SkyscraperCity banner

5441 - 5460 of 5491 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,063 Posts
Well that was a disappointing bump. Nowt to see here until c2035 at least. The folk at Ballymore who bought the site will be retired or dead, assuming they were at least aged 40. This is in the "cold case" draw until HS2/3 plans are decided, which, changing my mind... 2040 at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,227 Posts
Would the new line run through this site?
Ballymore still want to build it (likely to be different design). HS2 has put a safeguarding notice on the site that stops them developing anything (bar stewards). Don't expect anything to happen soon until they decide the route and design for the station. The development director at Ballymore says they want to make it happen.
That’s what Ballymore are waiting on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,227 Posts
I was about to say, it would need to be a different design.
I agree. Something more of a landmark design. Whilst I think this design has stood the test of time the city is far more ambitious now. I still believe a hotel/residential combo would suit with mid rise office depending on space of course. Hyatt were lined up pre-recession.
 

·
10th February 2008
Joined
·
59,216 Posts
Here's where the issue/problem is for Ballymore. (it's a nice issue/problem to have)

The proposed HS2 station and surroundings cut straight across the far end of the car park, exactly where Piccadilly tower would be sited.

That's not to say Ballymore couldn't build a tower/s on the remaining car park.

On the plus side for Ballymore, that bit of car park is now worth a fortune. It's value is only going to keep on increasing, as is the rest of the car park, regardless if Ballymore develop it themselves or sell it on.

London Warehouse is the marker and is safe!










http://instagr.am/p/CE7EjG7nHvg/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,212 Posts
It would be more than a few metres, but yes, theoretically you could move the tower to replace the two smaller buildings.

If the HS2 masterplan is approved as is, the land intended for Piccadilly Tower would be 90% unavailable.

I think based on this the only way we are going to ever see this tower or something similar would be to build it on plot 3. But it would obviously then need a new design, and if the massing guidelines are anything to go by, a severe haircut.



HL_FINALManchester_Piccadilly_SRF-page-098
I spent some time pulling together these blueprints back in 2008. Ballymore wont be building here full stop. The site is no longer viable now HS2 is U/C. They have probably already benefited from a healthy return for the the land that constitutes HS2, What remains who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,227 Posts
Until the final design and route for the station is known it’s anyone’s guess what Ballymore will do. Even if HS2 do take up some of the land the tower only took up a fraction of the site with a large chunk remaining. That much is evident in the blueprints above. It’s part of the regeneration framework from MCC. It’s a gateway sure and they will want a landmark building.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,063 Posts
The compulsory purchase will be based on current land usage/revenue streams, you cannot claim for a "future tower" surely. Yes, there will be a premium but not massively over the odds, it's a derilict site with a surface car park. The car park may be a good earner so based on loosing that income for life, as no relocation can happen, the pay off maybe reasonable?

How would a CPO work on such a "valued" site?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
They will get market value, which does include current and future uses, planning consents and alternative uses where there would have been a reasonable chance of getting consent if it wasn’t for the proposed scheme, ie, HS2. The valuation cannot reflect any increased value as a direct result of the scheme. They should do well out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,814 Posts
I remember being a “lurker” when this proposal came up and I can no longer get excited about it. The idea of the HS2 station with the thoroughfare running alongside it with all the associated development out towards Piccadilly trading estate is far more exciting. I would swap this for all that mid-rise in an instant (if that was the compromise).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,227 Posts
I remember being a “lurker” when this proposal came up and I can no longer get excited about it. The idea of the HS2 station with the thoroughfare running alongside it with all the associated development out towards Piccadilly trading estate is far more exciting. I would swap this for all that mid-rise in an instant (if that was the compromise).
Would you really though? One tower for ten mid-rises. Hmmmm I not so sure. c

It may just be another tower to you but it's another tower which put's Manchester on the map.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,814 Posts
Would you really though? One tower for ten mid-rises. Hmmmm I not so sure. c

It may just be another tower to you but it's another tower which put's Manchester on the map.
Yeah. I know this is skyscrapercity and all, but I’d rather have a new district of the city centre built than a skyscraper. This is hypothetical because in reality it’ll be a mix of mid-rise and skyscrapers, but in the time honoured tradition of the game of “would you rather”, I’d pick 10 mid-rise developments over 1 statement tower (assuming the quality is high).

PS, I would love to see what is at DS spread around the periphery of the ring road, but I think expanding the city centre to something more than 2 sq miles is more important to the development of Manchester.
 
5441 - 5460 of 5491 Posts
Top