A 400,000 square foot development of apartments, retail, casino, offices and a hotel. Causing some controversy due to its striking blue tower!

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1437/973048743_81635c4c0d_o.jpg

See more at the 1 St George's (http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/) website.

isnt st georges the one they painted blue? or am i just getting it twisted?

isnt st georges the one they painted blue? or am i just getting it twisted?

It is indeed the blue tower development. I think it might look ok when finished, but others will definitely disagree with me. I can keep an eye on progress, because I can see the tower from my office window...

Let me get this strait then...so what exactly are they doing? Are they going to put some white cladding over it or have they just painted it blue instead?

This would have looked so much better in white with seemless cladding. Instead we have a shocking blue tower with grey windowframes and solid window panels that ultimately make it look like a giant connect 4 game.

The March minutes from the Leicester Regeneration Company's board meeting (which can be seen HERE (http://www.leicesterregeneration.co.uk/boardminutes/Minutes26-03-07.pdf) in section 5.4.1) have suggested that they might be willing to pay to a repaint of the building.

Let me get this strait then...so what exactly are they doing? Are they going to put some white cladding over it or have they just painted it blue instead?

The tower is getting a complete revamp inside and out and there is a huge new building at the rear of the complex, to bring the total scheme up to 400,000 square feet.

thread 3

[Quoting Candida] Thankgod for that. They say some things grow on you in time. This building just makes me feel worse! I wonder if there will be a rush for buying the apartments!!

At least the rest of the structure looks nice. I quite like the idea of having a casino & hotel inside this building, within easy reach of the train station

I can't wait to see which government department is interested in the building-as the owners say. :)

The Dept of Comedy must be a front-runner surely... :lol:

Luckily they won't be housed in the blue tower! :lol:

I can't wait to see which government department is interested in the building-as the owners say. :)

having read this again, maybe they're presuming that the tories will be in power by then so have painted the tower accordingly ;)

fucking deluxe paints must have some kind of interest if there painting it again, wot color can they fuck it up with today, mauve, indigo

Here's the pic I posted in the original Leicester thread so you can all see what we're on about :o :D actually I think the colour scheme has had the desired effect (in a way) as it's attracted lots of attention :rolleyes:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/brian101/forum_images/SGT & Elizabeth House.JPG


BG

I quite like the silver clad bit of the development and has anyone noted the top-floor Juliet balconies on the railway station car park side. I think they look quite nice-however, the main tower still looks like an ugly sibling to the building. :lol:

I saw the thing again this time in glorious sunshine. Normally even crap buildings look good in the sun. Not this one. It looked even worse.

It's obvious the developer took a trip along the M6 and saw the Urban Splash FOrt Dunlop redevelopment, had an "Aha" moment and promptly decided to change the colour scheme - and just to add pizzaz stick candy coloured sweets in place of windows. I wouldn't be surprised if the scheme architect then took a lift to the roof and jumped off straight after.

By the way the Fort Dunlop redevelopment looks fantastic. Mr Zarbafi couldn't even get the right shade of blue. What a plonker.

I assume the Fort Dunlop job was done properly and not just spray painted blue like SGT. It still makes my blood boil!!! :bleep:

If I win the lottery I will buy the building just so we can have it reclad (properly) :D

Please dooo!!!

Any news about LRC offer to help to pay for the Tower to be re-painted?

Any news about LRC offer to help to pay for the Tower to be re-painted?

Any news that Mr Zarbafi was struck down by a swarm of (blue) flies.... well a man can dream can't he!

I really hate him he is the worst kind of cheapskate parasite developer. The council MUST surely have some powers to change it. For fxxk sake you can't even build a effing convervatory without planning approval. This may sound controversial but I predict whatever we do in spending billions to change the face of Leicester we will always be mocked as the city with that "shitty blue tower with those arsewipe stupid windows", if anyone thinks they look good they need to change their prescription!!!!:ohno:

At least the city will be a talking point, though I would have preferred a reflective mirror look for the tower. No news is bad news...

its f*****g blue, that bastard needs his head kicking in, thistle hotels or whoever it is who is renting space surely cant have seen the building. ive even heard the rest of it is a shit hole under the scaffold.
what a twat that zargreb guy is, hope someone pushes him of the top of his ridiculus tower, and his whole family aswell

lol braunstone geezer I 'm sure his family disapprove of that felt tip coloured splatter job. I would help you push him off the top of the building though. Aren't there any laws for this sort of thing!?!?! Where are you now Civic Society!! I get the feeling they are loving it so that it can used as a beating stick for any future development over 3 storeys!!! Conspiracy theories abound....I think the CIA are behind this paint job...its the only explanation!

I'm sure you're all going to jump down my throat when I say this, but I'm actually getting used to it now. I know... it's defeatest mentality but it's here to stay unless an earthquake brings it down, so we may as well stop whining. My main concern before regarding the windows was that they seemed to be white, but in fact they're actually dark grey. And the solid panels make it look colourful, although tinted glass would have been a lot better. Yes, it looks rather tacky as a whole but as we're going to have to live with it we can either ignore it or look at the positives. I'm looking forward till the low-rise element is finally unveilled and the scaffolding at the top of the tower is dismantled.

I'm sorry Xtremegamer I can't accept it. The whole point of the regeneration is to attempt (somewhat) the restoration of a human and more visually appealing city centre after the mistakes of the previous efforts. St Georges Tower is one of the most visible and prominent mistakes - and now it's like de ja vu!!!

extreme gamer, tell me more of this earthquake you talk about,

mosseeds, you got it spot on, the blue tower isnt progress, its just some greedy wanker who got a job lot of blue paint on the cheap,who couldnt give a shit about leicester or its people


i hate the twat so much,

i am going to graffiti all over it, they cant possibly prosecute me as mr zargy bargy fuck face has already defaced it.

I noticed that the rest of the development, looks a bit shite as well! The "officey" bit of the tower has some really cheap windows put in. This development is a serious right off!

The windows there putting in seem to be the cheapest they could find. Cant wait for a goverment department to move in :ohno:

Yeh I've been sceptical about the development under wraps because there seems to be an awaful lot of grey plasticky panelling.

Oh dear...the key cornerstone of regeneration was giving the new arrivals to the city a nicer welcome. INstead they come out of the station confronted by a giant duplo block!

Seriously, is there anything that can be done about the development? Even if companies do move in, the building will still be an embaressment, even with such iconic buildings as the PAC and Westbridge to show off, the SGT will probably come out as the talk of the town.

I'm seriously concerned about what effects the development will have on the city, especially around the station area. :ohno:

Is Mr Zarbafi from Nottingham by any chance? Sabotage!!! :P :P

I’m not sure if the Leicester Uni is having a laugh, but they are currently revamping the Attenborough Tower block, and the builders safety netting around the Tower upto over half way up is Blue!!

Is there a plan to turn all Leicester’s buildings blue!!:lol:

I hope not-anyway isn't the Attenborough Tower listed?

I was only joking about the colour of the tower.

The blue netting reaches nearly ¾ of the height, but is only their as safety for the workers.

I’m not sure if their just cleaning the tower or replacing the windows

Hm, well it would make sense - Leicester University's official colour is blue. Although it's a much more respectable shade (royal blue) than zarbafi's pop-art experiment.

Should we protest outside SGT? Someone please put up some banners "400,000 sq foot regeneration - No Thanks Mr Zarbafi" ... Let's put some ideas together and send a message to Zarbafi and the council/LRC so they apply some pressure or better still put SGT to the crowbar.

Lol :lol: – Maybe I’m on my own but I like SGT, but not with the shade of blue there’ve chosen. It needs to be darker, like the Fort Dunlop building off the M6.

Also it needs another coat of paint, in places it looks very patchy.

What I hate is the multi -coloured randomly placed glass.

Why couldn’t they have used a mirrored glass?

i cant beleive the arrogance of that twat mr z, the people of leicester have spoken and he still insists in paintinh it blue, the c**t

The tower may be blue, but Mr Zarbafi is developing a mixed-use scheme right next to the train station, which is the same size in floorspace as Fosse Park! That is quite a level of investment, blue tower or not...

I must agree that the floor space will be massive and will attract big names hopefully-I've said this before, but I heard somewhere that the office space will rival any office space in Canary Wharf-how true that is I don't know! :lol:

Pity the tower spoils it all - which I think is the whole building's major asset and first point of recognistion (it will be recognised no doubt!).

