Pall Mall

[kat2]

I wouldnt call them shoe box's and being in a desirable area to live governs the price, I personally think this is good for the city of liverpool, obviousley there are alot whom wish the money was spent on them (very selfish) the people that buy those homes may well decide to set up business's here, take the Beetham developments for example, they are resident here in Beetham West, they like others will employ, that too has to be good for the local population. The days of council housing is long over and will never return! (thank god) so, think of it this way the more yuppies that come the more money they will spend, which will in turn keep your council tax down to a reasonable level, remember those so called shoe boxs as you put it, will be in a high council tax band.
kat

[RoddersUK]

In my experience it's not the yuppies that are living in the city center flats. The majority are bought by investors and rented out. I've lived in the city center for a good few years now and i've moved a few times too and every time i've been able to get a large amount knocked of the rent because they are desperate to get any rent coming in. The demand is not there at the moment. The building i'm in at present has around 50 apartments and 8 are empty and have been for a while. There will be 9 next month as i'm being evicted due to my landlord being a arrears on his mortgage before i moved in and having the flat repossessed (his second repossession in this block alone). The rest of the block is mainly students.
I'm delighted to see so much investment in Liverpool, it's much needed and long overdue. But assuming that new flats means new residents and jobs automatically is simply not true.

Warehouse conversions tend to be more generous in size but all the new build flats i've looked at are tiny. No storage space and only suitable for single people unless you pay £250k+ for a decent sized one. And then you have another £10-20K for a parking space.

I dont know if you were saying that i was selfish and wanted money spending on me but that not true. And i agree with you about the demise of council housing, there are better ways.

Just my 2 cents.

[kat2]

I am supprised if you were in a prime location flat and not paying higher council tax for that privlage? thats my point. Yes, some do sub let and I think thats wrong, indeed I recollect Manchester City council stamping that out. You must agree though you have to be in the right price bracket to be able to afford such luxury, and good luck to those that are in that position. I beleive, yes any developer wants maximum return on real estate in a prime location, who wouldnt, after all common sense suggests, theres no free lunch and when you may pay several million for the land you have to get a return from it. No body in business is in business to make a loss or to be over generous, otherwise they wouldnt be in buisness.
with regards to smaller homes, it has plus and minus effects really, my home is extermely large, and comes with that the maintainance, and high fuel bills. smaller spaces if built correctly should have good thermal propertys. The same old saying is true, you get what you pay for, and I would imagine small apartments in prime locations dont really matter because the clinetel will most probably afford the luxury of eating out all the time?
kat
no I wasnt implying yourself ** just the general attitude seems to be why not spend it on us?

[RoddersUK]

I'm in a two bedroom flat near Campbell Square and it's only band 'B'.
I think they have kept them lower while there is still a lot of development going on to encourage investment.

[jon_hall]

I'm currently in a 2 bed in the X building after spending 7 months in Manhattan Place in a 2 bed.

Difference between the two is amazing, paying slightly more now but the X Building is better built and bigger albeit with bugger all storage in either.

Manhattan place was plagued by extreme internal corridor noise and you could easily here the flats either side. X Building, apart from St Pauls being built you barely here anything. Both built in 2002, not sure who built this but Iliad built the other and the quality difference is immense.

[RoddersUK]

Hi Jon
I've looked at both of those developments and i'd agree the X building is far better. The layout is slightly querky which gives it some interest where as manhattan place has been designed for maximum number of units to a quite low standard.The architects for the X building were KKA.
I might be slightly biased because i have a friend working there but it just shows that with a little bit of professional input and thought you can get a much better product for the same return.

[jon_hall]

Yep they managed to sort out something to keep out the noise. Possibly proper walls or as close to it for a change.

Yep in a corner flat fo the front bedroom only has our front room and main bathroom next to it and has no neighbour as such.

Also in the main far far far quieter with less people walking home this way.

Not sure what the other blocks in East Village are like. Looked both in Staten and Hudson as well.