where all the buildings are pulled down every 30 years. The new and the old if well planned can live perfectly well side by side. Have we learnt nothing from the 1960's where so much was pulled down in the name of progress. All this building needs is a clean up, 60 years of car fumes and dirt have not done it any favours, but you would be amazed Farsight how it would look if it was cleaned up. Nobody's got a problem problem with old and new Zim. We've really learned a lot since the 1960s. And yeah, it would look better done up. But IMHO it'll still be mundane. It'll be "yeah right OK" at best, and that's it.

The thing is, it's just not right for sentimental backward-looking people to demand that forward-looking people divert their energy from building a bright new future, and instead shell out to keep something mundane. Especially when the reason is that it's a reminder of a crap "heritage" past that a lot of people didn't like and want to forget. Where will it all end? In some pickled suffocating museum piece filled with "quaint" terraced houses and mill chimneys, darling. No thanks.

If you want to keep the Ragged School, you buy it. You clean it up. Don't saddle me with it, don't blight my bright future with your dark past. And most of all, don't expect me to pay for it.

I could almost imagine Farsights last post being read out a planning meeting in late 1960s Manchester, convened to discuss the approval of the marvellous new Hulme crescents.

If you see everything in terms of shiny new buildings, then maybe it is mundane. But I'd rather think that if all you have is shiny new buildings, they by definition become mundane themselves.

mancheter is the worst , most depressing 'stuck in the sixties' town i have ever been in and guys dont kid yourself, you dont have no skyline, glasgow does, you dont!!

Chorltonred: Hulme Crescents have nothing to do with this. And this is definitely not some matter of seeing everything in terms of shiny new buildings. It obviously isn't, because I posted up a picture of an older building that I thought was worth preserving.

What it is a matter of, is whether our city is beautiful, and presents a heartening uplifting experience for us and our children. I happen to think that a mixture of old and new is more beautiful than all new or all old. But I also know that when it comes to beautiful buildings and streets we all have our subjective judgements about what we like and what should be kept or treasured. We'll never be able to agree on everything. But we can debate, and hopefully strike a good balance.

What I think is the wrong balance is to start pushing for the retention of mundane or ugly buildings purely for the sake of heritage. Most ordinary people in the North West want to see the back of mill chimneys and terraced streets because they're cheap flat brick and tile, and are an unwelcome reminder of a grim poor past. I think the Ragged School falls into this category. Like I said, if you want to buy it and do it up, no problem. But don't demand that somebody else pays for it.

I want a bright future, for me and my children. And I don't want it despoiled by relics of the grim past just to remind me that the past was grim.

You don't half talk a lot of hypocritical shite.

I neither think this building is without character, nor when you look at what is going up around there, likely to be replaced with anything better. The standard of new build on Ludgate Hill is probably the worst of any area in the city centre. It's not as though keeping this building will prevent the building of Beetham II, or anything.

I also think that the former custodians of this building, will have acted in their own and thus the charitys best interest, so whilst I appreciate this does not always follow, I wouldn't have though a Dean would have much to gain form a dodgy deal??? That being the case, the building has been sold and should be converted. There is no need, or commercial sense in creating a millstone for tax-payers as Farsight said., but also no need to knock it down, unless it is replaced by something significantly better- so i'm with ChorltonRed there and others.

A plaque too would be suitable. If anybody has been down to Angel Meadows recently- since it was done up, there is an information board relating to the park and immediate buildings. I for one found it interesting!

Alot of the pavements and roads in manchester need replacing...

You only have to look at the quality of tarmac used on London roads to see what a dramatic improvement it would make, if the same was replicated up here.....

Look down oxford road...Not good atall... :(
Liverpool is currently having its 'big dig' done. Maybe Manchester will follow suit?

You don't half talk a lot of hypocritical shite. Aw, piss off you stupid kid.

Intelligent and witty retort. I AM DEFEATED.

What I'm saying is, you have the audacity to slag off anybody who likes a bit of heritage and then start piping on about people like 'me' are potentially ruining the future for your kids by wishing for the odd building to be preserved.

Yet we all took a similar viewpoint on the Maths Tower and we were Philistines for wishing death on that.

So come on Farsight, either definitively set out your viewpoint on Manchester history or just fuck off too-ing and fro-ing to suit your personal agenda.

You stupid old cunt.

Look, I can be witty and intelligent too!

What I think is the wrong balance is to start pushing for the retention of mundane or ugly buildings purely for the sake of heritage. Most ordinary people in the North West want to see the back of mill chimneys and terraced streets because they're cheap flat brick and tile, and are an unwelcome reminder of a grim poor past. I think the Ragged School falls into this category. Like I said, if you want to buy it and do it up, no problem. But don't demand that somebody else pays for it.



To be honest, if I had the money that is just the sort of Grand Designs type project I would go for with a clean up on the out side and if possible repair and repaint those window frames married with a complete refurbishment for the interior.

Re mill chimneys and terraced streets, I am saddened by your description of them as places people "want to see the back of " as it does reflect an opinion held by a significant number of the population including the Department of the Deputy PrimeMinister. I say sadly because whilst everyone says there is a housing shortage they are being highly disingenuous, what they really mean is there is a housing shortage of 3 or 4 bedroom shoebox houses with 3 bathrooms etc.

One of the reasons I like Stoke is because of it's old chimneys and streets and with the right management could easily be turned around, creating a place where the buildings have soul, cars don't dominate and people have a sense of belonging - OK I admit it sounds a bit pie in the sky (and I would be the first to admit the place is a shit hole) but I do think it is sad when people criticise good solid buildings like the ones you mentioned. Places like Manchester should be proud of it's industrial past, not ashamed.

That would be a worthy thing to do, Zim. My own house is something of an old ugly duckling that's been made beautiful again. And I know what you mean about the housing shortage. IMHO there's an issue in that the government are contributing to economic activity in the London region at the expense of other parts of the country, when they should be pushing the other way. But it isn't just the government. It's people too. They want greenery and supermarkets and cars. And trams and trains and restaurants and bars and nightlife and facilities and pride and beauty. Yes, they want character and soul, a sense of belonging, a place to walk, water. And yes, old buildings can be refurbished and made beautiful again. Yes, heritage and history enrich the mix. But we don't want to over egg the pudding for the sake of heritage alone. Because people want to live in the 21st Century, not the industrial past.

