pete_jim Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I did say that rental incomes only APPEARED to be static, however, this is borne out by RRPI - the rental residential price index for the country as a whole, suggests an overall slightly downward trend, with average rental cost now £569pcm for last month down from £719 in December 2006, variations in recent months are minimal but again downward. There are not sufficient figures for Sheffield but figures for Yorkshire mirror the national trend. I don't ignore or dispute what you are saying but I do take it in context and how my experiences may differ and ultimately how it affects me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginemro Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 this is gateway to sheffield city centre and why do we have to fall behind other cities the arts tower is 78 metres and was the tallest building in sheffield other cities have bigger towers so why cant sheffield have a few . The city lofts tower will be good as its in the heart of the city but dont understand why velocity is only allowed to go to 30 floors 36 would have given it the tallest building in sheffield mantal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unisol Posted September 10, 2008 Author Share Posted September 10, 2008 this is gateway to sheffield city centre and why do we have to fall behind other cities the arts tower is 78 metres and was the tallest building in sheffield other cities have bigger towers so why cant sheffield have a few . The city lofts tower will be good as its in the heart of the city but dont understand why velocity is only allowed to go to 30 floors 36 would have given it the tallest building in sheffield mantal. Because the council don't want the tallest buildings on the periphery of the city centre - which i think is a fair point really. Not at the moment anyhow, maybe once the business district around Moorfoot gets underway. 30+22 will still look expremely imposing alongside CityGate etc. The double towers should help forge an argument for future applications in order to build up a cluster - which, in my opinion, is how tall buildings should be situated e.g. Canary Wharf, La Defence etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Because the council don't want the tallest buildings on the periphery of the city centre - which i think is a fair point really. But with all the whining of the shade tall buildings supposedly create they don't want them in the centre either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unisol Posted September 10, 2008 Author Share Posted September 10, 2008 But with all the whining of the shade tall buildings supposedly create they don't want them in the centre either. I remember reading a report way back when City Lofts was in for planning indicating the shade created would be minimal, even when considering the Winter Garden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theripsaw Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Plot of land worth one million pounds, divided into one house - house costs a minimum of one million pounds. Divided into 200 houses on fifty floors - houses cost a minimum of twenty thousand pounds. Anybody else think cheaper housing would be a good thing? Not how it works though. Land prices are bases on house prices, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Scarlet Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Good news, but pathetic that they "expressed concern that would be too high" on the 36 storey extension. Coun. Arthur Dunworth, shame on you. Retire and let someone with vision shape a once-great city. Why should he be in shame? You like it or you don't? the tower isn't particularly researched or architecturally unique... If the man doesn't like it and think it's too high it's a fair comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InvalidUser Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 why on earth do we need these things:loopy: Because space in town centers is limited so it makes sense to build taller buildings. Because we don't want new builds in the green belt so making he most of brownfield sites makes sense. They can build to 100 floors as far as I'm concerned, as long as it doesn't fall down who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Why should he be in shame? You like it or you don't? the tower isn't particularly researched or architecturally unique... If the man doesn't like it and think it's too high it's a fair comment. But the difference in height between 30 and 36 storeys is marginal. The tower is already going to be a visible presence. He's nothing more than an out of touch NIMBY thinking only of himself rather than the good of the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0114owl1867 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 they should have gone up to 36 or more it would have been great to have a drink in a sky bar as they were going to call it ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now