|
|
Post by darkshrew on Sept 18, 2024 18:26:03 GMT 1
Cannot think of a better location for the hospital to put day patient appointments - scans, blood tests, etc
Let’s see what the Council do with it - sell it for a housing estate with houses that have 10ft x 10ft gardens and not enough parking spaces would be my guess
|
|
|
|
Shirehall
Sept 18, 2024 18:37:55 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by Stowmarket Shrew on Sept 18, 2024 18:37:55 GMT 1
sell it for a housing estate with houses that have 10ft x 10ft gardens and not enough parking spaces would be my guess Thus getting maximum value for the Shropshire tax payer, while making best use of a brownfield site, and meaning fewer of the houses we so desperately need in this country get built on greenfields? Surely not! 🙄 |
|
|
|
Shirehall
Sept 18, 2024 18:54:22 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by zenfootball2 on Sept 18, 2024 18:54:22 GMT 1
Cannot think of a better location for the hospital to put day patient appointments - scans, blood tests, etc Let’s see what the Council do with it - sell it for a housing estate with houses that have 10ft x 10ft gardens and not enough parking spaces would be my guess spot on. What they should do with it is build two and four bedroom flats , for local people only. So that local young people and young family's can get somewhere local to live. Unfortunately that won't happen as they are broke. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2024 21:04:10 GMT 1
Heard a little story a few days ago suggesting that the departure of the University from Frankwell was nothing to do with none payment of rent and more to do with the council wanting the building back so that Council staff could be relocated and the Shirehall sold off for a clear profit
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Sept 18, 2024 21:20:32 GMT 1
Heard a little story a few days ago suggesting that the departure of the University from Frankwell was nothing to do with none payment of rent and more to do with the council wanting the building back so that Council staff could be relocated and the Shirehall sold off for a clear profit I'm sure I read somewhere that any non payment of rent was because the council had let then have it rent free. So if you then say you want to start charging rent then it's likely you either get rent or the property back, win win.
Suppose it's too late for your council to ditch those shopping centres they bought and sell them on to a firm that specialises in shopping centre redevelopment and knows what they are doing?
|
|
|
|
Post by darkshrew on Sept 18, 2024 21:28:16 GMT 1
Cannot think of a better location for the hospital to put day patient appointments - scans, blood tests, etc Let’s see what the Council do with it - sell it for a housing estate with houses that have 10ft x 10ft gardens and not enough parking spaces would be my guess spot on. What they should do with it is build two and four bedroom flats , for local people only. So that local young people and young family's can get somewhere local to live. Unfortunately that won't happen as they are broke. I'm assuming that you do not live in Shrewsbury ? The town is awash with poorly planned low quality new developments that cram as much as possible into the space - even in the South East they have better planning guidance on new builds to make sure that they have enough in the way of open space and amenities. Weir Hill has just brought over 600 homes within less than a mile of the Shirehall; Down Otley Way another 1,000 new homes; no new schools, doctors, etc. All of that within a mile and a half of the Shirehall. The infrastructure cannot cope. At least when they built the estates in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s they thought about the needs of the people - the Town needs the planning department to have a long term strategy beyond brain dead zoning and letting the private sector cram as much in as possible. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Shirehall
Sept 18, 2024 22:03:17 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2024 22:03:17 GMT 1
Heard a little story a few days ago suggesting that the departure of the University from Frankwell was nothing to do with none payment of rent and more to do with the council wanting the building back so that Council staff could be relocated and the Shirehall sold off for a clear profit I'm sure I read somewhere that any non payment of rent was because the council had let then have it rent free. So if you then say you want to start charging rent then it's likely you either get rent or the property back, win win.
Suppose it's too late for your council to ditch those shopping centres they bought and sell them on to a firm that specialises in shopping centre redevelopment and knows what they are doing?