Farsight

It is a relatively small single building of historical interest. It's retention and renevation would 'blight' nothing.

Personally I quite like it, and think it would be rather more 'uplifting' for the people of Manchester to be aware of the efforts people like the Sharp family and others put into the betterment of Manchester than to walk past another identikit modern apartment block that would almost certainly get plonked in that particular location.

I was only taking the piss out of your rather histrionic response to a discussion over the merits (and demerits) of preserving one building.

You make valid points, but in a such an extreme manner that you simply alienate those that you are trying to convince.

And as a sentinmental backward looking person I quite like the odd mill chimney too. :)

The smoking baby has hit on summat. It started off as a school for poor street urchins, orphans and 'wild inner-city kids' So renovate it and let it see out the remainder of its life as a school for rich yuppies kids, orphans and 'wild inner-city chavs' Everyone wins!

Hope this helps..... :cheers:

Farsight - This is England, everyone wants to live in the past.

To put it into some perspective, I work in an office on Great Bridgewater Street. The buildings next door (Bridgewater Quay or some such shite) are new built flat red brick flats. They have an odd shaped roof, but they're bland. Many of the newly built residential blocks in Town, Hulme, Salford Quays, Picadilly etc share this hideous 'swollen Barratt homes' aesthetic. If it was a choice between a bland old building and a decent new building then we'd all most likely opt for the new build. In most cases this isn't a very realistic scenario though is it? So between the Ragged school, or even that old works behind Skyline Central, and something new but bland I'd take boring and old anyday, because although it isn't beautiful it has some character and it gives the city an ambience that new brick or terracota don't.

Practically I understand that these buildings wouldn't make good luxury flats, but there are only so many people who can want and afford urban luxury anyway. So give them to the artists, the bands, the embarrasingly earnest neo-hippies and others who might serve to make the city a more vibrant place. Wouldn't you rather that Manchester was interesting rather than the glass shod yuppie ghetto that knocking down all but 'the best' old architecture for flats would create? Your prejudice against 'heritage' is blinding you to the real blights on our urban landscape. The retail parks, trading estates, insubstantial corrugated warehouses and fenced off breakers yards that surround the city like post industrial buboes. There are plenty enough of those to be demolished before we start on the buildings above.

And with regards to chimneys, terraces and factories, is it not better that we keep some vestiges of our industrial landscape, as a reminder of how poorly the industrial revolution served its workforce and as a message not to be so inconsiderate again, rather than staring ahead with such determination that we stumble into the same mistakes again?

Glad I posted the pic of Sharp St School, not a bad debate for us lot. As for my views on it, bland but solid, in the right hands it would make quite a good conversion, hopefully better than the CWS Tobacco Warehouse next door.
What I do find interesting is the amount of vitriol poured on mill chimneys, and other remnants of our industrial past. Tall chimneys were surely one of the first efforts to improve the lot of the working man, there is no practical reason to make them so tall and some damn good economic reasons not to. I often wonder if the typical portrayal of the tyranical mill owner exploiting his workforce for poverty pay is not just a left over from the socialist movement of last century. If you look around you find they gifted their workers schools, churches, hospitals, libraries and parks. I am not saying that industrialisation was a joy for the workers, it was most certainly not, what I am saying is that buildings like the Sharp St School show that the industrialists of the time sometimes gave something back instead of buying a Premiership football team or island in the Caribean </ wine fuelled ramble>

Guys, I don't have a problem with one mundane old building. But it's something of a test case for a bigger looming issue. The issue is people who want to impose their left-leaning sentimental industrial-heritage vision on the poor saps who have to live in the dump, and make somebody else pay for it.

Chorltonred, if we were talking about something in Chorlton I'd cut you more slack. But I suspect as a sentimental backward looking person I quite like the odd mill chimney too wouldn't be so droll if we were talking about Chorlton-cum-Hardy.

And Che, you ask a question: with regards to chimneys, terraces and factories, is it not better that we keep some vestiges of our industrial landscape, as a reminder of how poorly the industrial revolution served its workforce. My answer is: Not if it shackles the sons and daughters of those workers to a blot on the landscape. Where do you live by the way?

And dj, you say: I often wonder if the typical portrayal of the tyranical mill owner exploiting his workforce for poverty pay is not just a left over from the socialist movement of last century. And I say that's oh so easy to say if you live in... Knutsford.

Catch my drift yet?

Alot of the pavements and roads in manchester need replacing...

You only have to look at the quality of tarmac used on London roads to see what a dramatic improvement it would make, if the same was replicated up here.....

Look down oxford road...Not good atall... :(

Got to agree, the pavements around Manchester are a disgrace! Here in Oz careful attention and replacement is given to paths and roads.

If they did save it they could turn it into a School Museum, done right something like that could draw people to that area. Even Farsight said if its "worth" saving to save it but do something useful with it, museums are popular. Another good suggestion was dgnr8's city centre primary school, it's only speculation that if it was bulldozed and replaced; that what replaces it will be of more benefit to the city and in particular that community, how do we know that the new residents around that part of town don't want something old but quaint,properly functioning and adding to and benefiting the community? we don't, they might. Just has to be done right.

Sounds fair enough roly. If the developer, the local community, council planners, heritage interests, and the public at large all favoured a School Museum, the situation would be absolutely cut and dried. The problems comes when they don't all agree. I think there's some sort opinion weighting to apply here. Something like developers 30%, local community 25%, council planners 20%, heritage interests 10%, and public at large 15%. I'm sure there's other ways to cut the cake, but you get the idea.

http://freake.demon.co.uk/sscpics/man092.jpg

well seen as non of us has actually gone and taken a poll, its difficult to imply any numbers. A bit of forsight from all parties and theres no reason why something constructive can't be done with that building.

That's a fantastic little building with it's lovely and interesting tall romanesque windows and it's good proportions and it's little devil horns. And the history, christ it's got and important history that we need to preserve - if you don't want to preserve it for your own benefit just think long term and capitalist, this sort of thing has a growing dollar tourism value. People will come to Manchester to see the origins of industrialisation and early socialism, it simply must be kept.