I must agree that the floor space will be massive and will attract big names hopefully-I've said this before, but I heard somewhere that the office space will rival any office space in Canary Wharf-how true that is I don't know! :lol:

Pity the tower spoils it all - which I think is the whole building's major asset and first point of recognistion (it will be recognised no doubt!).

I think it is the floor plate sizes that will rival Canary Wharf. Took another look today and even though I've defended the blue before, I've got to admit it is crap!

it can be the biggest thing in the world, but it will still be blue

If the council had had their way, it would have been blue up :clown: :D


BG

If the council had their way they'd CPO the place :lol:

if the council had there way theyd let some crack head developer buy it, put in some dubious plans for its transformation from eyesore to a big blue fucking eyesore, making a mockery of the city of leicester and holding back real investment from people who genuinely want to see leicester prospa

oh fuck, its already happened

i bet someone at the council had a big fucking backhander out of this

Conditional approval has again been granted for a change of use for the builing:

http://rcweb.leicester.gov.uk/planning/onlinequery/Details.aspx?AppNo=20071059

they ought to change its use to a museum of mockery or a comedy club

It is such a shame that we aren't going to get this as planned...perhaps the rear part of the tower will still live up to expectations?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1387/1274640581_1371e05981_o.jpg

that artists impression looks amazing compared to the reality,

what happened

oh yeah, that greedy mother f.... mr zylaphone screwed us,

The taller tower looks suspiciously, erm, blue in that render.

But a much nicer blue.

^^

That's what I was thinking :lol:. In fact it looks as though nothing has actually been done to the tower and it till has its concrete colour.

At least the main, though less noticable, body of the building will be more or less like the render.

he had our pants down, making us believe that render was wot was going to be built, no wonder he got planning permission

he ought to be shot for being a lying dirty c**t

How much of the lower building is going to be used for retail? It'd be nice if there was a counter-attraction in the south-east of the city to stop the HCL and all the new Riverside developments sucking all the money to the north and west.

Actually there's now going to be no retail in the development at all it was said last year I think. It will now just include leisure uses and offices.

Odd though, because on their website there is retail still promoted ?

After seeing this for the first time today... I see what you guys are on about. This is a mad development...I think they'd be better forgetting about all of those colours... this is going to be one of those development you lot are going to have to learn to love....

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1342/1296858116_48d1519fa4_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1205/1296853538_0304e02cbe_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1333/1296981078_a68542d06b_b.jpg

yeah thanks for the pics danz013, like we really need to keep on seeing the thing

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/3833/imagesrcbt2.jpgConditional approval has again been granted for a change of use for the builing:

http://rcweb.leicester.gov.uk/planning/onlinequery/Details.aspx?AppNo=20071059
I've Just checked the link for the planning and they have now change the building colour to blue on the planning documents!!

Sorry, I've posted the drawing the wrong way round!!

Was this application a delegated decision? If it was I bet the Planning Officer involved feels a bit stupid! The original plans on the SGT website looked quite good, just a shame that the planning people at LCC forgot to make them carry them through!

Sorry, I've posted the drawing the wrong way round!!
Doesn't matter which angle you look at it from it still looks pants

What is the planning application for though? I didnt think you needed PP to paint a building....

You should need planning permission to paint a building in a colour that ruins the city's skyline.. it's awful and can be seen from miles away. I just don't understand how the rest of the SG development can look so good, alongside the Mercury building, and yet the tower itself be designed to look so bad.

Anyone who stays in a hotel room in SGT once completed needs to have some form of mental examination.

What is the planning application for though? I didnt think you needed PP to paint a building....

It was for changing the use of the tower from offices to a hotel/apartments and a plant room or two.

This is a good building to start pushing forward Leicester's skyline boundary... It happens to look quite nice, a little bit like Bridgewater Place in Leeds!!! I Like it!!!

You can't honestly compare this 'blue' tower to bridgewater place? Can you?

This is a good building to start pushing forward Leicester's skyline boundary... It happens to look quite nice, a little bit like Bridgewater Place in Leeds!!! I Like it!!!

Hello mate welcome to the forum and our city! Unfortunately you're in a minority of 1 when it comes to liking that thing but oh well must move on! Hope you enjoy your stay!

Sorry how rude of me, I forgot to say welcome to ths forum New_to_this_city! :)

Hello mate welcome to the forum and our city! Unfortunately you're in a minority of 1 when it comes to liking that thing but oh well must move on! Hope you enjoy your stay!

I actually don't think new_to_this_city is actually here???

Would be nice if theye were. :)

Ha ha - someone has daubed "Wonder World" on the top floor of the St George's tower...

Was that you Braunstone Geezer?

You should need planning permission to paint a building in a colour that ruins the city's skyline.. it's awful and can be seen from miles away. I just don't understand how the rest of the SG development can look so good, alongside the Mercury building, and yet the tower itself be designed to look so bad.

Anyone who stays in a hotel room in SGT once completed needs to have some form of mental examination.

If you think about it, it may be the bast place to stay, as it's the only place you can't see the bloody blue thing!

Ha ha - someone has daubed "Wonder World" on the top floor of the St George's tower...

Was that you Braunstone Geezer?

Does it make the tower any better to look at???

Some photos of SG Tower before the work began from the site MWRIGHT17 found, not sure if they were previously posted on the old thread

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/...ad.php?t=20078

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/7452/ddd208wb1.jpg

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4580/ddd207yi5.jpg

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/8467/ddd206fn6.jpg

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/3441/ddd204pa2.jpg

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/3377/ddd203ib8.jpg

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/7529/ddd202nc5.jpg

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/5736/ddd201ok9.jpg

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/3407/dddof2.jpg

those guys at 28days are nutts... they climbed a crane (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=506462&page=4) at southreef in notts...

If only we could get them to clime one of the Leicester cranes we get some fantastic skyline photos!!!

theyve painted over the wonder world writing on the tower already

it wasnt me, im trying to stay legal, or im not getting into the army.

besides i would have written something a lot better than wonder world, like 'you and ur family are going to die mr zargreb'

theyve painted over the wonder world writing on the tower already

it wasnt me, im trying to stay legal, or im not getting into the army.

besides i would have written something a lot better than wonder world, like 'you and ur family are going to die mr zargreb'

Take it you're not a fan of his then :lol:

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/shared/contentbinaries/publish/1559953.jpg


10:30 - 18 September 2007

Mystery surrounds the appearance of the words Wonder World at the top of a city landmark.

The phrase was painted at the top of the distinctive St George's Tower, near Leicester railway station, but has now been painted over.

Developer Magnet Property Investment has courted controversy since deciding to paint the tower blue.

The words Wonder World appeared in white paint on the distinctive blue building over Sunday night.

Ian Holmes, 25, who works on the site, said: "As far as I know we just found it there yesterday morning.

"It's just some graffiti. I don't know how it got up there. We just painted back over it, it's a bit of a mystery."

The Mercury tried to contact the owner of St George's Tower yesterday without success.

The writing can still be seen painted over - I noticed it this morning, especially when the sun shines on it. It makes the tower look even more tacky now and more like a bodge-up job. The way the development of that tower has happened is the last thing this city needs. :ohno:

I really hope that if the hotel chain that takes over decides to render the tower themselves. The owner is a chump, how can he think that painted concrete looks good anywhere, let alone next to the rest of the redeveloped scheme.

I just think that, unfortunately, we're going to have to accept that SGT is here to stay because those in power bottled it and the city's reputation will suffer as a result.

You can see the tower from the M69 and M1!!!

I also hope that the occupiers will improve the tower. I mean if a 4* hotel was to open in there, surely they'd want to be in a building that was renovated with good quality materials?

You'd think! Maybe that's what will happen and the painting of the tower is simply to make it look 'better' than the grey concrete.
Or perhaps the scheme's run out of money?!

More like the latter and bad planning!

any hotel chain that moves into that mo fo tower deserve to go bust, i cant believe any business can seriuosley think of moving in, its madness.

cant leicester council impose mega business rates or something just for the area where the tower is located, charge them a million pound a month so he has no option but to sell it to someone who is not a greedy fucking twat

More like the latter and bad planning!

