|
Post by atcham jack on Oct 16, 2014 9:55:24 GMT 1
in the early 1960's planners had a beautiful old Shirehall demolished to make way for new offices and shops below. now the plans are to extend the former monstrosity into a carbuncle and build 50 flats on the site.
next time you are in the Square, my friends look about you and see what is planned. I am all for progress, but please let us not further ruin the centre of our town and live to regret it.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 16, 2014 10:49:40 GMT 1
There's already a monstrosity in The Square. Haven't seen the plans properly but I'd be in favour of any improvement to it. Bit like whatever's being done to that dreary and seemingly unused office building opposite The Gateway.
I'd take 50 flats (subject to design of course) adding life to the town centre and improving an ugly existing building over a new build on a greenfield site every time.
There'll have to be a lot of this sort of conversion work in a very short space of time if 2,000 new university students are going to be accommodated.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Oct 16, 2014 10:50:26 GMT 1
Link please then we can see your concerns.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 16, 2014 10:54:42 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 11:00:10 GMT 1
Personally think the new design is an improvement!
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 16, 2014 11:04:34 GMT 1
Thought the new design looked ok to be honest. Often a big difference between the initial design and the final building but seems an improvement on what's there and the logic behind the changes is a reasonable one
|
|
|
Post by percy on Oct 16, 2014 11:34:28 GMT 1
Lipstick on a pig - all they are proposing is putting a bit of cladding on a terrible building. If this was a regular house in the town the planning restrictions would be horrendous for absolutely no benefit - despite the fact that this is a key site in the town they seem to be able to avoid any problems; I wonder how they did that ?
As for students - has anyone heard where their luxury accomodation blocks will be built ? The council needs to offload the Shirehall site so I imagine that planning permission will not be a problem there either.
|
|
|
Post by darkshrew on Oct 16, 2014 11:40:03 GMT 1
Planning Permission Problems ? Surely not Sir ?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 11:50:08 GMT 1
If they hide princess house then praise be!
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 16, 2014 11:57:07 GMT 1
Lipstick on a pig - all they are proposing is putting a bit of cladding on a terrible building. If this was a regular house in the town the planning restrictions would be horrendous for absolutely no benefit - despite the fact that this is a key site in the town they seem to be able to avoid any problems; I wonder how they did that ? As for students - has anyone heard where their luxury accomodation blocks will be built ? The council needs to offload the Shirehall site so I imagine that planning permission will not be a problem there either. "The plans can be viewed on Shropshire Council's website and will be discussed by members of the authority's central planning committee at a future date." Nothing approved yet. I think it'll take more than "a bit of cladding" to convert the job centre and army recruitment office into penthouse flats. Anyway, I expect the options are limited. The existing building is horrible and the cost of a demolition and rebuild is probably too much to generate interest. A relatively low cost conversion from soon-to-be-vacant, outdated office space to residential use must be sensible. Personally, I'd love to see a strikingly modern building in the heart of Shrewsbury but I can imagine the howls of outrage that would generate!
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Oct 16, 2014 12:36:34 GMT 1
Problem is more people will be living in the Town center, join the residants assciation and moan about everything others try to plan in the town... If you choose to live in the town center it comes with benefits and drawbacks but it really p**ses me of when people who have chossen to live there then expect others to 'respect their peace' AS others have said anythig will be an improvement but would be great with bars and cafe's with seating making it a vibrant place to be till the early hours a bit like Brindley Place in Brum
|
|
|
Post by calimero on Oct 16, 2014 12:38:39 GMT 1
Designs look reasonably sensitive to the surroundings and a definite improvement on the existing building / facade.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 16, 2014 12:50:26 GMT 1
in the early 1960's planners had a beautiful old Shirehall demolished to make way for new offices and shops below. now the plans are to extend the former monstrosity into a carbuncle and build 50 flats on the site.
next time you are in the Square, my friends look about you and see what is planned. I am all for progress, but please let us not further ruin the centre of our town and live to regret it. I have to say that those comments bare no scrutiny whatsoever. Without doubt Princess House is the ugliest most disgusting building within the loop of the river, that it stands in the absolute picture postcard centrepiece of the town makes it all the worst. Nothing, and I mean nothing can be done that would make it any worse so I really hope that they grasp this opportunity and do something to repair the awful mistakes of the past. Incidentally, recently there was a great furore about the changing of the shop fronts on the southern aspect of The Square. Look at them now and they look great and enhance the overall perspective
|
|
|
Post by Uncle_Monkey on Oct 16, 2014 13:10:01 GMT 1
Personally, I'd love to see a strikingly modern building in the heart of Shrewsbury but I can imagine the howls of outrage that would generate! Although I love (many of) the old buildings in Shrewsbury I'd like to see this too, dependent on design and context - but as you say the aspic brigade would have none of it. I remember the furore about 15 years ago over the Mansers antiques building, outside the loop in Coleham. And that is possibly the best building put up in Shrewsbury since about 1900. I genuinely can't think of a better one at the moment
|
|
|
Post by buryshrew on Oct 16, 2014 13:25:11 GMT 1
I don't see what the problem is. Old and new can work really well together. And the introduction of upper floor new flats can only be a good thing surely.
|
|
|
Post by percy on Oct 16, 2014 13:37:28 GMT 1
For such a prominent location there should be a landmark building - a building of today; something adventurous - simply recladding the existing building (and yes doing a refurb inside too for the pedantic) really doesn't cut it.