I don't think people should think in terms fo this should be a skyscraper, I think it's better to think rather how great this thing would look surrounded by skyscrapers. Now that's something Dubai and the likes will never have and we have the opportunity to build here. Genuine history and genuine hope and competativeness in the future side by side.

It'll probably get struck by lightning and burn down, roly. Act of God and all that. Whatever happens, I hope it doesn't set some precedent that then hampers the new life being breathed into the area.

Anyhow, what's cooking with Skyline Central anybody?

Alot of the pavements and roads in manchester need replacing...

You only have to look at the quality of tarmac used on London roads to see what a dramatic improvement it would make, if the same was replicated up here.....

Look down oxford road...Not good atall... :(

Completely agree, the pavements and road surfaces are terrible for a city centre. Along with this I feel improvements to the street furniture are important. The streets lights in some areas of Manchester look a real mess, a lack of consistency. But yes, virtually all the roads need resurfacing.

And Che, you ask a question: with regards to chimneys, terraces and factories, is it not better that we keep some vestiges of our industrial landscape, as a reminder of how poorly the industrial revolution served its workforce. My answer is: Not if it shackles the sons and daughters of those workers to a blot on the landscape. Where do you live by the way?

Well at the moment I'm living at my Mum's (because I'm impoverished and saving up) which is a fairly modest 3 bed semi on the Baguley/Brooklands side of Timperley, which I will accept is not in the middle of mill country. However I lived until recently in Kentish Town (North London). A mixed area of large townhouses, small industrial terraces, a vast council estate, industrial units and old factories, and it was reaonably pleasant (except the high street which was a state). The mixture of these different building types (none of them stunning) served to produce a pleasant area by virtue of their contrast and this drew a variety of people in. My flatmates Dad said that he'd consider retiring into the city (from a big house in Caversham Reading) because he liked the mix of the area.

I'm not suggesting anyone's son or daughter be shackled to anything, but I doubt that many of these buildings you so despise couldn't be turned into decent housing or offices and that then, if they had more modern or interesting architecture scattered among them the areas would become still more attractive. We should be trying to get a larger and more varied community back into these central areas (as has to an extent happened in London) rather than repeating the post war mistakes of planning by class. If heritage floats the middle class boat then so be it. Do you believe that someone who lived in Ancoats or Old Trafford would rather not live in a relatively crime free, well looked after area with the quality public services that middle class residents with their money and political influence bring if they had to look at a factory building? No.

In a mixed area there would be something for those who liked old, new, modernist, industrial, art deco, post modern and any other style that someone wants to build in. This to me sounds much better than either Moss Side or Timperley, with their street after street of the same old style. If a dull old building was blocking something new, exciting and of high quality then of course it should go, but there is no virtue inherent in novelty. You will just have to accept that different people like different things, and that everyone will be happier if we take a more pluralist attitude that attempts to provide something for all preferences.

Che, it's fine having a nice mix of old/new/highrise/lowrise in suburbia, in fact it's great and makes for a better residential 'experience'.

However, when we move into an inner city district where land is at a premium, a whole different set of rules apply.

Manchester has one of the most expensive cost/area ratios in the UK which is the whole raison d'etre of having to build tall. Without picking on the 'ragged school', if a three storey Victorian school-house is taking up a footprint large enough to accomodate a highrise, then unless it's pre Georgian, Elizabethan, medieval or Roman then forget it, it's gotta come down. There's more than enough much better examples of Victorian architecture left in the city.

We all too easily forget the air space when it comes to the economics of real-estate. Plus if we can put in a tall building it accomplishes quite a lot, firstly it frees up additional land for alternative uses, ie. parks, gardens etc. and secondly it negates the need for cities to encroach on the countryside of which we all hold so dear.

Land cannot be replaced.

Build tall.

That's why we frequent this website.

Che, it's fine having a nice mix of old/new/highrise/lowrise in suburbia, in fact it's great and makes for a better residential 'experience'.

However, when we move into an inner city district where land is at a premium, a whole different set of rules apply.

Manchester has one of the most expensive cost/area ratios in the UK which is the whole raison d'etre of having to build tall. Without picking on the 'ragged school', if a three storey Victorian school-house is taking up a footprint large enough to accomodate a highrise, then unless it's pre Georgian, Elizabethan, medieval or Roman then forget it, it's gotta come down. There's more than enough much better examples of Victorian architecture left in the city.

We all too easily forget the air space when it comes to the economics of real-estate. Plus if we can put in a tall building it accomplishes quite a lot, firstly it frees up additional land for alternative uses, ie. parks, gardens etc. and secondly it negates the need for cities to encroach on the countryside of which we all hold so dear.

Land cannot be replaced.

Build tall.

That's why we frequent this website.

Deja Vous.....Newham Docklands,Lime House Link & STOLport = Canary Wharf........Say no more!!!!!!!!!!

And dj, you say: I often wonder if the typical portrayal of the tyranical mill owner exploiting his workforce for poverty pay is not just a left over from the socialist movement of last century. And I say that's oh so easy to say if you live in... Knutsford.

Does living in an area I assume you perceive as affluent somehow invalidate my observation. Mill owners, however much your politics teaches you to hate them gave their workers houses that were of the time good quality, education in the form of schools and libraries and recreation in the form of parks and gardens. Beetham and Allied have made millions out of Manchester and not even bought a single library book

Does living in an area I assume you perceive as affluent somehow invalidate my observation. Mill owners, however much your politics teaches you to hate them gave their workers houses that were of the time good quality, education in the form of schools and libraries and recreation in the form of parks and gardens. Beetham and Allied have made millions out of Manchester and not even bought a single library book
And Hitler did a lot of fine things for Germany before he decided to try and conquer the world.....
My politics has taught me to hate him though. ;)

DEL

Che, it's fine having a nice mix of old/new/highrise/lowrise in suburbia, in fact it's great and makes for a better residential 'experience'.

However, when we move into an inner city district where land is at a premium, a whole different set of rules apply.