They are literally in the process of demolishing two of them at the moment as part of the "Big Town Plan" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2024 22:06:32 GMT 1
spot on. What they should do with it is build two and four bedroom flats , for local people only. So that local young people and young family's can get somewhere local to live. Unfortunately that won't happen as they are broke. I'm assuming that you do not live in Shrewsbury ? The town is awash with poorly planned low quality new developments that cram as much as possible into the space - even in the South East they have better planning guidance on new builds to make sure that they have enough in the way of open space and amenities. Weir Hill has just brought over 600 homes within less than a mile of the Shirehall; Down Otley Way another 1,000 new homes; no new schools, doctors, etc. All of that within a mile and a half of the Shirehall. The infrastructure cannot cope. At least when they built the estates in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s they thought about the needs of the people - the Town needs the planning department to have a long term strategy beyond brain dead zoning and letting the private sector cram as much in as possible. I'm sure that MattW advised that housing developers have to contribute towards infrastructure but not enough money for the council to actually build anything |
|
|
|
Post by darkshrew on Sept 19, 2024 6:07:26 GMT 1
I'm assuming that you do not live in Shrewsbury ? The town is awash with poorly planned low quality new developments that cram as much as possible into the space - even in the South East they have better planning guidance on new builds to make sure that they have enough in the way of open space and amenities. Weir Hill has just brought over 600 homes within less than a mile of the Shirehall; Down Otley Way another 1,000 new homes; no new schools, doctors, etc. All of that within a mile and a half of the Shirehall. The infrastructure cannot cope. At least when they built the estates in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s they thought about the needs of the people - the Town needs the planning department to have a long term strategy beyond brain dead zoning and letting the private sector cram as much in as possible. I'm sure that MattW advised that housing developers have to contribute towards infrastructure but not enough money for the council to actually build anything Sadly our council's approach to both CIL charging on large developments and also the application of quality measures on housing developments both lag behind other areas; and not in small measure. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Shirehall
Sept 19, 2024 6:43:32 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2024 6:43:32 GMT 1
The obvious answer is housing and I'm pretty confident that is what it will become. But as others have said it puts more pressure on the already creaking infrastructure of the town
|
|
layton
Shropshire County League
Posts: 56
|
Post by layton on Sept 19, 2024 7:05:39 GMT 1
I'm sure that MattW advised that housing developers have to contribute towards infrastructure but not enough money for the council to actually build anything Sadly our council's approach to both CIL charging on large developments and also the application of quality measures on housing developments both lag behind other areas; and not in small measure. When they have to spend every penny they get on paying for past mistakes there is no chance the money they get will be spent on investing for the future good of the town. They get more money for allowing high density, low quality housing - there may be a link to that being what we are getting in Shrewsbury ? |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 19, 2024 7:44:29 GMT 1
anyone remember the time when they layed the whole town centre roads with cobbles at huge expense ?
what a disaster that was in so many ways
|
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Sept 19, 2024 8:38:33 GMT 1
I'm assuming that you do not live in Shrewsbury ? The town is awash with poorly planned low quality new developments that cram as much as possible into the space - even in the South East they have better planning guidance on new builds to make sure that they have enough in the way of open space and amenities. Weir Hill has just brought over 600 homes within less than a mile of the Shirehall; Down Otley Way another 1,000 new homes; no new schools, doctors, etc. All of that within a mile and a half of the Shirehall. The infrastructure cannot cope. At least when they built the estates in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s they thought about the needs of the people - the Town needs the planning department to have a long term strategy beyond brain dead zoning and letting the private sector cram as much in as possible. I'm sure that MattW advised that housing developers have to contribute towards infrastructure but not enough money for the council to actually build anything Yes thanks for the mention. These new developments have generated a tax called Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which is then used to build infrastructure to support the new development. Approximately £6000 comes in for an average 3 bed house CIL has been spent on local infrastructure such as the new Meole Brace traffic island, a new teaching block at Meole School, the new Bowbrook school and contributed to the 3G pitch used by the community trust at the new meadow, and replacing the hockey pitch at Meole school.But the level of CIL generated doesn’t cover the full cost of such services and matches funding is needed Groups such as the Integrated Care Board (NHS) can bid for CIL too and we’re looking at creating new “super surgeries” in Shrewsbury but these got pulled when central government funding was cut. CIL is not a great tax as it’s retrospective and arguably in an ideal world new infrastructure would go in before development, but Council powers to get developers to contribute are greatly diminished now to force them to pay. The new government is proposing that Shropshire increases its annual housing target to 2000 a year from the current 1300 but as yet hasn’t outlined how new infrastructure to support all that will be funded |
|
|
|
Post by iestywfc on Sept 19, 2024 9:28:57 GMT 1
having worked there pre-covid, it was ready to be knocked down then. I dont imagine it has had too much spent on it since!