You dont need planning permission to paint a building. Sadly.

You dont need planning permission to paint a building. Sadly.

I meant planning as in the developer seems to have planned badly, i.e the cheapo materials used for the tower.-unfortunate about the planning process as you say though-or lack of it I should say! :ohno:

You should do.
Leicester city council will probably ask future developers what colour they plan to paint a building in future.
Although the building really does look shit I think it'll probably become a local landmark as time goes by. I bet it will get loads of nicknames like most of the proposed buildings do in London. Connect 4 is a good one.

I do hope so!!! (and what materials they may or may not use).

You should do.
Leicester city council will probably ask future developers what colour they plan to paint a building in future.

Possibly, but in many cases they can paint it what colour they like. Most firms have a vague idea how NOT to ruin the appearance of their building though...

papa fuking smurf wouldnt approve of this building, the developer shouldnt be allowed to be in bussiness, i dont understand how he got the money for this tower development

unless its sponsored by deluxe

sorry, wilkinsons own brand, cos no decent paint company are going to admit to this shoddy paint work

I don't know if you guys had noticed, but some brave person who wasn't happy with the look of SGT scaled it's heights and graffitied the exterior a week or two ago. He tied himself to scaffolding at the very top and painted 'WONDER-WORLD!' in 10 foot white lettering.. I absolutely wet myself when I saw it!

Unfortunately they painted over it not long after, but hey.. good on that guy for showing his distaste towards the tower.. although perhaps a little too risky!

You can see more of the 'silvery grey' part of the building-which I prefer. The tower still looks like a seperate development, even though it may be seen as such. It still looks horrid-on a slight plus point at least the window frames aren't white.

I think that this 'blue' colour of the tower is just to gain publicity for the development, and that hopefully in the near future, once the inside of the tower has been done, that they will reclad it. This is what I hope anyway, as it is awful at the moment. Even in the latest planning application, from last month, even shows the tower clearly in white, with multi-coloured windows. So I think this is why is is blue for the moment. The trick worked too, as it is in the mercury quite often.

The renders on the official website also show the tower in white, not blue:
http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/homeimage-1.jpg

It would be much better without the multi-coloured windows - but we cant have everything :bash:

By the way - dont you think the first ever render of the development looked much better?:

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/512LeicesterSetForMassiveReclads_pic1.jpg

I think it does - and it would have been something to be proud of if they had stuck to this render. :ohno:

Image is from this article: http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=512

I wonder why they changed they're minds?

I was at leicester station yesterday and now the new windows are in, the building doesn't look so bad. If they were to take away the random coloured panes, we might have something that doesnt look totally ridiculous. I'm not saying it'd look acceptable, but it'd look less shit than it does now.

Even with the first render that Leicester Man posted the tower still looks awful even if it is clad in white. What materials will they use if they do decide to clad it in white? It'll most likely be coloured plastic panels which is even worse. They'll age terribly. At least coloured concrete is durable enough to look good for a prolonged period of time, you can just give it another lick of paint.
Coloured panels will need to be replaced which will cost more and make it look cheap. Keep the paint I say.

What does it say about the planning process in Leicester where the eventual look of a significant city building is unknown despite it having been given planning permission?

I think if the orginal render was the finished article, then that would fit well into the areas, since the Colton Sqaure development has gone that way, so will international house

SGT Tower does look pretty impressive when viewed from St George's Retail Park. From the Wickes forecourt, you get good views of a few of Leicester's towers. Shame I didn't have a camera with me...

You could easily get a good view of the Simpson towers from there when they'll be built. :)

From today's Mercury:

BLUE TOWER IS ALMOST READY FOR BUSINESS

BY JENNY CORNISH
CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER

10:30 - 18 October 2007

One of the city's most talked-about developments is almost finished - and, yes, the blue tower is here to stay.

The outside of St George's Tower will be completed by the middle of next month.

Next door, a nine-storey building will be ready for businesses to move in by Christmas.

Developers are now waiting on tenterhooks to find out if a casino, planned for the ground floor of the silver building, will get a licence.

The hearing is in early December and the future direction of the project rests on the decision.

Amir Zarbafi, owner of developer Magnet Property Investment, said: "A very critical part of its success will be the licence hearing. It will set the tone of the direction in which this building will go forward.

"It is quite important in terms of the job creation for Leicester.

"The casino will be employing something like 200 people and it turns the building from being a five-day-a-week building to being a 24-7 operation."

He said the casino licence would also have a knock-on effect for other businesses which could move in.

The aim is to sign up a hotel to open in the blue tower, along with apartments, and for businesses and a gym to move into the silver building next door.

Mr Zarbafi said: "If the casino licence is given, the hotel operator will be employing 33 per cent more people and the gym operator will be looking at a seven-day business.

"We're currently talking to four three-star and two four-star hotel operators. The two four-stars will only go in if the casino licence gets approved."

However, plans for the rest of the silver building are pressing ahead, with 24 flats on the ninth level almost completed.

A show flat has been prepared.

Twelve businesses are also showing an interest in moving in to the 150,000 sq ft of office space below the flats.

"There are opportunities for employers to employ 4,000 people here," said Mr Zarbafi.

"It will act as a catalyst to allow the city of Leicester to become more of a 24-7 operation rather than a place where people come in during the day and disappear in the early evenings."

The blue tower was designed to match the city's football club colours.

Mr Zarbafi said he was happy with the colour, despite a number of complaints.

"I gave up listening to them a long time ago," he said. "You can't please all of the people all of the time."

Leicester Mercury website, 18th October, 2007

:ohno: that tower.

Mr Zarbafi said he was happy with the colour, despite a number of complaints.

"I gave up listening to them a long time ago," he said. "You can't please all of the people all of the time."

He's a fucking wanker no two ways about it....:bash:

Talk about a slap in the face of Leicester!!!

You can't please all people - He hasn't pleased anybody, apart from his bank manager - the tight fisted f#@*ing twat!

Notice that the 4* hotels will only come if the casino is approved? Why? :nuts:

Upmarket Hotels like to be around conference facilities, casinos and bars and restaurants.

We've got one 4star in Notts...its right across the road from a casino. Infact.. within 50 meters of the casino there is 3 hotels.

Remember the Manchester supercasino? It consisted of Casinos, Hotels, More hotels, and conference centres.

Casino's give something for all of those rich folk to do.... somewhere they can splash out their money whilst only across the road from the hotel.

i can see why the hotel would be affected by the casino but why would the gym?

Ohh. I see.

I'm surprised the tower has attracted 5 potential hoteliers, obviously the 4* ones weren't attracted by the tower itself then :laugh:, more for the money making?

About these 4 star hoteliers, wait till they actually come to Leicester and conduct a scoping exercise, I can just hear them now 'what, a hotel in that fuxking blue thing.....not a chance' .

I am just waiting for the fanfare when Zarbifi announces a forumula 100 hotel takes up residence

About these 4 star hoteliers, wait till they actually come to Leicester and conduct a scoping exercise, I can just hear them now 'what, a hotel in that fuxking blue thing.....not a chance' .

I am just waiting for the fanfare when Zarbifi announces a forumula 100 hotel takes up residence

:lol: :lol:

i can see why the hotel would be affected by the casino but why would the gym?

Well... like the report said.. if you bring a casino.. that turns the building into a building which stays open 24/7... that appeals to the gym... .. a place which is always open... and will probably have good links with the hotel... its all money.

Mr Zabafi should be applauded for his investment in SGT, hopefully jobs and wealth will be created where once there was dereliction and wasted opportunities in such a prime location.

But why oh why did he have to buy a job lot of paint from British Rail after they had stopped painting their trains blue ? :?

Aurthur Daly of Leicester. :lol:

The development on the whole is fine. Even though it's there (the tower) to stay and all that, it's let the whole development down IMO.

If the tower and the 9 storey addition fill up with businesses and residents, then that is better for this part of town and Leicester as a whole, than an empty tower block next door to our train station.

I welcome the investment that this man has made in Leicester. So what if the tower is blue?

Is it the colour people object to or the implementation? Would we have liked it more if he'd had covered the tower with blue tiles instead of blue paint or would it have made no difference?

I think that the only thing that people object to is the cheap way in which the tower has been painted blue. The new building next to the tower is fine, but it's quite modern and the blue tower clashes. Would it be that difficult to reclad the tower?

