I think it looks pretty cheap, especially the grey blocks to the rear. Is there a single balcony on the building? Crazy considering the location.I'm in favour of those. I really like the design.
Fitting into the surrounding areas though, not so much, but that's the fault of the poor design of them daft curving roof houses with coloured windows next to it and no fault of this proposal.
As someone i'd like to think 'in the know', the drawings seem to have been completed on a 3D modelling software, so what you are seeing is a 'raw' virtual image over ones that are softened on photoshop with softer and more subtle lighting and grit to make it realistic. This isn't a criticism, often architects aren't paid enough to give that extra bit of sensitivity. (Look at how the visuals for Brett Wharf look so much better with better rendering and lighting)Has anyone rummaged through the planning app thoroughly enough to know what the various-coloured cladding shown in the pictures is? I can't really tell from the CGIs whether it looks disappointing because the software isn't state-of-the-art, or whether the back end of it really will be a dreary grey and the front a bit bland. Since the buildings surrounding the site all look even drearier, I'm hoping it's the software.
Might be worth just reminding ourselves of the original Quayside masterplan
View attachment 179360 View attachment 179361
Images courtesy of Newcastle's Quayside Regeneration Archive - How has Newcastle's Quayside Changed? | North East Regeneration Archive
Now we can see that the original 'Hotel and Leisure' building does indeed step forward of the building line, and there was always an intent for the masterplan to host its largest imposition at this site.
From this it is clear that St. Ann's would be in some way be less connected to the Quayside. Despite it's heritage standings, it does not have a right to clear all possible buildings for panoramic views. St. Ann's connection to the Quayside will be more of a glimpse view aligned with the connecting stairs to the East of the proposed site.
The current development seems narrower than the original proposals anyway. I admire the hard work by the St. Ann's Management group but the reality is they all bought a flat next to an incomplete part of a masterplanned regeneration area, and so they cannot really complain.
I'm sure they would argue that a smaller building could be built, but the land value will be based upon what numbers in principle can be achieved- as set out by the masterplan. The developer does not randomly stack as many units as possible, it is all a fine tuned estimate to deliver some kind of return.