Manchester has one of the most expensive cost/area ratios in the UK which is the whole raison d'etre of having to build tall. Without picking on the 'ragged school', if a three storey Victorian school-house is taking up a footprint large enough to accomodate a highrise, then unless it's pre Georgian, Elizabethan, medieval or Roman then forget it, it's gotta come down. There's more than enough much better examples of Victorian architecture left in the city.

We all too easily forget the air space when it comes to the economics of real-estate. Plus if we can put in a tall building it accomplishes quite a lot, firstly it frees up additional land for alternative uses, ie. parks, gardens etc. and secondly it negates the need for cities to encroach on the countryside of which we all hold so dear.

Land cannot be replaced.

Build tall.

That's why we frequent this website.

If we needed to build tall everywhere then this website would be a damnsite less popular, because people could look at giant architecture from their bedroom windows and not those microsoft provide. In the grand scheme of things, while towers are nice, dramatic and impressive, a dense, quality low level urban environment would be a most benefit to the city than a legion of giant glass pillars. The question isn't should we let this building go if we get a better offer, but should we actively encourage someone to knock it down. In my opinion, when we have so many uglier, unconvertable sprawling sheds chocking the city it is gettting rid of those that is a priority.

Che: thanks for your lengthy reply. I do agree that a mixture of old and new is better than all new or all old. I really don't despise old buildings. I like nothing better than old stone and mirror glass, tile and wood and render and tudor and brick and clay and slate. It's a delight to the eye and warms the heart, the richness and depth, the sense of history. I really do agree with what you say, a rich tapestry does make an area more interesting, and much better place to be. But the devil is in the detail, and we differ because I put beauty ahead of history.

dj: living in an affluent area doesn't invalidate your observations. And it isn't a matter of my politics teaching me to hate the old Mill owners. My views stem from my childhood experience of living in a depressing dump that people wanted to move away from. You might see some old mill as cherished heritage, I see it as a ugly reminder of crap times past. So I really don't think it's fair for people in leafy suburbs like Knutsford or Chorlton or Timperley to impose industrial heritage on the people who don't. This Ragged School is one of those "devil in the detail" cases we'll never all agree on. It isn't terribly ugly, and it isn't gorgeously beautiful. So if the developers and locals want to keep it that's fine by me, and if they don't that's fine too.

Just thought I would chuck this into the OLD/NEW debate. It depends what happens to the old, and whether the two can live side by side really... been a lot of good press about one of these.

I know which city I would rather live in.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e50/b4mmy/old_new.jpg

Both pictures look pretty good to me, b4mmy. The old church in Brum looks nice, and that new Selfridges is something special. The Royal Exchange in Manchester looks lovely, and Market Street looks good too. Sure they don't all "relate" so well, but if everything had to, we'd get no progress.

Maybe the debate we've been having is because it shouldn't be about OLD/NEW, but instead should be about BEAUTIFUL/UGLY.

Maybe the debate we've been having is because it shouldn't be about OLD/NEW, but instead should be about BEAUTIFUL/UGLY.


Which is pointless, Mr Sight, as you think stuff like the Maths Tower's beautiful. Heh, it's beautiful. Not it's not. Yes it is. You're blind, 60's concrete towers are are well sexy. If you say so. I say they are, that's all that matters.

That'd be a brilliant debate.

I dunno, I think it should be about syntax and context myself.

If you think that school looks dodgy or great, then go to Florence. The inner (protected) part is a bit of shambles and all narrow streets and sometimes a bit claustrophobic. BUT because its all like that, and its all looked after, and its CLEAN, and tactile and colourful... its possibly one of the most wonderful cities in Europe.

I love the old stuff, and I love the mills and the chimneys and all that. But we seem to build em, and knock em down with little regard for the future, or the society living around them... Regeneration is the name of the game. Chuck the new stuff in of course - we need it, but try and show a bit of consideration, and look after the old folks... they too looked young and beautiful once.

Just thought I would chuck this into the OLD/NEW debate. It depends what happens to the old, and whether the two can live side by side really... been a lot of good press about one of these.

I know which city I would rather live in.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e50/b4mmy/old_new.jpg

The new Bullring is a great building compare to the 60s hellhole it replaced.
I think the The Royal Exchange is a much better building than St Martin's. But the Bullring is a much better building than the Arndale.

...syntax and context...

Che, it's fine having a nice mix of old/new/highrise/lowrise in suburbia, in fact it's great and makes for a better residential 'experience'.

However, when we move into an inner city district where land is at a premium, a whole different set of rules apply.

Manchester has one of the most expensive cost/area ratios in the UK which is the whole raison d'etre of having to build tall. Without picking on the 'ragged school', if a three storey Victorian school-house is taking up a footprint large enough to accomodate a highrise, then unless it's pre Georgian, Elizabethan, medieval or Roman then forget it, it's gotta come down. There's more than enough much better examples of Victorian architecture left in the city.

We all too easily forget the air space when it comes to the economics of real-estate. Plus if we can put in a tall building it accomplishes quite a lot, firstly it frees up additional land for alternative uses, ie. parks, gardens etc. and secondly it negates the need for cities to encroach on the countryside of which we all hold so dear.

Land cannot be replaced.

Build tall.

That's why we frequent this website.

Lets get colonial..... Knock down China town & build Hong Kong!!!!!! and Manchester will reach new heights!!!!!!!!!!!!

[QUOTE=b4mmy]Just thought I would chuck this into the OLD/NEW debate. It depends what happens to the old, and whether the two can live side by side really... been a lot of good press about one of these.

I know which city I would rather live in.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e50/b4mmy/old_new.jpg[/QUOTE

]
I was born in Brum & vowed never to return....Why you ask....That F'cking Bull Ring Centre.......But now they have pulled it down & replaced it with Selfridges (Thats the Pretty building with Compact Discs stuck all over it....I think Richard Branson was the developer)....I might give a quick look!!!!!

He he he, I'm sure Manchesters quite ready for a Hong Kong style makeover quite yet Dan.

Which is pointless, Mr Sight, as you think stuff like the Maths Tower's beautiful. Heh, it's beautiful. Not it's not. Yes it is. You're blind, 60's concrete towers are are well sexy. If you say so. I say they are, that's all that matters. That'd be a brilliant debate.