Is it the colour people object to or the implementation? Would we have liked it more if he'd had covered the tower with blue tiles instead of blue paint or would it have made no difference?

For me it's the implementation, yes tiles or cladding of whatever colour would have seen a much more professional finish in keeping with this prominent landmark.

The blue initially was a shock but it's the way it's been cheaply done that i object too. If you notice across the road from SGT there is a curved fronted 4 storey building (Army careers building) It was refirbished mid 90's and was painted blue & red with details picked out in yellowy/gold. It did in my opinion transform this building for the better. Perhaps Zabarfi was inspired by that building across the road (wish he hadn't) :lol:

I think that the only thing that people object to is the cheap way in which the tower has been painted blue. The new building next to the tower is fine, but it's quite modern and the blue tower clashes. Would it be that difficult to reclad the tower?

Not difficult just more expensive which would eat into Zarbafis profits and cash flow. I would have lent him a million or two if i'd won the lottery and glazed the tower in reflective mirror glass that would have been my dream. Oh well it least it wasn't demolished.:colgate:

At least people who live in the smaller block won't forget how to find their apartment when they've had a few.

Here's the copy of the article from the Mercury

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p109/leicesterskyscraper/stgeorge.jpg

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p109/leicesterskyscraper/Zarbafi.jpg

Some updates from around St George's this afternoon...sunglasses needed for the first one!!!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2287/1634705781_5b39046859_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2030/1635568516_fbca9614b7_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2379/1634698169_8ea5d57f26_o.jpg

Colton Square - opposite St George's

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2346/1635562570_385d9a6f91_o.jpg

Are the random coloured windows not going on the right hand side of the tower then?
The 9 storey section of the tower looks ok, not as good as I thought it would though.
The cladding doesn't look like it'll age very well at all.

Zarbarfi is actually leaving these to the end. The 'random' bits of coloured glass will spell something out to the citizens of Leicester.

Oh dear.
What will they say? CRAP

I don't know, it's a surprise :nuts:

I have a hunch this is all going to end in tears for Mr Zarbarfi. He claims that there is loads of interest from companies, etc but he would say that wouldn't he? Let him name them. He seems to have the sort of maverick egotist attitude you get with football club owners - I don't think that sort of approach works so well in business nowadays however.

I can just about see companies being happy in the BT but I think the stigma and piss-taking is going to put off pretty much anyone from renting a flat there. Plus we have too many flats already.

Regardless of the colour, the general appearance of the tower is ugly by almost any standards. Commercial suicide?

Leicester Regeneration Company don't seem to comment on this much these days - I think they're probably taking the "give him a length of rope and let him hang himself" approach. Perhaps they are right.

Plus we have too many flats already.



Not true. I read some months ago in a report that Leicester is one place where demand is still out stripping supply. Someone on here said they'd bought an apartment in Thames Tower off plan and all of the 112 apartments have been sold. They same will happen to West Bridge.

I think the apartments in SGT are aimed at families? Did I read that on their web site?

I think some of them are, but not all. If you have a look at the show flat on the previous page, I don't think many families would want to live in it.

Well atleast it will be easy to direct people to your home!
The big blue tower is beggining to grow on me though, especially from a distance.
Anyway surely anything is better than the drab grey it used to be.

Great photos Lears.

I think the business quarter phase 2 will now have to exceed in quality even more now.

http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p109/leicesterskyscraper/Zarbafi.jpg

:lol:

Is it the colour people object to or the implementation? Would we have liked it more if he'd had covered the tower with blue tiles instead of blue paint or would it have made no difference?

The implementation of the paint had definitley put off the blue colour. It may be fine from afar and wouldn't have been half as bad if you couldn't see the cheap paint job from up close.

Oh dear.
What will they say? CRAP

:lol:

Not true. I read some months ago in a report that Leicester is one place where demand is still out stripping supply. Someone on here said they'd bought an apartment in Thames Tower off plan and all of the 112 apartments have been sold. They same will happen to West Bridge.

I think the apartments in SGT are aimed at families? Did I read that on their web site?

But isn't it the case the most of these purchases are buy-to-let rather than people buying to move in themselves? What proportion of Leicester flats are actually occupied? This concerns be because although some flats are good quality a lot are shoe boxes which will devalue and probably end up empty or full of undesirables.

Would be interested to know about occupancy rather than just sales.

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee79/STOREYS39/CRIM0093.jpg

Zarbarfi is actually leaving these to the end. The 'random' bits of coloured glass will spell something out to the citizens of Leicester.

Here's a sneak preview if you just can't wait...

http://desk.unfrequented.com/sgt.jpg

:)

At it all becomes clear ££££££££ - which side is this?

Brilliant. Must have taken you ages! This will advertise the shops in and around the Haymarket to all the commuters :| :D


BG

But isn't it the case the most of these purchases are buy-to-let rather than people buying to move in themselves? What proportion of Leicester flats are actually occupied? This concerns be because although some flats are good quality a lot are shoe boxes which will devalue and probably end up empty or full of undesirables.

Would be interested to know about occupancy rather than just sales.

I was talking to an estate agent about this a few months back, and from what he said, Leicester is seeing huge demand for new homes - especially near or in the city centre. I've seen first hand just how quickly apartments can be snapped up, we've tried viewing possible new homes several times, only to be told that they were taken days before we found them! They appear on the net, and sure enough they're gone before you get to them.

Nottingham on the other hand are apparently struggling, they've too many homes and not enough demand. Their local paper had an article in it about the city having hundreds of homes that aren't being sold - I think we have the better side of the coin.

I must say i'm a little surprised at the level of demand here. Shows a lot of confidence and potential for further developments :)


BG

I reckon the Blue St Georges Tower is a huge conspiracy by the council because from now on all crappy developments will look decent relative to this thing and hence be approved without so much as a whimper from anyone! There has to be a conspiracy behind this thing its the only *real* explanation...

Hey guys,

Just to tell you that BBC Leicester interviewed the owner, Mr Zarbafi. Here is the link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/content/articles/2007/07/09/st_georges_tower_feature.shtml

He says the colour is here to stay :ohno:

Call me cynical if you like but what else would an estate agent say? "No we can't shift anything at the moment - its a dead town"?

Yet again I think its very important to distinguish sales from occupancy as I have a feeling significant numbers of flats may not actually be occupied (correct me if you know otherwise - depends on the quality of the building I expect). Investors buy-to-let these speculatively on the back of the froth about regeneration and the general increase in house prices over the years.

I'm sure I read recently that the glut of flats was keeping prices subdued in the city. There are loads of for-sale sings outside blocks. I just hope these do end up being occupied by long-term owner residents.

I think its a fair criticism that the runaway residential developments going on haven't been matched by job opportunities in the city. It is 5 years since the Regeneration Company was founded and only now are we seeing the business quarter and science park getting underway. Hopefully the opportunites catch up with the flats otherwise we're one house price crash away from a slum of Dickensian proportions.

That's why I'd like to see more office/work developments; as at the moment there are far more residential ones in the pipeline in comparison. Also many of the proposed officed developments nclude their own apartments, i.e The Core (Colton Square), top floor of International House and of course SGT.

I walked past Epic House today.

Lord, that was depressing.

I wonder what's become of those plans to convert the upper floors to flats (approval granted).

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/2451/photo0032rr9.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=photo0032rr9.jpg)

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/7339/photo0036tr8.th.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=photo0036tr8.jpg)

I see you've avoided photographing the tower :lol:. But what's that blue bit I'm seeing in the main building!

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/669/photo0021cs7.th.jpg (http://img508.imageshack.us/my.php?image=photo0021cs7.jpg):ohno:

Oh. :ohno: indeed.

It's bent.

No, really

Dodgy camera phone!

It's quite a good quality picture for a camera phone.

Am I the only one who actually likes the tower (from a distance only)? Its different, and is an improvement on the drab grey it was before. And as the developer intended, it is now a major landmark on our skyline. I mean how many people actually noticed it from a distance before the colour change?

But it's a landmark for all the wrong reasons. It may look 'OK' form afar, however, it's still horrid from nearby and from where rail travellers and many others will see it.

