St Luke's | Sherlock Street | Residential | 15/7/4/3fl | 46m | U/C - Page 6 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Birmingham Metro Area > Birmingham Construction Forum

Birmingham Construction Forum Building projects in Birmingham and the Black Country


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 28th, 2017, 09:04 AM   #101
BhamBadger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wolverhampton/Mainz
Posts: 4,522
Likes (Received): 1597

The council ripped into this development. The architects presented it to the chamber, and they criticized every detail.

They hated the destruction of the church. They said it should be a community centre or flats.

They hated the design saying it looked like a prison complex.

They hated the specs, saying they were like tiny cells.


They truly hated this proposal.
__________________
Flickr
Mainly pictures of Mainz and Birmingham, with a healthy dose of tram thrown in.

Biosonic, o'flaneurie liked this post
BhamBadger está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 28th, 2017, 09:05 AM   #102
leonigmig
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 973
Likes (Received): 595

In fairness, it would be a shame to lose the church.
leonigmig no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 11:44 AM   #103
Sonny97
Registered User
 
Sonny97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rubery, bIRmiNGhaM (or is it BrOMsgRoVe?)
Posts: 956
Likes (Received): 87

http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news...ments-12954954

The Post, has a similar damning article. Can't say I disagree with the opinion that these apartments are bland little boxes at sky-high rents, no doubt.

Good to see the planners actually figuring out their arse from their elbow for a change, and criticising the proposal for what it really is.

Reading some of the comments on the Post article, and I would have to agree with all of them, especially from Zola Lloyd, who suggests this design is the sort of thing you'd see in the former USSR - bland, conformist little grey buildings that would probably suck the life-force out of any new occupier!

And the church really must be saved!
__________________
How Do I Get Out Of This Chickenshit Outfit!

RalphGuy liked this post
Sonny97 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 28th, 2017, 01:07 PM   #104
CL81
Registered User
 
CL81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,082
Likes (Received): 549

Quote:
Originally Posted by BhamBadger View Post
The council ripped into this development. The architects presented it to the chamber, and they criticized every detail.

They hated the destruction of the church. They said it should be a community centre or flats.

They hated the design saying it looked like a prison complex.

They hated the specs, saying they were like tiny cells.


They truly hated this proposal.
Much of the complaining was around the affordable housing contribution which they thought should have been closer to 35% rather than the 10% offered.
CL81 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 09:24 PM   #105
o'flaneurie
Registered User
 
o'flaneurie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London/Birmingham
Posts: 176
Likes (Received): 94

Quote:
Originally Posted by BhamBadger View Post
The council ripped into this development. The architects presented it to the chamber, and they criticized every detail.

They hated the destruction of the church. They said it should be a community centre or flats.

They hated the design saying it looked like a prison complex.

They hated the specs, saying they were like tiny cells.


They truly hated this proposal.
Well done BCC for telling it like it is on this one, including the proportion of affordable housing. Birmingham deserves better.
__________________
Get around town. Add your voice to the sound of the crowd.

RalphGuy liked this post
o'flaneurie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 09:33 PM   #106
RalphGuy
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 8,193
Likes (Received): 4527

I hope Barratt come back with a better proposal or, better still, sell the land to Crest Nicholson who set about Park Centralising it.
RalphGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 10:34 PM   #107
BhamBadger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wolverhampton/Mainz
Posts: 4,522
Likes (Received): 1597

Double Post
__________________
Flickr
Mainly pictures of Mainz and Birmingham, with a healthy dose of tram thrown in.

Last edited by BhamBadger; April 28th, 2017 at 10:40 PM.
BhamBadger está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 10:38 PM   #108
BhamBadger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wolverhampton/Mainz
Posts: 4,522
Likes (Received): 1597

There's simply no reason that delivering 35% of higher of affordable housing isn't possible there.

Just have the ground and first floor flats smaller and up the denisty. Make your money by selling marginally larger flats to foreign investors, Seven Capital seems to bloody manage.

I am normally fairly "Whatever" with housing developments. But this one is so close to the city centre, has ridiuclously small levels of affordable housing, and would destroy what is actually a pretty nice Church, replacing it with something. Meh.

