I was in town with a friend who was visiting the city the other day and he pointed out that the first things you see when you get off the train are pound land and house of Fraser, both the buildings are in pretty **** quality, is there no way we could've done something to make this better?
Yeah we seem to have spent most of our time bragging about getting it and have actually forgotten to improve the city.
I know I'm going to get hammered for this but what the hell. As far as I know Hull was awarded City of Culture status in Nov 2013, only around 2 years ago. I believe Liverpool, for example, had around 5 years notice. Now, I'm no engineer or architect but 2 years doesn't sound like very long to undertake the sort of works which would be expected of Hull CC or whoever. Maybe they took on too much, or in the wrong order, or maybe too much is being asked of them? I'm off down the shed with my tin hat...
Yeah we seem to have spent most of our time bragging about getting it and have actually forgotten to improve the city.
Just who do you think should be doing something to tidy up these privately owned buildings. We had a big debate on here before about the Poundland store, they were the only ones prepared to pay the rent. Sad but true.
It wouldn't matter that it's Poundland, but at least make the buildings look better and we might get some better shops in. We spend so much time trying to convince people we aren't a ****hole city full of poor people, yet the first thing you see when you leave the station from the front is a crappy 18th/19th century department store and a pound shop. My Dad did a lot of work for the city in terms of regeneration (mostly the fruit market and the marina), I'm going to have to ask why this wasn't addressed,
I dont know the ins and outs with these particular lease arrangements but Id be highly surprised if the council or any 3rd party body could do something about making a privately owned building look nicer. Of course they could if they were disgusting and / or a danger, but neither of these are. Ah just seen this I can probably help you out, the buildings are (I assume) privately owned.
The council can't do anything about the state of building they don't own, you might as well complain to them that your house needs painting.
Three years should have been plenty of time to re-landscape Jameson Street, King Edward Street and Whitefriargate, there's really no excuse for not having it ready in time. Liverpool was European City Of Culture, it's a completely different thing, the works they had to complete were massive.
Well it was just an observation from somebody from out of town. I hadn't really given it much thought, but when we looked and he showed me, it does look pretty ****. If they are privately owned, not much can be done, but it's a shame the landlords don't try and make them look better.
Digging up roads and rebuilding buildings is the same whether it's European or UK City of culture. Liverpool may have had more to do but they didn't finish it all in time either. Could it be that 'City of Culture' status is a poisoned chalice because expectations get too elevated? I'd have thought it's important that as much as possible gets done in the time available but that it continues getting done beyond 2017, part of the legacy and all that.
In Liverpool, in the run up to City of Culture (amid some difficulties), 50% of Liverpool's residents said they thought it would all go wrong and wouldn't benefit the city at all. Despite some issues, the same poll after the CoC year had 85% of Liverpool's residents saying it had been a success and the city had benefitted. Hardly a surprise, it massively increased investment in the area, they had 9.7m visitors that year and raised £750m in additional revenue. We can't expect anything like those numbers, but the principal is the same.
The paving thats getting put down Whitefriargate has to come back up. Theres no mortar under it has its too cold to lay them. Thought it looked odd