Maybe just you! :)

Regardless of colour its a monument to crap planning in our city. It was crap when it was built and its crap now when the alternative for the site that LRC proposed was so much better.

:(

I agree with your last point bravil-it's definitely a poor second best (tower part anyway).

I have a question for everyone. Would you rather have St Georges Tower like it is now? Or a replacement low rise for instance that is well designed?
Some people don't really care about what it looks like as long as it's tall.
If it was me I'd rather see a well designed low rise. What about you? Discuss.

Stef88 pretty obvious, I think most would like a well designed building whatever the size. Whatever the hell you mean by "well designed"? I spose the RIBA building of the year is well designed, but I didn't like it much. Can't really answer the question without specific plans to decide between.

Well some people think "Oh well it doesn't look brilliant but at least it's tall"
As St Georges Tower plays a big part in Leicester's skyline some people may like the way it looks as it's still tall and has an impact on the skyline.
People who actually have an interest in design will obviously think differently.

nothing fucking blue

The main problem is that what could have become a well thought out and well designed 'reclad' of some sort has totally been disregarded by the developer. I know it's his building, blablah, but this is our city. I just hope that someway this debacle can be sorted out.

Yes as Stef mentioned regarding St Georges Tower i do like tall buildings for the sake of it, but of course would prefer the finishing materials to be of a higher quality.

The cheap painted spray job has unfortuately given Leicester's tall buildings a bad name again just as confidence was returning. (Nothing wrong with the tower) 20 glorious storeys, saying look at me i'm the dogs b*****s.

Opal Court, Filbert Village have had a battering recently for no good reason just an attack of high-rise phobia !

It's crap like this which will influence future decision makers on the council.

I like tall big buildings i live in a big city not a poxy village !

I would much prefer a Tower than lots of smaller "well designed" buildings. Why couldn't the LRC show a bit of ambition and plan for a cluster of Quality high rises in the first place? or perhaps now for on top of the Station car park?

I would much prefer a Tower than lots of smaller "well designed" buildings. Why couldn't the LRC show a bit of ambition and plan for a cluster of Quality high rises in the first place? or perhaps now for on top of the Station car park?

Absouletely. St Georges Tower may not be the nicest building to look at, whatever it's colour. (personally i like it though) But if it was included in a cluster of new generation high-rise offices it could form the economic engine room of the city if not the region !

Perhaps with so many people disliking St Georges Tower. There could be campaigne to build lots of 30 storey towers around it, to hide it :lol:

That's what I think too, what we need now are a few good quality office towers next to the station as part of the Buisness Quarter Phase 2.

That's what I think too, what we need now are a few good quality office towers next to the station as part of the Buisness Quarter Phase 2.


As long as they have adequate parking facilities as this is where our towers have had problems in the past. With this scale of a project we should be able to attract bigger businesses.

Hopefully the planned multi-storey car park ot an underground one may help.

Why couldn't the LRC show a bit of ambition and plan for a cluster of Quality high rises in the first place?

They did. if you look at the masterplan document you can see the type of buildings they were aiming for. Unfortunately, they wouldn't pay (the money grabbing bastard) zarbafi enough money for him to sell SGT and we see the results of his shocking paint job. I know I need my head examining but I am getting used to the blue (i know I need to lie down in a darkened room) but I cannot get use to those stupid coloured windows. Who is going to live in flat that has a yellow hue?

Also has anyone noticed the adverts for the flats in the SGT? James Sellicks marketing 'technique' is to show pictures of the 'view' from the building and NOT a picture looking at the building, wise choice I think. :ohno:

I would much prefer a Tower than lots of smaller "well designed" buildings. Why couldn't the LRC show a bit of ambition and plan for a cluster of Quality high rises in the first place? or perhaps now for on top of the Station car park?

Well in the consultation process the people spoke and said they didn't want 'high-rises' :ohno:. But surely we need something to upstage SGT. ;)

Just driving into work this morning and for the second time a week. Ben Jackson the BCC radio Leicester presenter has been debating the St Georges Tower controversy. Basically it was a sympathetic peice about what a great developer Zarbafi is. I nearly crashed my car with rage!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway he is asking people to text in with their thoughts this is what I sent him Dear Ben on the subject of the blue tower I nearly crashed my car with shock when I heard you pandering to Zarbafi last week, St Georges tower makes our city a laughing stock to visitors and should be roundly condemned by the BBC, just read what leicester people really think by going onto skyscrapercity.com East Midland Forum St Georges Phil from Leicester

Bombard them with texts showing our comptempt for this awful refurb to 01162561049

Just driving into work this morning and for the second time in a week. Ben Jackson the BBC radio Leicester presenter has been debating the St Georges Tower controversy. Basically it was a sympathetic peice about what a great developer Zarbafi is. I nearly crashed my car with rage!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway he is asking people to text in with their thoughts this is what I sent him Dear Ben on the subject of the blue tower I nearly crashed my car with shock when I heard you pandering to Zarbafi last week, St Georges tower makes our city a laughing stock to visitors and should be roundly condemned by the BBC, just read what leicester people really think by going onto skyscrapercity.com East Midland Forum St Georges Phil from Leicester

Bombard them with texts showing our comptempt for this awful refurb to 01162561049

I can forgive someone for thinking it's 'alright' but to think it's brilliant is beyond me.. I don't understand some people, I really don't..

That's just...:ohno:

Thats a bit of a change in attitude from Ben Jackson! Only last month he was bemoaning the loss of the Thomas Cook hotel. You would think he'd be gunning for SGT don't you think?

I think there are some potential developments on the cards round the back of the tower where the car park is - seem to recall John Nicholls mentioning it. Plenty of space there - just a shame it will have the monstrous blue erection looming over it. I suspect that these developments may only be 'on paper' (and presumably likely to stay that way as long as the blue thing remains.)

From Property Week - apologies if posted before...

Thanks for nothing
14.07.06

Amir Zarbafi’s redevelopment of St George’s Tower in Leicester has brought him into conflict with Leicester Regeneration. Stuart Watson talks to him in his first major interview. Photograph by Yosuke Morikawa

By Stuart Watson

Advertisement
Amir Zarbafi is a controversial figure in Leicester – and his outspoken manner is unlikely to mitigate the situation.

‘It’s like Zimbabwe,’ he seethes. ‘They say: “We don’t like your attitude, so we will compulsory purchase you.”’

The London-based private investor-developer’s IRE is directed at Leicester Regeneration, with which he has been in dispute since its creation five years ago.

Far from shooting from the hip, though, the 42-year-old pauses from time to time to choose the most appropriate words, tilting his face toward the ceiling as he does so. While he never raises his voice, he is clearly angered by what he perceives as a lack of appreciation for his efforts to develop in the city.

‘They are extremely arrogant,’ he fumes.

‘I would really like to know who the last man was to spend £33m in Leicester.’

Zarbafi’s Leicester vehicle, Magnet Property Investments, is now several months into the £25m contract for the first phase of the £80m redevelopment of the 400,000 sq ft (37,160 sq m) St George’s Tower in the city centre.

Fly in the ointment

The strife has arisen because the building lies at the heart of the area identified in the urban regeneration company’s masterplan as the second phase of the city’s new business quarter. Leicester Regeneration argues that Zarbafi’s plans do not fit with the masterplan’s ambitions for the area.

The monstrous, 20-storey lump of dark grey concrete ticks all the boxes of Zarbafi’s acquisition criteria: to buy the biggest, ugliest building on a street, preferably with a few years’ income. He then seeks a change of use to increase the site’s value, before selling it on at a profit or redeveloping it.

Each of his projects – there are 32 across the UK – is carried out as a joint venture between Zarbafi and a UK-based private investor – or ‘sugar daddy’, as he puts it.

‘They are all self-made people who have generally made money in another business,’ he says. ‘The sugar daddies trust me 100%. They let me get on with it.’

Zarbafi uses a variety of vehicles, including limited partnerships and unit trusts, putting up 25% of the equity himself, while the investors supply the remaining 75%. Some buildings are retained as investments, while others are sold and the profits split 50:50.

He is undertaking two large office schemes – the first of which will have a developed value of £100m – on Dingwall Road in Croydon, as well as a £35m-£40m scheme of 67 flats at Sir John Lyon House in the City of London.

He has also built an office scheme at the neighbouring Broken Wharf House.