I get it. 90% of people like some building but it's pointless talking about it because you say it's a heap of shit. Aw fuck off you arrogant git. You've definitely got nothing to add to the debate.

Now call him a child, quickly before he gets away!

I get it. 90% of people like some building but it's pointless talking about it because you say it's a heap of shit. Aw fuck off you arrogant git. You've definitely got nothing to add to the debate.

CALM DOWN..... !!!!!!! Please refrain from swearing .....It shold be said as either F'ck off or F off or better still "Go Fornicate"!!!!!!!!!!!

I think what Manchetser is Wonderful might have been getting, is that 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' and isn't something that can be necessarily right, or wrong. It's also worth considering that even if everybody else disagrees with you it doesn't mean your wrong. A bit of diplomacy/ choice of words always helps though guys, as things can come across differently when read, as to when typed :)

We've hit on a decent topic here though. As it stands, Ragged School should stay (IMO), as it's symbolic of the area and represents the local heritage. I also quite like it and think it's much better than any of the new build around there, from a purely physical point of view.

Additionally (and i'm not expecting much support in my choice- this is merely an example), I feel that the former Employment Centre on Aytoun St has some nice Art Deco. merit and although it needed a 'good scrub' and a bit of TLC, and whilst it's former usage didn't hold much appeal, feel that it is far from the city's worst building. However, if it is to make way for Albany Tower as we all hope, then I think in this case we can afford the sacrifice. That's I cannot forsee, will happen on Sharp St.

I too feel this 'school' should stay. With a bit of care and attention it could be converted into pretty much anything, even a new school! The former employment centre which you speak of does have a art deco feel to it and I don't really think its as repulsive as everyone makes it out to be. However in its case it is relatively unremarkable architecturally and historically plus it has a well thought out replacement. If it was being demolished for a second rate new build I would definately want it to be kept.

Fair enough GShutty. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And if we differ in some respect about why we find some building desirable or not, I think it's a good thing to talk about it, exchange viewpoints, explain the reasoning, and learn from each other. OK maybe I shouldn't have been so sharp with ManchesterIsWonderful, but I get annoyed when people want to impose an opinion by undermining and having a dig instead of being open and honest. Particularly since one of my points has been that it's not fair for people in leafy suburbs to impose industrial heritage on people who maybe don't want it.

Perhaps another aspect of the debate here is signalled by what you said above about the Ragged School. You talk about symbolism and heritage first, and your beholder view second. Maybe it's just the way you phrased your sentence. But if everybody agreed that the Ragged School was downright ugly, including yourself, would you want it to be kept for the sake of symbolism and heritage? And would you be tempted to say "I think it's beautiful" in defence of the symbolism and heritage?

Yep, the Aytoun Street building isn't bad. I've never thought about it because IMHO Albany Tower looks so much better. I guess that's another aspect of the debate, like you were saying and what Inquisitor just said. It's not just your opinion on one building, it's your opinion on what's there now and what will replace it. Even more scope for subjectivity.

Stand back and think.






Here are some words of wisdom.







If it was being demolished for a second rate new build I would definately want it to be kept.






.......

I can't believe what a furore is being caused by such a sweet and unassuming little building!

The point that's been made twice now and that Farsight has studiously avoided is that his argument could just as easily be applied to the Maths Tower or the Piccadilly Hotel. Why should people living 500 miles away try to impose their penchant for poor examples of 60s architecture on the people that have to put up with such structures in their everyday lives. That's not fair either.

Personally Im in the 'save it' camp. I knew nothing of ragged schools before this debate errupted but agree that it should be saved both for what it represents and how it looks.... And if a developer decides to convert it and people decide to make their home in it then its value cannot be denied. If however West Properties had such grand and ambitious plans for the district that retaining the building were to severly compromise, then it should probably be swept away. I doubt this is the case though.

. If however West Properties had such grand and ambitious plans for the district that retaining the building were to severly compromise, then it should probably be swept away. I doubt this is the case though.

Its not in the West development, Sharp St is the other side of Rochdale Rd behind that Birse development that no one seems to have any info on.

While discussing the aesthetic merits of buildings do you think the owners of this one pre-empted our discussion.

http://freake.demon.co.uk/sscpics/man093.jpg

The point that's been made twice now and that Farsight has studiously avoided is that his argument could just as easily be applied to the Maths Tower or the Piccadilly Hotel. Why should people living 500 miles away try to impose their penchant for poor examples of 60s architecture on the people that have to put up with such structures in their everyday lives. That's not fair either. If you read the thread you'd see that if local people wanted to keep the Ragged School that would be fine by me. In similar vein if students and lecturers at Manchester University had backed matters such as the demolition of the Maths Tower or a new Environment Building on greensward, that would have been fine too. I also said I felt there should be an opinion weighting of say 30% developers, 25% local residents, 20% council planners, 15% public, and 10% heritage interests. Nobody who advocates retaining the Ragged School responded. My position here is that people in leafy suburbs and ivory towers try to force heritage on other people with no regard for the views of those people. Now, if you'd prefer to manufacture some "studiously avoided" distraction, I'm sure everybody will understand your position!

:)

dj: now that really takes the biscuit. Can I call in an air strike?

While discussing the aesthetic merits of buildings do you think the owners of this one pre-empted our discussion.

http://freake.demon.co.uk/sscpics/man093.jpg

:lol:

It fits in with its surroundings though doesn't it? :cheers:

Skyline Central today,,

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/skylinecentfeb.jpg

For what its worth the Ragged School is listed it aint going anywhere! It is being converted into apartments. The old Police Station is also listed and despite the best efforts of the owner to blow it up and an application to demolish what is left, the City are keen for it to stay.

For what its worth the Ragged School is listed...

Phew... that clears that one up then. That thread has been going on forever.

Yes, back to Skyline Central now... and on that note:

great pic highriser :)

For what its worth the Ragged School is listed it aint going anywhere! It is being converted into apartments. The old Police Station is also listed and despite the best efforts of the owner to blow it up and an application to demolish what is left, the City are keen for it to stay.