I do not think would be accepted in many other towns and cities - look at the striking buildings going up acrss the country.
|
|
|
Post by RBA on Oct 16, 2014 14:21:17 GMT 1
For such a prominent location there should be a landmark building - a building of today; something adventurous - simply recladding the existing building (and yes doing a refurb inside too for the pedantic) really doesn't cut it. I do not think would be accepted in many other towns and cities - look at the striking buildings going up acrss the country. think this is right -The proposal is an improvement but on a marginal on IMHO
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 16, 2014 14:37:02 GMT 1
For such a prominent location there should be a landmark building - a building of today; something adventurous - simply recladding the existing building (and yes doing a refurb inside too for the pedantic) really doesn't cut it. I do not think would be accepted in many other towns and cities - look at the striking buildings going up acrss the country. I agree with you but the owner's then got to commit to demolition and build the new one (or sell to someone else who'll do it). The question is whether that could be justified economically. This is a much cheaper option and at least provides an opportunity to improve the existing building.
|
|
|
Post by shrewder on Oct 16, 2014 15:43:04 GMT 1
Very good design, fits in well with surroundings. A major improvement on the present.
|
|
|
Post by percy on Oct 16, 2014 15:56:47 GMT 1
For such a prominent location there should be a landmark building - a building of today; something adventurous - simply recladding the existing building (and yes doing a refurb inside too for the pedantic) really doesn't cut it. I do not think would be accepted in many other towns and cities - look at the striking buildings going up acrss the country. I agree with you but the owner's then got to commit to demolition and build the new one (or sell to someone else who'll do it). The question is whether that could be justified economically. This is a much cheaper option and at least provides an opportunity to improve the existing building. Completely agree - if I owned it and could get the planning permision to turn a quick buck by converting it to residential with minimal effort then that is what I would do. On the other hand - if I was the council and stuck with an eyesore like we currently have I would take the opportunity to take the developer aside and tell them if they wanted to be a bit more adventurous and look to knock the place down then I'd allow them some more square metres. Why we let the developer add more square metres and do nothing to address the carbuncle for another 50 years or more is not an indication of a forward looking town council - as for the idea that the site would be a vacant lot; it's true that a vacancy may cause a move from another part of town but for that site there will always be a demand. No problem at all with flats being part of the proposal - agree its a good idea, but why miss the opportunity to get the eyesore removed.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 16, 2014 16:54:28 GMT 1
Unfortunately the new planning laws introduced a few years ago by the coalition have almost totally cut off the town or county councils ability to have a significant say in the type of development.
As long as it meets fairly basic economic, social and environmental criteria the style of the building is down to the developer. Should the Council turn it down and it goes to appeal and they loose the local tax payer then picks up the tab which can be hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Government is so keen to get the economy going they have created a planning system aimed at the build it quick and cheap developer, rather than encourage innovative and long lasting designs that will add to the environment
Same is happening with housing where estates are getting thrown up with little thought to the long term impact of them or the quality of the build
|
|
|
Post by Matster on Oct 16, 2014 17:53:08 GMT 1
The Lloyds banking building at bottom of pride hill won an award for its design when built.
Next time you're walking at bottom of Wyle Cop have a look at the flats on left just past Cornhouse as you go towards Town Walls (the rounded one). The designer placed little metal statues of birds on the ledges of the building and also in-flight. Nice little touch.
I wasn't overly impressed with the plans for the Square but it'd be better than what's there I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Matster on Oct 16, 2014 18:02:15 GMT 1
There's already a monstrosity in The Square. Haven't seen the plans properly but I'd be in favour of any improvement to it. Bit like whatever's being done to that dreary and seemingly unused office building opposite The Gateway. I'd take 50 flats (subject to design of course) adding life to the town centre and improving an ugly existing building over a new build on a greenfield site every time. There'll have to be a lot of this sort of conversion work in a very short space of time if 2,000 new university students are going to be accommodated. I heard that the someone has acquired the prison as accommodation for student halls. Made me think that the sorting office and those offices to let opposite the Gateway would be good for Uni buildings too. They are going to use the reference library so would keep it all close together. Then up the road is the flaxmill and a few empty buildings on Chester road. It would be a great boost for that end of town too. Imagine loads of students popping into the Rock...
|
|
|
Post by atcham jack on Oct 16, 2014 18:39:29 GMT 1
I had forgotten about student accommodation being needed. I just did not like encroachment of the square by extensions.
on main news tonight that students are sharing bedrooms in Bristol because of lack of accommodation.
|
|
|
Post by calimero on Oct 16, 2014 19:13:05 GMT 1
I had forgotten about student accommodation being needed. I just did not like encroachment of the square by extensions. on main news tonight that students are sharing bedrooms in Bristol because of lack of accommodation. Not just students, severe lack of social housing stock.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 16, 2014 19:34:53 GMT 1
The prison becoming halls of residence would be epic. With the buttermarket there as a student union building.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 20:09:15 GMT 1
Planning Permission Problems ? Surely not Sir ? Blooooody hell mon! Nearly had an epileptic fit watching the start to that! Ha ha!
|
|
|
Post by Matster on Oct 16, 2014 22:22:07 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Oct 17, 2014 16:51:11 GMT 1
During the 1950s/60s my aunt was involved in various campaigns to save landmark buildings in the town. The demolition of the old Shirehall in the Square was an act of vandalism for which those involved should be ashamed. She also campaigned for the old Market Hall and Raven Hotel. Don't think they're as badly missed although the buildings that replaced them are of little merit.
|
|
|
Post by atcham jack on Oct 17, 2014 17:12:23 GMT 1
agree with everything the Shropshire Tenor says. how any body can give the Lloyds building an award is beyond me. assume it was Lego. the Facia hits you from a long way up High St.
The new Market hall grows on me each visit, and for me this is the town's sole modernist success.
|
|