He is reluctant to name further schemes or to ascribe a value to the projects that he has under way but, given the size of several of them, the figure must comfortably exceed £500m, at a conservative estimate.

Zarbafi claims that until 2011, his companies will build between 250,000 and 500,000 sq ft (23,225-46,450 sq m) a year and that he is not searching for further investors.

‘I have stopped networking for at least five years,’ he says. ‘I avoid the meetings if I can.

I have enough trouble keeping the current investor base happy and it has been difficult to find stock for the past three or four years because there are more people in the market.’

Zarbafi was born in Iran in 1964. Both his parents had been students in England and wanted their son to receive an English public school education, so from the age of 11, he boarded at a prep school in Surrey and then attended Charterhouse. Far from being an intimidating experience for an 11-year-old who spoke no English when he arrived in the country, Zarbafi claims he relished his school years. ‘I took to it like a duck to water,’ he says.

He studied building construction and management at Bristol Polytechnic, graduating in 1986. ‘My father wanted me to go back to Iran and build houses, but I was keen to be my own man as soon as possible,’ he recalls.

After two years’ work in the construction industry, Zarbafi moved into residential mortgage brokerage with Chase De Vere and was instrumental in encouraging the financial services company to undertake more commercial transactions.

Bust or boom


He was keen to set up his own niche commercial mortgage brokerage and in 1991 decided the time was ripe.

‘Canary Wharf went bust and I decided to start my own company,’ he says. ‘After that, what else could go bust? It must have been the bottom.’

Zarbafi began by arranging funding for low-risk deals on property such as supermarkets and government buildings, leveraging in extra bank funding in exchange for a share in the property. Selling out of these investments between 1994 and 1997 provided him with the capital to start his development business.

He first became involved in Leicester in 1996, after Wilson Bowden initiated a deal to allow BT to move out of St George’s Tower and into a site owned by the East Midlands-based commercial developer. Wilson Bowden then sold St George’s Tower to Zarbafi for £1.5m.

The sale incorporated a four-year lease for BT with a break clause after two years, and a 10-year lease to the building’s other tenant, the Post Office, with a mutual landlord/tenant break after two years.

Zarbafi planned to demolish the building and build a leisure and retail scheme with a cinema above. He secured planning permission, but by the time BT and the Post Office had vacated St George’s Tower, three other cinemas had been built in Leicester and the scheme lost the cinema operator that was lined up as the anchor tenant.

Zarbafi decided to refurbish the building instead, and received planning consent in June 2001. ‘While it was being stripped out in December 2001, Leicester Regeneration came along with the first of its grand plans. It made noises that if we didn’t play ball, it would CPO us,’ he claims.

Leicester Regeneration chief executive John Nicholls says he is still interested in participating in discussions regarding the future of the site. ‘Obviously, Magnet is very keen to invest and we are keen to find ways that it can work with the grain of what we are doing, and not against it,’ he says.

Nicholls defends his company’s record.

‘It is frustrating that the controversy about that building is obscuring the other projects that are going on,’ he says. ‘We have 2,000 dwellings and 100,000 sq ft of offices under construction, both sites for the science park have been cleared and the Shires [retail] development is progressing very well.’

Leicester Regeneration has aspirations to link the St George’s site with neighbouring ones owned by Network Rail and Royal Mail.

It aims to provide a location for high-quality office development and to improve the railway station’s links with the city centre, from which it is separated by the inner ring road.

‘We tried for three years to work out how we could unlock it,’ says Zarbafi. ‘We have never heard a sensible strategy. Leicester Regeneration made a two-line offer of £2.5m in March 2004. In December 2001, the property was valued at £6.5m for our bankers. I have always said come and buy it, but they have never had the money, or the other two landowners, or the planning.’

If the delays had persisted until the end of this year, Zarbafi’s planning permission would have expired, reducing the value of the site. So he contends that he had no option but to start work. The first phase, comprising 40,000 sq ft (3,716 sq m) of retail and leisure and 150,000 sq ft (13,935 sq m) of offices, is due to complete in December. It will be followed by a further 40,000 sq ft (3,716 sq m) of leisure and 24 flats in March. The final phase, due for completion in September 2007, will include a hotel in the tower.

As the work started, a hoarding was erected on the scaffolding outside the scheme reading: ‘400,000 sq ft of regeneration for Leicester, no thanks to Leicester Regeneration.’

Does Zarbafi not regard this as a confrontational move?

‘They decided to bulldoze me over,’ he responds. ‘They started the confrontational stuff. I have worked very hard for my investors, so for someone to start costing me and my partner £300,000 a year in insurance and security between 2002 and 2005 hurts.’

Remote possibility

The further Zarbafi proceeds with his development, the more expensive and difficult the CPO process will become. It now appears a remote possibility. He is dubious about the value of urban regeneration companies.

‘I believe market forces force events to occur, and when you try to interfere, you do not have the speed of that process,’ he argues.

On the other side of the ring road, Akeler has begun the first phase of its 100,000 sq ft (9,290 sq m) office development on the site of the former police station, which will form the first phase of the new business quarter.

Niall McGilp, a director at Akeler, says: ‘When we started out, there was a masterplan for the city centre which had the second phase of the new business quarter and a major rerouting of the ring road. We have accepted that those things are unlikely to happen, but we are still confident that our scheme will work.’

The offices in the refurbished space at Zarbafi’s scheme are likely to be significantly cheaper than at Akeler’s scheme and both developers say they will not be in direct competition with each other.

Zarbafi clearly possesses an unshakeable faith in the virtues of private enterprise. His conflict with Leicester Regeneration is not the first example of a clash between a developer and a regeneration agency. And with the public sector playing an ever-expanding role in urban renewal, it will certainly not be the last.

:blahblah:

Thanks for that.

Do you think he'll invest in Leicester again?

No matter how much you dislike Connect Four atleast somethings been done with it.

Though it sounds like his original plan would have been great for the city, giving us another retail anchor the other side of town to rival highcross.

Well if there's money to be made...

I don't dislike te building as a whole, it's just the tower's so called 'renovation' that I'm at odds with. The rest makes quite a nice impression when viewed from the outside and I'm sure the offices will be snapped up quickly.

It weird because I like the Tower-although a better paint job could have been done, but think the main parts a bit boring. You can't please everyone!

Ying and Yang and all that. :)

Has anything been confirmed to be going in it yet?

No, that's another odd thing, being so close to the opening date as well. There are claims that a government department and other companies are interested in it. There's been no new news on the occupancy front as yet. I forgot, the casino has been named, can't remember its name; though it's part of the Thistle hotels group, who are also interested in moving in, apparently.

No, that's another odd thing, being so close to the opening date as well. There are claims that a government department and other companies are interested in it. There's been no new news on the occupancy front as yet. I forgot, the casino has been named, can't remember its name; though it's part of the Thistle hotels group, who are also interested in moving in, apparently.

Has it been confirmed? I remember a while back them saying that the casino needs permision? But if it gest it then we should have a decent hotel lined up etc.

Of course it depends on the approval and the 4 star hotels will only want to move in if it is approved according to this recent Mercury article:

BLUE TOWER IS ALMOST READY FOR BUSINESS

BY JENNY CORNISH
CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER

10:30 - 18 October 2007

One of the city's most talked-about developments is almost finished - and, yes, the blue tower is here to stay.

The outside of St George's Tower will be completed by the middle of next month.

Next door, a nine-storey building will be ready for businesses to move in by Christmas.

Developers are now waiting on tenterhooks to find out if a casino, planned for the ground floor of the silver building, will get a licence.

The hearing is in early December and the future direction of the project rests on the decision.

Amir Zarbafi, owner of developer Magnet Property Investment, said: "A very critical part of its success will be the licence hearing. It will set the tone of the direction in which this building will go forward.

"It is quite important in terms of the job creation for Leicester.

"The casino will be employing something like 200 people and it turns the building from being a five-day-a-week building to being a 24-7 operation."

He said the casino licence would also have a knock-on effect for other businesses which could move in.

The aim is to sign up a hotel to open in the blue tower, along with apartments, and for businesses and a gym to move into the silver building next door.

Mr Zarbafi said: "If the casino licence is given, the hotel operator will be employing 33 per cent more people and the gym operator will be looking at a seven-day business.

