SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In today's (Leicester) Mercury, the headline procalimed Leicester as a "Boom Town". The Regeneration company was setup in 2001 and results of their proposals are starting to bear fruit with ever more cranes appearing over the horizon...

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co....Node=132702&contentPK=14419298&folderPk=77465

I am sceptical as to how the article arrives at the conclusion regarding the £3 Billion being the highest amount of regeneration in the country, barring London (obviously :p), but it is still pretty decent - taking out the cost of the hospital and schools money that still isn't bad at £2 billion to get the ball rolling...hopefully this amount will continue to rise as the regeneration gains pace.

I think finally things might be looking up for the East Midlands...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
930 Posts
I wouldn’t call Hull is a boomtown, to be honest, neither is Leeds.

Nottingham isn't a boomtown anymore but it was in the past years. It might be again in 2007 (with construction of £400 million Broadmarsh, £900 million east side, and the whole Southside thing) so it isn't a boomtown anymore eventhough there are more than 20 Cranes on the Skyline at the moment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Hull is going through some regeneration but not on the same level as Brighton, Nottingham or even Leicester.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
Every city/town has its year in the sun. Sometimes more than one. There will be some survey later on in the year showing that more companies are relocating to Derby than anywhere else (or something along those lines). Next year it will be someone else who is on top. Its just the councils trying to blow their own trumpet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,474 Posts
Thats a stupid comment; Hull is transforming its city centre and waterfront, and Leeds is rivalling Manchester and Birmingham.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Leeds No.1 said:
Thats a stupid comment; Hull is transforming its city centre and waterfront, and Leeds is rivalling Manchester and Birmingham.
Leeds - if you seriously think Hull is undergoing as much development as cities like Notts, Btn, and Leicester you are even less intelligent than I thought you were, I visit Hull on a regular basis, and I also used to live there so I know what I'm talking about.

Hull is receiving around 1 billion pounds worth of investment, compared with roughly 2 - 3 billion in Brighton (don't know about Notts or Leicester but it's there or there abouts on the same level).

All hull is really building at the moment is a bland out of town style shopping centre - in town next to the station, along with some small to large scale residential developments in and around the old town/river hull.

There are plans in the pipeline to transform the waterfront area but this all relies on building a road tunnel for the main road that seperates the city centre and the marina/waterfront area - which even if it does get unlikely approval from the government will not start until 2015 ish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Insignia said:
Hull isn't a boomtown, and neither is Leeds because there are nothing worthy u/c.

Nottingham reached its peak over the years so it isn't a boomtown anymore (eventhough there are more than 20 Cranes on the Skyline.)

Leicester must be a boomtown but the CBD is too small for a major city.
Yep spot on. The CBD will never rival those of Birmingham or Manchester etc and for that reason the regeneration is concentrating on developing a (space) science/research park clustered around the river and the existing National Space Centre to utilise the skill sets of Leicester Uni, Demontfort Uni & nearby Loughborough Uni. Also the East Midlands Development Agency is encouraging a modicum of developments across the region so I think there's plenty more to come in both Nottingham and Derby.

From what I read on here it seems nearly all Leeds' construction projects are residential flats rather than buildings of specific interest. Is this the case?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,474 Posts
Not particularly- there are alot of residential developments, and hotel developments but there are also lots of retail developments (The Light, Trinity Qtr, Harewood Qtr), cultural developments (Leeds Museum, College of Music or whatever its called) and theres also major developments such as St. James' Oncology Wing extension which will create Europe's largest Oncology department. Most of the major developments are mixed use anyway like Clarence Dock 1/3 office, 1/3 retail/leisure, 1/3 office
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
moseeds said:
In today's (Leicester) Mercury, the headline procalimed Leicester as a "Boom Town". The Regeneration company was setup in 2001 and results of their proposals are starting to bear fruit with ever more cranes appearing over the horizon...

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co....Node=132702&contentPK=14419298&folderPk=77465

I am sceptical as to how the article arrives at the conclusion regarding the £3 Billion being the highest amount of regeneration in the country, barring London (obviously :p), but it is still pretty decent - taking out the cost of the hospital and schools money that still isn't bad at £2 billion to get the ball rolling...hopefully this amount will continue to rise as the regeneration gains pace.

I think finally things might be looking up for the East Midlands...
There's 4billion coming into Coventry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
MartinN said:
There's 4billion coming into Coventry.
Wow. Is that in the next 1-2 years though or over a longer period? The 3 Billion mentioned in the article is regarding projects that are already underway or due to start shortly. From the article the money being invested in the hospital and schools is due to start later this year or early 2007 as far as I know.
 

·
Kolymaaa
Joined
·
3,586 Posts
leicester is a big enough city, to justify calling itself a boom-town. Hull is too isolated, and not important to anyone outside of its boundaries. Brighton was once a small town, but as a suburb of london, it has grown in reputation.

Leeds, is the opposite of leicester, it is a city that has been given far too much importance, and really is not in the same league in any way as the cities it tries to compete with (manc, liverpool etc)

Leicester has one of the biggest (if not the biggest) indian community in the world, outside of india. Look how famous the china towns in san franscisco, and LA are.. if leicester sold itself well enough, it could be very important. It has a large scale industrial base, and a big enough population to mean things actually happen there. didnt they host an england game once? things like that.

the problem leicester has, is that it is the boring, ugly, poor relation of nottingham, just like leeds is the poor boring, uninteresting relation of manchester and has lived in its shadow for a long time. If instead of competing for first place, leicester promoted itself as the second city of the east midlands it would do much better, its much more important and diverse than derby could ever be, and while competing with nottingham, it looses sight of many of its own strengths.