The larger blocks are alright. The houses are alright if a bit bizarre. It just seems an odd use of the land.
__________________
Flickr
Mainly pictures of Mainz and Birmingham, with a healthy dose of tram thrown in.
BhamBadger está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2017, 11:43 PM   #109
damo1969
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 117
Likes (Received): 58

shame if they have to go back to drawing board it will mean another delay, and without much progress at holyhead, icknield port....so much brownfield space to be filled is it 89,000 homes needed by 2031 need to get a move on!
damo1969 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2017, 10:16 AM   #110
Brummyboy92
Registered Abuser
 
Brummyboy92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 6,966
Likes (Received): 1576

Going back to the drawing board is the best thing that could possibly happen, this scheme is terrible and its about time we started upping our game. Parts of the JQ are being wrecked because of crappy developments, lets not ruin other parts of the city as well.
__________________
Brummyboy92 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2017, 12:39 PM   #111
GAZ
Registered User
 
GAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 510
Likes (Received): 232

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brummyboy92 View Post
Going back to the drawing board is the best thing that could possibly happen, this scheme is terrible and its about time we started upping our game. Parts of the JQ are being wrecked because of crappy developments, lets not ruin other parts of the city as well.
Totally agree Brummyboy92

"Going back to the drawing board is the best thing that could possibly happen"
GAZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 08:14 AM   #112
Kingsheathen
Kingsheathen
 
Kingsheathen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,855
Likes (Received): 2084

This area of Brum is almost totally social housing or housing built by the council that is now privately owned (and possibly rented to tenants on benefits).

This area needs to be closer to 70% private and 30% social. Then you end the sink estate, no point trying mentally. For this reason I think 10% social/ affordable is correct.

Also increasing the amount of social in a scheme lowers the value of the private sale units. This might make the scheme unviable and then we get nothing for years.
Kingsheathen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 01:21 PM   #113
BhamBadger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wolverhampton/Mainz
Posts: 4,522
Likes (Received): 1597

If a developer can't find a way to introduce Affordable housing into their scheme, then they shouldn't be in the development business.

There's no need for social and affordable housing to be of any less quality than any other housing. That's merely an economic choice, not an economic neccessity.

The council is right to stand up for the rights of citizens, to have the posibility to own their own homes in an area they desire to live in.
__________________
Flickr
Mainly pictures of Mainz and Birmingham, with a healthy dose of tram thrown in.

DE51GNR liked this post
BhamBadger está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 02:04 PM   #114
ReissOmari
Birmingham - #1
 
ReissOmari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 21,121
Likes (Received): 14393

I'm confused as to the design flaws here, when I've said before there are much worse designed houses on the other side of Bristol Street in Park Central, what's the difference between St. Luke's and Park Central, did anyone complain of the location of PC??

(I'm ready for someone to give me an indepth reason )
ReissOmari está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 04:47 PM   #115
djay
The promised land
 
djay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 14,879
Likes (Received): 2633

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReissOmari View Post
I'm confused as to the design flaws here, when I've said before there are much worse designed houses on the other side of Bristol Street in Park Central, what's the difference between St. Luke's and Park Central, did anyone complain of the location of PC??

(I'm ready for someone to give me an indepth reason )
Do you mean how the houses look or how big the rooms are? From my reading, the main contention was the size of the dwellings and the affordable provision.

Kings Heathern, I don't believe there is any reviewed evidence to suggest affordable housing reducing house prices on new developments overall. There might be a proximity issue with those that are closest.

Social rent accommodation usual forms the lowest part of the affordable provision. Much more of the provision on new developments tends to be reduced market or shared ownership (because it makes more money for the developer).
__________________

If I ain't the one I'm the prototype
djay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 04:57 PM   #116
ReissOmari
Birmingham - #1
 
ReissOmari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 21,121
Likes (Received): 14393

Sorry, should have explained a little better. The designs of the apartment blocks and the houses are all very similar, light coloured bricks which to me looks better than the mish mash of houses in Park Central, then I moved over to the location where a lot of people are saying the location is wrong for this type of developments, but Park Central which is practically the same, is on the other side of Bristol Street and is really the same distance from the City Centre.

As for the size of the houses/rooms, that can be amended, and the Church doesn't need to be demolished, really that's the only problem I can see.

I feel like if this was proposed in the suburbs or in Edgbaston for example, nobody would have a problem.
__________________
ReissOmari..




Kingsheathen liked this post
ReissOmari está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 04:57 PM   #117
Kingsheathen
Kingsheathen
 
Kingsheathen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,855
Likes (Received): 2084

I don't have a problem with shared ownership. Makes perfect sense.