Not necessarily. They could leave it to degrade into a state of disrepair like a few of the listed mills that every now and then surprisingly burn down (considering they are mostly so-called 'fireproof construction'). Are there no powers to prevent this kind of vandalism by neglect?

A dozen cans of petrol usually sorts out the fireproofing, Jerv. If you catch my drift. These things happen. And unless you catch somebody red handed you can't prove who did it. I actually got threatened with legal action once about a comment in an objection letter. I had to crawl and withdraw because otherwise I would have been sued, and would have been up for thousands in legal costs. I couldn't have won because I had no proof, so they would have won and I'd have been up for damages too. That's the way the law is. It's for people with money. Oh, and scroats on legal aid of course.

:)

Pretty red cranes! Look better without that pesky police station in the way eh?
Taken today.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f85/garybaldy/IM000111.jpg

its growinghttp://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f122/tommyfg/P2080018.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture0266.jpg

Skyline Central today,

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0645.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0643.jpg

top banana!

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b292/caw1234/P3010006copy.jpg

One of the tower cranes came down today at Skyline Central

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0677.jpg

The back of Skyline
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0674.jpg

Looks quite nice. A definite asset to this rather shabby urbane area. Thanx for the pix salfordscally, jrb (oops), caw, highriser.

... Double post.

Heres one from today. Its a little blurry as i was passing on the bus. What are they cladding this building in? Looks to me like Wooden sheets, surely not :S

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/Photo-0313.jpg

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_1.jpg
Could very well be wooden cladding.

^^ I wonder what's gonna be housed inside that glass bladey thingy stuck on the SW corner ? Maybe just an illuminated 'feature' ?

I think there is going to be a swimming pool in there. I remember seeing an internal render of a pool with fantastic views over manchester and the wall was completely glass.

It's on page 1.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_3.jpg

Cool.

I remember the black Labrador, LOL!

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y139/rolybling/skylinecentral.jpg

It's on page 1.

http://www.jacobswebber.com/graphics/roc_3.jpg

Cool.

I remember the black Labrador, LOL!


So do i ;)

Wow, thats looking very tall. I'm still not sure about this tower though, without the big blade its pretty much just a bland, council block style tower. The wooden cladding might help solve that problem, but then again, wooden cladding rarely seems to look any good...

Not convinced either, always been my least favourite tower going up in manchester, along with tempus...

Tempus is way better than this. Its development includes a fantastic historic building too.

This is nothing compared to the old design. Remember it? It looked like a taller version of those blocks in Miles Platting.

I wouldn't worry about Skyline Central too much, its not the greatest looking building but it will add density to the skyline and on the street, besides it wont stand out so much eventually as we know there are more planned for this area, nicer ones hopefully.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y139/rolybling/skylinecentral.jpg

I think a lot of people will be very surprised with this one when it get's uncovered , it makes a big impact from Shudehill,,,that crappy building infront if it on this pic must have its days numbered

...that crappy building infront if it on this pic must have its days numbered

You said that just to upset me didnt you? :cry:

LOL ,,,your joking ? u like that one as well ?

I have wide and perverse tastes!
A like it a little bit but wouldnt chain myself to any bulldozers put it that way!

Planning application has gone in for that site for an Hotel, jrb I think posted something about it a while ago

Roly the hotel is going right next to the Icon 25 apartments , the building im on about is the one on the other side of Swan St with the "houses wanted " thats the one i wanna see go :)

ahhh I see, sorry jumped the gun a bit there. Yes it would be good (and only a matter of time surely) if something was done with these below par buildings round there. Not a nice view from the Hotel lobby is it?

ahhh I see, sorry jumped the gun a bit there. Yes it would be good (and only a matter of time surely) if something was done with these below par buildings round there. Not a nice view from the Hotel lobby is it?

The hotel lobby actually faces out on to Shudehill (missed opportunity not putting on the corner?) so they will be able to look at the smashing new tower thats going up opposite (oops! did i just say that?) :doh: :gossip:

Leave that nice little industrial 30's building alone. if you lot werent so obssesed with knocking things down and big shiny new buildings you would see the potential for tarting that building up and making something really cool and sophisticated from it. Anyway it seems to be hive of activity (well a sweatshop anyway) and people work there (who was moaning we need more industry?) so it aint going anywhere.......for now!

Longboy I was all for keeping this building where the hotel is going actually.

Dont say stuff about a smashing new tower and go ooops! spill the beans, at least give us a taster

Longford: Are we talking about this building with the yellow banner that says "Houses Wanted for Cash". Wince. Please say no.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y139/rolybling/skylinecentral.jpg

Fomer Aussie tennis star fallen on hard times, or his he doing a Robbie Fowler?

Fomer Aussie tennis star fallen on hard times, or his he doing a Robbie Fowler?
Not many people will get that, but I do... :)

Huh. Pat.

I get it too ;-)

Up, up and away from the manor
Jill Burdett


GOOD MANORS: Georgian retreat
WHY would a couple with two daughters give up the splendour of a large Georgian house and secluded gardens for a city centre penthouse? Later this year, Dr Paul Griffiths and his wife Sue will be doing just that.

They will leave behind the rambling 18th century manor house that has been their home for 20 years and move with daughters Alex, 14 and Ellie, 12, to a three bed apartment at Skyline Central on Rochdale Road.

Paul, a GP in north Manchester, said: "It is a glorious house and has been a fantastic place for the girls to grow up but I think we have sort of outgrown it now.


"The girls don't play in the garden anymore. They are happier hanging round TopShop, and the upkeep of a place like this is quite demanding.

"We replaced the roof last year and it cost £20,000 but you have to do things properly and you have to keep on top of the maintenance and that includes the garden.

"We also own a house in Spain which is very rural and quite remote and we all liked the idea of a place in the city centre which would be in complete contrast and which we could just lock-up and leave and not have to worry about mowing the lawn."




NEW HOME:
http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/C_17_Articles_210490_BodyWeb_Detail.jpg
Skyline Central

After several months of intensive looking, they heard about West Properties ground-breaking scheme and liked the idea of the indoor skyline pool on the 20th floor

Paul said: "We looked at lots and lots of stuff and they were either too far out - like Castlefield which would be too far for the girls to walk - or pretty low quality. Then I heard about this and it fitted perfectly."