Leicester is the most cosmopolitan city in this country (maybe even more so than london), if not even europe, or indeed the world. . it has communities from every part of the globe. Not many realise that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Karate_Kev said:
leicester is a big enough city, to justify calling itself a boom-town. Hull is too isolated, and not important to anyone outside of its boundaries. Brighton was once a small town, but as a suburb of london, it has grown in reputation.
Brighton has never been a suburb of London! How outrageous! :p
That would be like saying Nottingham is a suburb of Birmingham. :)

It has also never been a small town, unless you're talking about hundreds of years ago when it was a tiny fishing village.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
Karate_Kev said:
leicester is a big enough city, to justify calling itself a boom-town. Hull is too isolated, and not important to anyone outside of its boundaries. Brighton was once a small town, but as a suburb of london, it has grown in reputation.

Leeds, is the opposite of leicester, it is a city that has been given far too much importance, and really is not in the same league in any way as the cities it tries to compete with (manc, liverpool etc)

Leicester has one of the biggest (if not the biggest) indian community in the world, outside of india. Look how famous the china towns in san franscisco, and LA are.. if leicester sold itself well enough, it could be very important. It has a large scale industrial base, and a big enough population to mean things actually happen there. didnt they host an england game once? things like that.

the problem leicester has, is that it is the boring, ugly, poor relation of nottingham, just like leeds is the poor boring, uninteresting relation of manchester and has lived in its shadow for a long time. If instead of competing for first place, leicester promoted itself as the second city of the east midlands it would do much better, its much more important and diverse than derby could ever be, and while competing with nottingham, it looses sight of many of its own strengths.

Leicester is the most cosmopolitan city in this country (maybe even more so than london), if not even europe, or indeed the world. . it has communities from every part of the globe. Not many realise that.
I've read a government document (Can't recall what it was!) that stated 275,000+ is considered a "big city".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
moseeds said:
Wow. Is that in the next 1-2 years though or over a longer period? The 3 Billion mentioned in the article is regarding projects that are already underway or due to start shortly. From the article the money being invested in the hospital and schools is due to start later this year or early 2007 as far as I know.
Not sure - I think the council just got 800 million for the Swanswell Initiative, and there are big projects like Belgrade Plaza, Park Court, Ikea, Friar's Road Apartment blocks, Albert & Victoria buildings apartment blocks. Someone is planning a high-rise block next to the Ramada hotel in the Butts...

Personally, I think while some of these big projects are good (They are mainly up to 17 storeys high, and will make the city centre look much more built up and also bring in more apartments, offices, leisure & desperately needed retail units) I think a lot of cosmetic changes could actually be just as effective. In particular, restoring a sense of place by creating more street frontages and removing the "zoning" that created desolate tracks of city centre filled with nothing but civic buildings. I never understood the point of a nice grass square surrounded by council offices.

No patch of land is safe here, though, it seems - much of the city centre was left as car park after the war, or unusable due to the weird shapes the ringroad cut it into...

Anyway, this is a Leicester thread, and me & the wife tend to go to Leicester for the (Non supermarket) shopping as Coventry's is absolutely rubbish. We can get straight into the centre and park up in something like 25 minutes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
MartinN said:
Anyway, this is a Leicester thread, and me & the wife tend to go to Leicester for the (Non supermarket) shopping as Coventry's is absolutely rubbish. We can get straight into the centre and park up in something like 25 minutes.
It really is surprising how fast you can get from Coventry to Leicester, with that lovely stretch of motorway ;) I didn't realise there were so many projects going on in Coventry too.

Karate_Kev said:
Leicester has one of the biggest (if not the biggest) indian community in the world, outside of india. Look how famous the china towns in san franscisco, and LA are.. if leicester sold itself well enough, it could be very important. It has a large scale industrial base, and a big enough population to mean things actually happen there. didnt they host an england game once? things like that.

the problem leicester has, is that it is the boring, ugly, poor relation of nottingham, just like leeds is the poor boring, uninteresting relation of manchester and has lived in its shadow for a long time. If instead of competing for first place, leicester promoted itself as the second city of the east midlands it would do much better, its much more important and diverse than derby could ever be, and while competing with nottingham, it looses sight of many of its own strengths.

Leicester is the most cosmopolitan city in this country (maybe even more so than london), if not even europe, or indeed the world. . it has communities from every part of the globe. Not many realise that.
Boring? Ugly? Poor relation!?!? Cheeky bugger! To be honest nearly all the midland cities (east/west) exc Lincoln are ugly, all concreted over and any last remaining bits of charm mercilessly smothered in grey. I think the boring tag sticks because no-one really knows much about Leicester...until they attend the festivals - summer sundae, mela, carnival, diwali, etc (which are all huge events) or visit the city's indian restaurants. Yes there was an England friendly played, last year Brazil entertained Jamaica in a friendly and this year Jamaica are entertaining Ghana.

Poor-relation may be true - but I think as this current spate of regeneration shows this is no longer always the case...recent history since WW2 has seen many changes to both cities but arguably moreso to Leicester with the mass influx of immigrants. The next few decades hold much promise for the fortunes of Leicester.

Leicester is one of the most multi-cultural places in the UK, which doesn't just mean having a large Indian community but also many many other groups. This is one it's main strengths - without the "non-white" community the city/suburbs would be nowhere near as big and hence regeneration would most likely not even be talked about.

I don't think promoting Leicester as the second-city of the east mids would have any benefits - there's only 4 cities in the east mids (inc Lincoln) and comparitivly they are all quite small. Leicester's strength lies in its location and the diversity of its population. If the council bothered to utilise these assets properly Leicester would be a much better place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
930 Posts
BG101 said:
Promoting ANY city as a "second city" is not on .. it will just upset people and serves no useful purpose other than advertizing to all that the "first city" has a leading edge.


BG
I agree. Leicester should promote itself as the East Midlands leading city That would wake up our council.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top