I can tell you as someone who has bought more houses than most people that the demographics of an area are probably the most important factor when buying a property. You can't change the neighbours easily.

Most of my houses are ex social and surrounded by social and ex social. As a result I expect them to be cheap (which they are). I then do my bit to improve the neighbourhood, provide a decent home and increase prices.

Developers want to build up market developments that they can charge top dollar for. Social tenants nearby doesn't help.
Kingsheathen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 05:27 PM   #118
djay
The promised land
 
djay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 14,879
Likes (Received): 2633

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReissOmari View Post
Sorry, should have explained a little better. The designs of the apartment blocks and the houses are all very similar, light coloured bricks which to me looks better than the mish mash of houses in Park Central, then I moved over to the location where a lot of people are saying the location is wrong for this type of developments, but Park Central which is practically the same, is on the other side of Bristol Street and is really the same distance from the City Centre.

As for the size of the houses/rooms, that can be amended, and the Church doesn't need to be demolished, really that's the only problem I can see.

I feel like if this was proposed in the suburbs or in Edgbaston for example, nobody would have a problem.
I think the lack of variety in materials for such a large site is a bit of an issue. It may end up sterile when built.

I don't think the area is wrong for the type of development but i do think it need thought so that it responds to the character of the area better. I think there are some parts of it which seem confused as to what it is trying to be (although i can see why this has happened), i would be better i think, for them to just do one or the other. Alternatively, follow the park central model and zone the site. This pretty much links to why if it was in Edgbaston it wouldn't get some much of a hard time as the character of the areas are different and its response to the area is more appropriate for suburban town centre development than city centre IMO. However, i didn['t see these issues as being large enough to refused the application.

Amending the size of the dwellings is more of an issue as that can impact viability and this links to the affordable housing issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingsheathen View Post
I don't have a problem with shared ownership. Makes perfect sense.

I can tell you as someone who has bought more houses than most people that the demographics of an area are probably the most important factor when buying a property. You can't change the neighbours easily.

Most of my houses are ex social and surrounded by social and ex social. As a result I expect them to be cheap (which they are). I then do my bit to improve the neighbourhood, provide a decent home and increase prices.

Developers want to build up market developments that they can charge top dollar for. Social tenants nearby doesn't help.
Demographics is different. For example, they could all be in managerial roles within their sectors but renting... Many young professionals rent (not socially) for example. What you are talking about is the perception that those in socially rented accommodation do not have jobs, are on the dole and do not care about the places they live. I think this is a slightly different issue which applies generally but not to house builders.

To national house builders it makes a really small difference. It is more an issue of appeal than pricing for developers. Developers know that people have a similar attitude as you have shown above when it comes to affordable so they "hid" it in design terms. Home located close to affordable may take longer to sell and if that happens, discounts tend to take place so the developer can get off the site and get their money.

More of an issue for developers is that they make no money on rented property, more on reduced market and somewhere between on shared ownership but all costs them profit. They break even on affordable accommodation in general but for every affordable dwelling, it is a space that they cannot sell a £200k dwelling which they make £120k profit on and instead get build cost get. That is why they chip affordable provision.
__________________

If I ain't the one I'm the prototype

Last edited by djay; April 30th, 2017 at 05:43 PM.
djay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 07:47 PM   #119
Kingsheathen
Kingsheathen
 
Kingsheathen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,855
Likes (Received): 2084

I don't think they make £120k profit on a £200k property. More like £40k. I believe profit margins are about 20% on uk housing.
Kingsheathen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2017, 09:37 PM   #120
djay
The promised land
 
djay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 14,879
Likes (Received): 2633

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingsheathen View Post
I don't think they make £120k profit on a £200k property. More like £40k. I believe profit margins are about 20% on uk housing.
That was an illustration rather than fact but yes about 20% when all things are considered.
__________________

If I ain't the one I'm the prototype
djay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACTUALIZACIONES | LISTA MAESTRA DE PROYECTOS | Información y Fotografías Melkor2004 Ciudad de México 17084 Yesterday 11:16 PM
London - Full Summary of Projects 28 SE9 London Metro Area 93 October 15th, 2019 08:50 AM
**ADELAIDE Project Guide** - Updated: March 2018 crawf South Australia 18 December 17th, 2018 11:19 PM
[Bratislava] Full Summary of Projects alien Bratislava 636 October 3rd, 2018 12:45 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us