"We're currently talking to four three-star and two four-star hotel operators. The two four-stars will only go in if the casino licence gets approved."

However, plans for the rest of the silver building are pressing ahead, with 24 flats on the ninth level almost completed.

A show flat has been prepared.

Twelve businesses are also showing an interest in moving in to the 150,000 sq ft of office space below the flats.

"There are opportunities for employers to employ 4,000 people here," said Mr Zarbafi.

"It will act as a catalyst to allow the city of Leicester to become more of a 24-7 operation rather than a place where people come in during the day and disappear in the early evenings."

The blue tower was designed to match the city's football club colours.

Mr Zarbafi said he was happy with the colour, despite a number of complaints.

"I gave up listening to them a long time ago," he said. "You can't please all of the people all of the time."

Leicester Mercury website, 18th October 2007

I hope the tower is lit well at night. It could be a nice landmark at night at least.

My two-penneth would be that there's something not right about the St Georges development. Can't quite but my finger on why, but I expect more to be happening - potential occupiers, obvious sign's of work and I'm not seeing it.

It looks like either it's not going well, or they've got something else up their sleeve, like getting the Council to compulsorily purchase it. And it looks like a complete sack of shit...

Welcome Sir Robert! :)

I thought they would have announced more occupiers by now, they seem so 'confident' in themselves.


Another weird thing is and I've not mentioned this before, but when the new floor extensions were being built it looked as though they were being built with plyboard or MDF, with hardly any steel joists or bricks in sight. Honestly!

Do you think this is just abig cover-up?

Just look at these from the SGT site to see what I mean:

http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/p3b.jpg http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/p8b.jpg
Source: St George's Leicester website

Link: http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/progress.html

Cheers, RS

I find the whole thing pretty bizarre. It's like the ginger step-child of Leicester's redevelopment. The Council HATE it - I was told they've had an enormous number of complaints about it.

Rumour has it that if the owners apply for any changes to the permissions, the Council will make them paint it another colour.

My gut feeling though, and I have no evidence to back this up, is that the developers found some kind of underhand way to make money out of this. Maybe he got some kind of grant or incentive just to take over the building, that is not dependant on letting it out. I'll be surprised if they find any top notch occupiers.

Ohh these conspiracy theories! :gossip: I wonder what the real story is-if there is one.

I agree Sir Robert. Someone from Leicester regeneration I spoke to described it as 'commercial suicide'. One wonders if Zarbafi in his war with LRC has taken things too far with the provocative paint job?

I wouldn't live there or move my business in there - would you?

On the other hand, if he isn't crazy then he's probably just keeping the wind-up going as long as possible and will repaint a more sympathetic colour once its all ready.

I thought the council planning people's letter to the Mercury yesterday was a bit feeble: Letter here (http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132938&command=displayContent&sourceNode=132547&contentPK=18835688&folderPk=77483&pNodeId=132438). How can the colour of a building that big not be a condition of the planning permission? I really think the planning dept are so used to dealing with trivial applications for uPVC windows that they don't know hwo to respond to big cases like this.

I read that too and thought how ridiculous it was. Talking of uPVC windows and SGT...

Who know? It could just be the developers way of sticking two fingers up at everyone - doing it his way.

I've not had a good look recently, but when it had first been painted, it looked terrible - really patchy and uneven. Anyone know if this is still the case? That had have to put you off.

Strangely I would like to see the views from the top, I bet they're amazing. It stilll has potential to be a decent development.

Paint job was still the same the last time I saw it. You can still read the words 'wonder world' at the top if you look carefully enough even after it's been painted over!

How can the colour of a building that big not be a condition of the planning permission? I really think the planning dept are so used to dealing with trivial applications for uPVC windows that they don't know hwo to respond to big cases like this.
Daft as it sounds, the Council are not allowed to make the colour of paint part of the planning approval. It's a bit of a loophole. They could if it was cladding and equally if the building was in a conservation area, then they could tell them not to paint it that colour.

I suppose they could try and take a legal action on it, but they'd have no guarentee of winning and it could be enormously expensive. I've worked on tall buildings in London and they do have rules about where they can be seen from (with relation to St Pauls, Tower of London, etc), so there is some legal basis.

What the Council could try and do is get the developer to sign some sort of legal covenant to paint it a certain colour, in return for approving changes to the planning details. But even that could be a bit dodgy.

I agree that no decent business will want to be associated with this building at the moment.

OK, another question: Are the rails for the raisable painting/window cleaning platform (or whatever its called) still attached to the outside? If so would that suggest that there was further work planned for the outside or will they remain permanently anyway?

I'm shocked that the colour cannot be made a condition of planning permission - quite a loophole when you consider how many other nit-picking things *can* be set as conditions don't you think?

If they are still there (can't remember), they may still be used for fitting the windows in as they were still doing that last time I had a look.

hes just a greedy bastard, i fucking hate him, anyone who is says they are getting used to it just look at the mercury building then look at that fucking tower.

its mindless vandalism

its got some kind of fucking plastic colored panels in the windows for fucks sake, u cant even buy them plastic panels, they are raw materials that are usually used by toy companys to mold into fucking plastic pedal cars

ben jackson must be a cunt

OK, another question: Are the rails for the raisable painting/window cleaning platform (or whatever its called) still attached to the outside? If so would that suggest that there was further work planned for the outside or will they remain permanently anyway?


I can confirm they are still there. The bottom of the tower and proposed main entrance have not been touched at all yet.

Welcome Sir Robert! :)

I thought they would have announced more occupiers by now, they seem so 'confident' in themselves.


Another weird thing is and I've not mentioned this before, but when the new floor extensions were being built it looked as though they were being built with plyboard or MDF, with hardly any steel joists or bricks in sight. Honestly!

Do you think this is just abig cover-up?

Just look at these from the SGT site to see what I mean:

http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/p3b.jpg http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/p8b.jpg
Source: St George's Leicester website

Link: http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/progress.html

I don't think you should be worrying, this looks like the way they build low rise buildings in the US, and these essentially are low rise buildings plonked on top of the building. Its just a cheap way of building like prefabs etc.

I can't believe that anyone would invest all that money in a building just to argue with the LRC, and its not all his money either!

If the development is meant to be prestigious, why is it being constructed so crudely then? Those materials will barely survive the test of time and Britain's weather at that height!

If the development is meant to be prestigious, why is it being constructed so crudely then? Those materials will barely survive the test of time and Britain's weather at that height!

Who knows! The materials must be able to withstand the weather or they wuldnt have been given planning permision. Perhaps as they are building on top of another building they need to use lightweight materials? I dont know. but it does seem wierd.

Yes it's very weird, but what do I know about construction. :nuts:

Yes it's very weird, but what do I know about construction. :nuts:

Same here, I'm just guessing!

But its got to work or they wouldnt allow it to be built.

It's probably a good thing the building won't stand the test of time. There is hope yet!!

Yes, there's always that! :lol:

its a fucking insurance job, its made up of fucking balsa wood and flammable blue paint

please someone flick a fucking match at it

its a fucking insurance job, its made up of fucking balsa wood and flammable blue paint

please someone flick a fucking match at it

I hope not, its one of our not many towers, and is different to the normal boring new builds.

Didn't the LRC's original plan for the Business Quarter consist entirely of low rises (i.e. ten storeys or less)? At least with the SGT and Elizabeth House stubbornly stayng put they might be forced to reconsider commissioning a tower or two to regain the lost floorspace.

I hope so. Tall office blocks are being built in other cities.

Yeah. Businesses: relocate to Leicester! The city that's scared of tall office blocks.

Image a little 'canary Wharf' there! Though with more interesting towers.

Are you saying the Gherkin is dull? :?

The Gherkin's not in Canary Wharf, it's in The City. No. 1 Canada Square ('The Pencil') is there though and is the current tallest office tower in Britain, I think?

btw the Gherkin is one of the best looking skyscrapers around. ;)

The original height limit was SEVEN storeys :bash:

About half the height of the insurance buildings opposite, 12 storeys or so (these were put up in the mid 80s I think) and certainly not in keeping with the idea of a "prestigious office quarter" :|

We would be the laughing stock at any expo trying to promote our city as a business base for any company bigger than a corner shop :mad:


BG

That would be bad. :ohno: Roll on the Business Quarter phase 2 - I hope it won't disappoint.