|
|
|
|
Shirehall
Sept 19, 2024 10:13:55 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by staffordshrew on Sept 19, 2024 10:13:55 GMT 1
having worked there pre-covid, it was ready to be knocked down then. I dont imagine it has had too much spent on it since! I would imagine any owner would want to reduce it to a pile of rubble before some bright spark suggests it should be a listed building as an example of it's time. |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Sept 19, 2024 10:17:38 GMT 1
anyone remember the time when they layed the whole town centre roads with cobbles at huge expense ? what a disaster that was in so many ways Similar in Stafford centre, cobbles laid around 10 years ago and expected to last 100 years, they've just been relaid.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2024 10:41:17 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Sept 19, 2024 10:50:40 GMT 1
That seals it's fate then, that building is going to be knocked down pdq. |
|
|
|
Post by iestywfc on Sept 19, 2024 11:46:02 GMT 1
c20society.org.uk/buildings-at-risk/shirehall-shropshirewww.myshrewsbury.co.uk/blog/saving-shirehall-the-case-in-favour/Historic England dont even think it is worth saving, hence the Certificate of Immunity. I would love the protestors who have set up SOS to actually undertake a working week in Shirehall in the summer and in the winter to see how bad the building is. I recall discussions when i worked there about refurbishment but ultimately that was going to cost millions of pounds - for a near poverty council that would not be a good look tarting up a carbuncle when people are moaning about the state of the roads etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Sept 19, 2024 13:46:38 GMT 1
c20society.org.uk/buildings-at-risk/shirehall-shropshirewww.myshrewsbury.co.uk/blog/saving-shirehall-the-case-in-favour/Historic England dont even think it is worth saving, hence the Certificate of Immunity. I would love the protestors who have set up SOS to actually undertake a working week in Shirehall in the summer and in the winter to see how bad the building is. I recall discussions when i worked there about refurbishment but ultimately that was going to cost millions of pounds - for a near poverty council that would not be a good look tarting up a carbuncle when people are moaning about the state of the roads etc. A councillor I spoke to recently told me the top floor isn't used now (& can't be), that there are some asbestos issues and that people working remotely means the building is far bigger than the council now requires. Sale and demolition is inevitable and that seems the best outcome for the council and the town. |
|
|
|
Shirehall
Sept 19, 2024 15:18:58 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by zenfootball2 on Sept 19, 2024 15:18:58 GMT 1
I'm sure that MattW advised that housing developers have to contribute towards infrastructure but not enough money for the council to actually build anything Yes thanks for the mention. These new developments have generated a tax called Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which is then used to build infrastructure to support the new development. Approximately £6000 comes in for an average 3 bed house CIL has been spent on local infrastructure such as the new Meole Brace traffic island, a new teaching block at Meole School, the new Bowbrook school and contributed to the 3G pitch used by the community trust at the new meadow, and replacing the hockey pitch at Meole school.But the level of CIL generated doesn’t cover the full cost of such services and matches funding is needed Groups such as the Integrated Care Board (NHS) can bid for CIL too and we’re looking at creating new “super surgeries” in Shrewsbury but these got pulled when central government funding was cut. CIL is not a great tax as it’s retrospective and arguably in an ideal world new infrastructure would go in before development, but Council powers to get developers to contribute are greatly diminished now to force them to pay. The new government is proposing that Shropshire increases its annual housing target to 2000 a year from the current 1300 but as yet hasn’t outlined how new infrastructure to support all that will be funded As always thanks for post on such matters. As usual informative and helps me get my head round such matters. |
|
|
|
Shirehall
Sept 19, 2024 15:19:58 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by zenfootball2 on Sept 19, 2024 15:19:58 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Sept 19, 2024 17:24:11 GMT 1
What does that big round thing at the front do? Probably the only thing that could stop it being knocked down is finding bats in there. A private owner would have had the whole site cleared by now before anyone finds a reason not to.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Sept 19, 2024 17:56:28 GMT 1
What does that big round thing at the front do? Probably the only thing that could stop it being knocked down is finding bats in there. A private owner would have had the whole site cleared by now before anyone finds a reason not to. The round bit is the Council Chamber where the full Council meets. It was quite a cutting edge design in the 60s and inside looks quite impressive but it’s past its useful life now and really poor for sound and heating Part of the problem with selling the site of Shirehall is that the building is hard to demolish due to the building construction and location, and likely asbestos. So developers have to spend a lot before they can redevelop the land - and so the price they might pay for it is limited So probably selling it won’t raise a massive amount for the Council and long term a new smaller site in the town centre needs to be funded from the receipts |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Shirehall
Sept 19, 2024 19:22:15 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2024 19:22:15 GMT 1
So probably selling it won’t raise a massive amount for the Council and long term a new smaller site in the town centre needs to be funded from the receipts [/quote]
________________________________
So the story that I've heard,see up the thread,could well be true?