They are paying £420,000 for the top floor of the lower block and persuaded the developers to turn what was to be a storeroom into an extra bedroom for them creating a total space of 1,700sq ft.

Paul said: "There will be a gym three floors below us and a communal garden with hot tub and, in the other block, they have managed to put in a 20m pool.

"It was important that everyone has their own space so each bedroom will have satellite TV points and the kitchen/dining space is separate to the living room.

"We did not want to feel like we were living in a box and the developers have been very helpful in accommodating us.

Quality

"We have looked at their completed scheme in Manchester, Lumiere, and like the quality and the finish and it will be very novel having everything brand new."

But it means that the house is on the market for only the third time in its history. It stands next to Boggart Hole Clough Park at Blackley in north Manchester and is part of the original grand manor house, which has since been split into three individual period houses.

The Griffiths' home is at one end with a glorious conservatory down one side leading to the extensive and secluded gardens and has a wonderful entrance hallway.

Paul said: "When we first saw it all those years ago it was about to be bought by a group of German monks as a retreat but we got it instead and spent five years gutting it and bringing it up to date without losing any of its character.

"It still has the big period fireplaces and the tiles and the stained glass and has a lovely flow.

"We will be sad to leave but we are all very excited about the move. We quite fancy being city slickers."
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/homesearch/latest/s/210/210490_up_up_and_away_from_the_manor.html

The side of the low-rise part of Skyline Central .

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0722.jpg

thanks H

red brick :puke:

Personally Im not one of the anything-but-red-brick brigade. It all depends how its used and the quality of the brickwork. On this building it looks pretty decent. I like the way its been broken up with the render and I also like the regularity of the pattern and the balconies. Its all pretty neat to my eye. Not spectacular but neat.

Now there's a good few buildings on the opposite side of Rochdale Road in the Ludgate Hill area which quite frankly do deserve a good slagging.

I agree Sleep's in the flesh it does look very nice :)

Im not part of any brigade either sleepyone I just don't like too much red brick on modern buildings, to be fair Skyline Central shouldn't look too bad apart from the silly glass spire thing, but red brick..it's been around such a long time you'd think they could find something else to use on these modern apartment buildings that is a bit more aesthetically pleasing. The grey brick colour on Icon25 or whatever its called on Shudehill is much more appealing IMHO, especially against that white render.

At least with red brick we know how well it will age and that it is a better building material then this cladding that they just bolt on and will either:-

A) Look crap in 10 years
B) Have fallen off in 10 years
C) Both of the

Though I do hate it when after a few months the cement starts to run and you get those white streaks down the brickwork...

I know fuck all about these things anyway, I just know what I like and don't like the look of.

I'm not a fan of red brick either. But I think this looks pretty good considering. The white lifts it, and the white rectangles connect the balconies and windows to give them a neatness that I like.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0722.jpg

I have to say that judging from the renders Skyline Central isn't my favourite looking building, but they can't all be brilliant and it might look good when it's finished.

From the Wing Yip car park

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/P1010004.jpg

Hi all!

Dont know if anyone knows this but west properties has purchased there largest site this year which is the owen st car park acquired from pathfinder. The site is 3.4 acres and the intention is to create a major mixed use scheme.

Also the princess st car park has a view to submitting a planning application in mid-summer, ian simpson architects hace been appointe

Also!! Sharp st car park located adjacent to skyline central, they have a very exciting plans for this scheme and at this stage are planning a mixed use development.

Cheers Dave , we found out about that earlier in the week, a nice 40 storey for Owen St would look great next to Beetham ,,, do u work for West ?

Welcome aboard anyway matey .

Hi, no i dont work for west, i just seen it on there web site so just thought i would let you all know, princess st site shoul be good as ian simpson is doing it so hopefully a nice tower or two!

Went past this today , and they have started taking down the scaffolding on the smaller section of the development , the cladding looks great .

And on the other side of Rochdale Rd , a big site has been cleared and looks like something is about to start there ,,on Sharp St , could this be the other West Properties site ?

Today:

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/9144/manchester00026nx.jpg

:cheers:

Your on the ball MP :)

That new site i was on about is where that yellow lifting thing is .

that yellow lifting thing

Is the word you looking for 'crane' perhaps? :)

Skyline Central is looking great dont ya think ?

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0814.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0815.jpg

/\ wow! that looks amazing. I like how they're using various styles throughout the development. This one in particular, looks quality.

Nice timber cladding there. West Properties seem to be delivering which bodes well for their three recently purchased and highly significant sites at Owen Street, Sharp Street and Whitworth Street.

Superb cladding. Nice surprise after all the doubts.

Flip, I drove past it today but obviously on the wrong side, nice one H you're a star, that looks class to me

Yeah Roly ,,this is going to be a beaut i think ,you can just work out what the bigger building is going to be like through the red netting.

Once that hotel on Shudehill start's this will spread the city centre up Rochdale Rd.

Indeed :D

Does anyone else think that as every year passes, the quality of apartments in Manchester goes up a couple of notches! This is great for the property market as I think some developers *ahem* Bellway *cough* *splutter* need to get their act together.

Awesome pics for an amazing development. Bring on the swimming pool!

I don't really know Pookgai but this one looks the biz doesn't it..yeah lets hope it raises the bar some what.

It's a nice finish but those pokey balconies do my nut in.

Give me something like this

http://www.millerhull.com/images/in%20progress/Chicago_06.jpg

www.millerhull.com/html/progress/Chicago.htm

As some of the youth's that buy confectionary from my uncles store might say "Yeah, Rare mate, init!"

It's a nice finish but those pokey balconies do my nut in.

Give me something like this

http://www.millerhull.com/images/in%20progress/Chicago_06.jpg

www.millerhull.com/html/progress/Chicago.htm

lol I know what you mean Isaac, but surely that's a car port or a patio :)

They are quite big aren't they for a balcony.

Hated the look of this on render to tell truth, but it does look really fresh in reality... turned out good and nice to have some variance on materials!