The Tall Buildings SPD (see City council website) gives guidelines for tall buildings developments.

This is what the document classifies as 'tall buildings':
http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x20/lecimage/TalBldngsSPD.jpg
Tall Buildings SPD document

20m? That's only about 65ft !! Or about 6 floors. They have got to be joking :nuts:

High rise buildings are generally considered to be over 115ft (35m)


BG

Yes that is abit short isn't it!

SGT is very similar in design to the CIS tower in Manchester. Pity SGT isn't getting the same treatment in recladding as CIS has.

outsider, are u saying st goerges tower is better than new builds? are u sure m8? u prefer that big blue thing to things like the simpsons towers? thats mad

id rather replace the blue tower wiv a midgets bungalow

I hope not, its one of our not many towers, and is different to the normal boring new builds.

Outsider1, no it is not boring, it is just the worst, most awful, singularly flippin ugly refurb ever, ever undertaken. I swear this building will win prizes in years to come..... I leave it to your imagination what kind of prizes

An indication of what can be done with crap buildings...

http://www.mcdproperty.com/mcdpr020.asp

People are actually saying they like our blue tower...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjmphotos/1161564402/

Wouldn't it be nice if it really was at that angle...

It doesn't look that bad in the photo.
This building would look 100 x better if it wasn't for the coloured windows.

Look what the area looked like when St George's Tower had first been built...note the fine old building that was replaced by Elizabeth House. The shopping core used to stretch right up to the train station too...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2205/1875758047_8f81b343f4_o.jpg

That's a lovely photo.

outsider, are u saying st goerges tower is better than new builds? are u sure m8? u prefer that big blue thing to things like the simpsons towers? thats mad

id rather replace the blue tower wiv a midgets bungalow


I much prefer the proposed simpson towers.

I meant most new builds which mostly all look very similar. I do quite like a few new builds though.

And to be honest i would rather an ugly tower than a small building, as it gives Leicester its city feeling.

Took a picture of the blue 'thing' yesterday, it's still bloody awful :(

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/9739/09112007099hm3.th.jpg (http://img208.imageshack.us/my.php?image=09112007099hm3.jpg)

I don't understand have lots of people from outside of Leicester are saying how good it looks. It could have been so much more..

Went past the gre bit today and it's been spoiled by the 'blue parts' around the larger central windows - again a blotchy blue paint job.

Does the tight arse own the blue building behind Rainbow Dove aswell?

No, it's opposite SGT. That's actually where the constituancy office of Leicester South MP Peter Soulsby is. It's not an attractive building either.

The front of the building can be seen in this link:

http://www.egpropertylink.com/property/detail.aspx?liAdvertID=10042263&NoBanner=true

:okay: cheers.

i bet whoever owns the rainbow and dove hasnt got a tite arse

well - now the render on the official st georges tower website has changed:

http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/images/homeimage-1.jpg

link: http://www.stgeorgesleicester.com/index.html

so - what do you guys think? I think the render looks totally different from what it is like in real life. For one thing, in real life the painting of the tower is botched and the blue is very bright. In the render, they have used a slightly darker blue, and the tower doesn't look out of place, which of course it does in real life. I hope the council do compulsary purchase it - the sooner the better. I hope they build what was originally planned by the LRC to go there. The tower is a disgrace and sticks out like a soar thumb all around Leicester. I bet Nottingham is laughing at us, and the towers owner. What makes it even worse is that everyone can see it, as it right next to the train station. I really do hope it is demolished very soon.

P.S. If the tower is compulsary purchased - could the owner take legal action against the council? As hes spent all this money on the development now? Surley he'd want the money back somehow??

If that were to occur the council would probably make the owner change the facade of the tower.
At the end of the day, he hasn't broken any planning laws so there isn't much the council can do.
Lets just hope that another darker coat of blue is put on the tower to hide the blotches.

Why don't you create a petition to get another coat of paint on the tower? I would.
I hav yet to see this in the flesh but from what people have said about still being able to see the grafitti at the top it seems they've cut costs big time.

I agree it looks much worse in the flesh.

Serving a compulsory purchase order on a developer with good solicitors is a very different prospect to looking at shifting private home owners. It would cost the council an absolute fortune, but maybe they feel they have to do it.

My bosses opinion is that it's likely the developer got such a good deal buying the building, he's spent a minimum doing it up and he'll be able to offer incredibly cheap office space in a convenient location. Even only letting out a fraction of the building should be enough to cover his costs.

Every city has crap buildings that stand out. I actually think this is one to put Leicester on the map lol. Everyone of these forums has heard about the Connect 4 building in Leicester.

I can't see why the council would CPO the building? It would make no sense. Councils are about regeneration and improving services, even though that building looks bad it will serve its purpose (hopefully) and totally regenerate the building and the new part of the building next door. Your councils view would be that it would be better to CPO somewhere else to ignite the regeneration rather than waste money on something which has just been regenerated.

Based purely on the render above, would the Nottingham forum lot be happy to see that building in their city. Say if it was a new build?

No, but its not a new build.

Lears, there are developments 10 times better than that going off in Nottingham that I don't think excel in Architecture. But... the fact in the matter is... that is regeneration. the area will have improved because of that tower, the area will have a hotel, a casino, and a 24 hour gym. I'm assuming these are things which are not already in the area.

The other option would have been to leave it as it is with no regeneration. I think your all just a bit worked up because it "could" have looked better.

How do you define something as "10 times better"?

I do welcome St George's for the regeneration and I'm not "worked up" about it?

Go on use your imagination Danz - if it WAS a new build in Nottingham, would you welcome an 84 metre blue tower?

How do you define something as "10 times better"?

For example this (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=506450), or this (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=506915), or this (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=533787).

I do welcome St George's for the regeneration and I'm not "worked up" about it?

Go on use your imagination Danz - if it WAS a new build in Nottingham, would you welcome an 84 metre blue tower?

Exactly Lears. Thats my point, its the same with the plans above. I don't think neither of them are amazing but I recognise both of them would make a significant improvement on their areas. I'm not worked up about them though.

My point is, would you want your council to waste money on buying this when it has just been redeveloped when there are so many other things in Leicester the council could be improving?

If this was a NEW BUILD Lears I would most certainly oppose it but its not a new build. Its an old 60's tower already built in Leicester. You can either knock it down and take something away from your skyline or refub it. We all want high quality developments and our councils will try out best to enforce high quality design but you have to remember not every development in our cities is going to be the all amazing and almightly, some developers just don't have the money.

I take your point to an extent, Danz. The problem is that I'm not convinced that the scheme will actually deliever all that it's promised.

I take your point to an extent, Danz. The problem is that I'm not convinced that the scheme will actually deliever all that it's promised.
And I take yours, but what things exactly did they promise that you think they might not achieve?

None of those examples are ten times better Danz. How would you define 10 times better anyway?

By the way, I don't want the site CPO'd - I'm very happy with 400,000 sq ft of developement right next to the train station. To be honest, I'm not even that bothered about the blue paint either.

I was just curious whether it would gain approval in another city, if it was a new build?

The website and publicity have said we'll have a hotel, gym and leisure opportunities, but there has been no anouncement as to who these will be. If they had name occupiers you can guarentee they'd be shouting this from the rooftops.

Considering the size of the building very little work seems to be going on. It seems likely to me that this building will remain largely unoccupied for some time.

Hopefully you are wrong Sir Robert. We will have to wait and see, when it is finished. The owner has suggested that they are talking to several interested parties...

Considering the orignial finish date was spring this year (it still says that on the website), although it seems to have slipped to before the end of this year, we should know who's going in.

The only reasonable conclusion is that he's not got anyone yet. While it's a good spot for offices, as a hotel it sucks. You're too far from the nice bits of Leicester (bar the PAC when it opens) where you can eat etc, and unless they can cough up some more parking I don't see it as a leisure destination.

It'll be bargain basement offices and empty space.

Well buildings can take longer than planned.

I think the site is excellent for a hotel. There is a car park at the back - £8 for 24 hours - and another multi-storey car park planned. It is right next door to the train station, which is planning new retail and other uses. More offices are planned in the area, because it is the Business Quarter. The site is very close to the PAC, DMC and Athena.

Having said all that, wouldn't surprise me if you are right!