Get rid of the Uni and take the building back,smaller site,low cost and with staff working from home😁
|
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Sept 19, 2024 19:42:34 GMT 1
So probably selling it won’t raise a massive amount for the Council and long term a new smaller site in the town centre needs to be funded from the receipts ________________________________ So the story that I've heard,see up the thread,could well be true? Get rid of the Uni and take the building back,smaller site,low cost and with staff working from home😁 [/quote] Think this move has been known by staff for a long time which is probably where the rumour came from, but is offically in the public domain now as part of the Shirehall report. www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwylxk2nm98oThe Unversity moving out is as the article says just a fortunate coincidence. The University of Chester were originally given the building on a pepper corn rent to help the Uni establish in the town, with an agreement that once student numbers were significant that rent for the building would come in. However the covid outbreak and wider issues with University funding really hit student numbers and the Uni couldn't make retaining the Guildhall viable and pay rent - hence the move out. At the same time the advances in remote working that Covid excelerated meant a lot of Councils staff no longer needed a full time office at Shirehall, so a smaller venue would do to replace the Shirehall - and the Guildhall fits the bill, and its layout was originally as a Council office for Shrewsbury and Atcham means it can be converted easily. There are also plans for Council offices in the redeveloped Riverside but these won't likely be ready for 3-4 years so the Guildhall makes a more cost effective base. Makes sense in many ways for Council offices to be more central so its easier for people to visit. Much older B&A members might recall before Shirehall was built in the 60s the County Council offices were in the old Rackhams building and in Dogpole, so its almost full circle returning the offices to the town centre |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2024 9:57:25 GMT 1
Not that I think it will happen because of the cost factor but the only alternative I could see to houses is the Sixth Form taking the land. They are maxed out across their 3 sites and I believe that they were/are looking for spaces to expand
|
|
|
|
Post by iestywfc on Sept 20, 2024 10:28:58 GMT 1
A councillor I spoke to recently told me the top floor isn't used now (& can't be), that there are some asbestos issues and that people working remotely means the building is far bigger than the council now requires.
Sale and demolition is inevitable and that seems the best outcome for the council and the town. The issue is fire proofing for the third floor and it would cost too much to rectify. And asbestos was the best thing since sliced bread in the 60s! I believe that the majority of staff who use Shire Hall are primarily sub-consultants or sub-letters The council are only keeping it going as it has all of their record information and they havent yet relocated / sorted it all. I dont know if the registrars have moved or not - when i posted my notice of marriage 18 months ago they said they had been given a date to move somewhere else but havent actively looked to see if they are moved now. |
|
|
|
Post by iestywfc on Sept 20, 2024 10:33:18 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by MetaShrew on Sept 20, 2024 12:02:00 GMT 1
A preternaturally grim edifice. Not to mention the awful layout and poor materials used to build the thing.
No, not Shirehall... Town's defence!
|
|