I can't stress strongly enough how great the cladding looks in the flesh, it's QUALITY!!

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/SKLCEN-0606.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/SKLCEN2-0606.jpg

I bumped in to Highriser while taking these :D

Bit confused, is this the actual tower part that we're looking at? Because I'd come under the impression that was 20 floors? Only see about 12 on this part of the building, so is this the adjoining part of the building, because it also looks like the void in the roof is where a blade element could go so... I'm baffled :S

No Ferge this is the smaller building next door to the 20 storey main tower.

Good pics Roly ,, pleased to meet you earlier, soz i could'nt chat , i had 5 mins to get to Piccadilly .

Seeing this cladding really brightens up the prospects of having the Mill Towers dont you agree?

One Word, 'NO!!'

I'm still hoping they remain on the desk and not new age blots on the skyline!

Bit confused, is this the actual tower part that we're looking at? Because I'd come under the impression that was 20 floors? Only see about 12 on this part of the building, so is this the adjoining part of the building, because it also looks like the void in the roof is where a blade element could go so... I'm baffled :S

You can see it peeking out behind the main tower here ferge

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/P12010060.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/P1010058.jpg

Looks quite nice does that. Better than I was thinking from the "hey look it's a council block" renders.

This one might look okay, once the scaffolding get's taken down, a few pics from a Scorching Sunday...

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral1.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral2.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral6.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral5.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral4.jpg

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7/vertigoscraper/SkylineCentral3.jpg

Oh you know that little carpark next to the main tower, it was sealed off today with a very strange metal object on it, i think the blade will going up soon :)

is it me or is that cladding just 8x4 sheets of ply with a coat of varnish?

Its nice dj, get up close it looks quality, trust me. And I'm loving those dark balconies.

The blade on the main tower is going up today .

What? So its all in one piece or a few peices and just being hoisted into place? I would of thought it would of gone up a litle bit at a time, strange.. PICS!!

didnt have camera ferge ,, looks like a steel frame of some kind

Yeah I was passing on the 17 a few days ago and saw it all in one piece on the ground, constructed from tubular steel like the supports on top of Old Trafford! At least I assume that was it, hah.

The frame for the glass blade thingy is in place

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0860.jpg

Couple of pics today, its got a big presence when looking up Shudehill from the Transport Exchange.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0872.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/ANTEATPETE/100_0871.jpg

Am right in believing that more of the 'blade' is going to be added on top of that? or is there? I always thought it was taller than that..

Yeah. From the renders it looks like the blade will protrude significantly from the top of the building. I think this will be quality and it will soon become one of the most recognisable buildings in the city.

Depite not being that big there's nothing of any size in the immediate vacinity and being at the top of the hill that swallows much of the scale of the CIS tower, it will stand very tall for its size, if you know what I mean.

Some images of how its going to look, just to remind us all whats in store

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skylinecentral1.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skylinecentral2.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skylinecentral3.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skylinecentral4.jpg

and these are from the video walk through on West Properties website, its pretty good, check it out if you've not seen it.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skywlk2.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skywlk1.jpg

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j159/rolybling2/skywlk3.jpg




video (http://www.westproperties.co.uk/MSVirtualTour.asp?MicroSiteSettingsID=13)

Cheers Roly...is that Colleen and Posh wagging about on the pool side?...and Geoff Boycott (for some reason) enjoying the views?

I don't know Northernline that dark haired girl looks a bit fat to be Posh, unless she's had bouts of depression recently and ate the whole lettuce leaf

I'm loving that black pool (not blackpool) on the top floor. Good location; A design that stands out and enough gimmicks to keep this above the rest if Manchester ever does get oversupplied and sees apartments loosing value.

That garden at the bottom is gated though (from the video). It'll keep the scallies but the concierge (spelling) can do that instead. I don't like the way some appartments stop people wandering through, it'll just leave the garden like a morgue. Who is going to reguarly doss about on their own in that garden with 200 people staring out of their window at you and that bird in the bikini, when she's sunbathing.

That video gives it a community feel, which is very appealing. There's just no need to lock it away from the rest of the world though. That's all very....castlefield....and unsociable.

Castlefield is very morgue like, I'll give you that...not sure 'what's wrong with it'. Last time I was there they had a 'fun'fair on one of the carparks which was also bereft of life.
It's a nice urban space but lacks...oxygen.
But agree - this is turning out to be a fine development in a neck of the woods you wouldn't have expected not so long ago.
I see the dogs been kicked out of the pool though?

Aye - roly - how could I miss that! Must be t'bird from 'Girls Astride'.

How come it looks more like the size of Albany on those ariel shots?! lol

Okay, this now has become one of my favourite buildings in Manchester, I love it.. Isis is gonna have its work cut out when that starts to rival this..I love the unique look it has, can't wait to see the main tower properly!

Castlefield is very morgue like, I'll give you that...not sure 'what's wrong with it'. Last time I was there they had a 'fun'fair on one of the carparks which was also bereft of life.
It's a nice urban space but lacks...oxygen.


I think castlefield is fantastic and its great the events and things they put on (anyone know if dpercussion is on this year. I've heard nothing) but the gated communities I'm not a fan of.

Though they don't spoil the look of the the place, its very elitist and doesn't promote any kind of social interaction between anyone on either side of the fence. You're not going to mill around the grounds outside your apartment like an animal in a zoo. If there was no fence the car park you are sharing your cage with would probably back onto some grass where you can have a bbq and yet still feel that you're kind of in you own garden. But once you leave those gates, you loose the sense of ownership. despite living next door to that bit of grass you feel you have no more rights to sit on that bit of grass than that random bird in the bikini walking past. This therefore, makes you less likely to use it.

A bit psycho babble sounding I know, but do you see where I'm coming from?

The events are far and few between though, it really is tumbleweed for the best part of the year.
But yes I see where you are coming from...when I was last in Leeds, I couldn't walk barely anywhere near a good part of the river because of such a set up macc...very frustrating...paranoic bunch!

Yes - I believe D percussion has found a new sponsor and shall be on once more...it was top last year...just to see the redneck pitbull scallies not let in was fun in itself.