Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Windrush Square, Brixton - news and discussion

teuchter said:
Obviously we can haggle forever exactly where you draw the line, .
Click to expand...

Yes especially as you have no idea as to the profile of KC square, Ill send a plan if Im allowed. You have also included Saltoun Rd in your Windrush plan :D
Its approx 2x larger. :rolleyes:
 
editor said:
This notion that costs for entirely different redevelopments in entirely different areas all universally simplify down to a simple, one-size-fits-all calculation is really naive, you know.
Click to expand...

To be honest its fairly prevalent in the industry.
 
editor said:
This notion that costs for entirely different redevelopments in entirely different areas all universally simplify down to a simple, one-size-fits-all calculation is really naive, you know.

I've posted up the official costings from the press release and I'm not really inclined to comment on teucher's completely wild guesses based on random Google images.
Click to expand...

1. Construction costings based on square metre rates are commonplace as a means of getting a ball-park figure in the absence of other information

2. As it happens, the Lyric Square and St Johns square schemes seem if anything to be less complex than the Windrush one; the KX one is unknown

3. Those estimates pointing to a figure in the £4M region are the only attempt anyone on this thread has made to make a stab at what a "going rate" cost might be (except for gixxer1000's £1.5M figure which he initially tried to justify with the examples I've used above)

4. Despite being the one who originally brought up the cost of the square and moaned about it being "staggeringly" expensive you haven't provided any explanation of how you came to that conclusion and I think that anyone can see that it wasn't based on anything objective at all

5. The projected spend for the square itself was £4.25M which seems to tally with the figures I have speculated upon

6. You have have not posted any post-construction official costings for the square by itself

7. My guesses are not "completely wild"; they are based on scaled and measured comparisons of the various schemes mentioned

8. They are not based on "random google images" as is blatantly obvious

9. Have you considered applying for a position at the News Of The World?.
 
Gixxer1000 said:
Yes especially as you have no idea as to the profile of KC square, Ill send a plan if Im allowed. You have also included Saltoun Rd in your Windrush plan :D
Click to expand...

Saltoun Rd was repaved along with the rest of the square, as was Rushcroft Rd. I decided to be generous and not include the bit of Effra road that was also repaved seeing as it is TfL maintained as far as I know, and also it was finished off after the square opened. It's a bit academic as we are all guessing what scope of work we are talking about as being included in what figure.

Its approx 2x larger. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Based on the reliability of your evidence so far, I will believe it when I see it.

Even if it is 2 x larger, then 6M would scale down to 3M (or more, if we take into account your front-loaded scaling thing) which is twice your 1.5M estimate.
 
teuchter said:
Saltoun Rd was repaved along with the rest of the square, as was Rushcroft Rd. I decided to be generous and not include the bit of Effra road that was also repaved seeing as it is TfL maintained as far as I know, and also it was finished off after the square opened. It's a bit academic as we are all guessing what scope of work we are talking about as being included in what figure..
Click to expand...

Its a road- Its not part of the Square (cars drive down it/park on it). Saltoun Rd was also finished off after the Square.

teuchter said:
Based on the reliability of your evidence so far, I will believe it when I see it.

Even if it is 2 x larger, then 6M would scale down to 3M (or more, if we take into account your front-loaded scaling thing) which is twice your 1.5M estimate.
Click to expand...

You were to lazy to do the research for yourself so I pointed you in the right direction.
The art to this is not only looking for the similarties but also the differences in the scaling.eg. Do half as many people traffic Windrush as Kings x?:D
Is there a tube station? etc etc
Its not a science but youre to dogmatic to be anything other than an internet "expert" thats why your opinions count for nothing in the real world.
 
Ps i think you me and him are all qualified in architecture to some extent. Shouldn't we be fighting the common enemy? :)
 
I quite like the Lyric Square - it has a ground-level fountain that children try to chase pigeons into - but I wouldn't say it was much of a public space. It's more like an open area in a mall. You basically use it as a cut-through or if you're sitting at one of the pubs and cafés around the edges.
 
editor said:
Apparently it was Jamaica day according to the BBC News and there was a sprinter there to inspire the handful of people who showed up. Why wasn't this publicised properly?
it.
Click to expand...

The event was publicised via a very good quality attractive flyer that came thru my door from Aviva(sponsor) and UK Athletics. I'm on one of the roads off Effra Rd, no idea how broad the flyering was.
 
teuchter said:
Are we arguing about the difference between a "valid" opinion and a "qualified" opinion? This seems a little pedantic.



But your opinion on the cost of the square would not be valid if you didn't know the cost of the square.




I wanted a poll that asked the questions that were asked in the poll that I posted. And that is what I got, seeing as I was kind enough to provide myself with exactly what I wanted.
Click to expand...

You dont read other peoples posts properly.

What I was saying is that if you want a poll about validity u should do it and say that is what its about.

I said I "might" think my opinion was valid. Not that i think it is . I was making an example. This is an instance of u not reading peoples posts properly.

To say im being Pedantic is a bit rich coming from u. I have been following your posts. You nit pick every detail of others posts.
 
Gramsci said:
You dont read other peoples posts properly.

What I was saying is that if you want a poll about validity u should do it and say that is what its about.

I said I "might" think my opinion was valid. Not that i think it is . I was making an example. This is an instance of u not reading peoples posts properly.
Click to expand...

No, I can assure you that I read your post carefully. You said you "might" think your opinion was valid, I responded:

But your opinion on the cost of the square would not be valid if you didn't know the cost of the square.

Note use of conditional "would". If you had said, "I think my opinion is valid" I would have responded:

But your opinion on the cost of the square is not valid if you don't know the cost of the square.

To say im being Pedantic is a bit rich coming from u. I have been following your posts. You nit pick every detail of others posts.
Click to expand...

This I cannot deny.

As for whether my poll explicitly asked "whether criticism of costs without knowing what they were is valid" (as I implied in my reply to the Editor in post 22) I can see that there is a (pedantic) argument to be made that that question was not explicitly asked, even though in my opinion it was fairly clear that part of the purpose of the thread/poll was to make that specific point. I say "make" because it is not really something that needs to be "asked": the answer to "is criticism of costs without knowing what they are valid" is "of course it isn't".

Therefore I will happily withdraw this part of my post 22:

So to say the project was too expensive without making any effort to research the actual cost is fine ... and yet to start a thread asking whether criticism of costs without knowing what they were is valid, is somehow in contrast totally pointless?
Click to expand...

And replace it with:

So to say the project was too expensive without making any effort to research the actual cost is fine ... and yet to start a thread that
a) makes the point that criticism of costs without knowing what they are is obviously insane,
b) allows the identification of those posters whose opinion may be of some worth,
c) allows the identification of those posters who are simply engaging in uninformed sensationalism,
- is somehow in contrast totally pointless?
Click to expand...

I hope this clears up any confusion.
 
Budget is one thing... scope of works is another.
For example, weren't the old fuel tanks still in the ground where the Texaco garage used to be? If so, they would have cost a bit to remove and infill.
Also - there was all the re-paving around the St. Matthew's island, outside the fridge, KFC corner etc.; the new road layout; were these included in the budget for Windrush Square?
One thing's for sure, the project was more than a simple bit of re-paving and landscaping.
 
billythefish said:
Budget is one thing... scope of works is another.
For example, weren't the old fuel tanks still in the ground where the Texaco garage used to be? If so, they would have cost a bit to remove and infill.
Also - there was all the re-paving around the St. Matthew's island, outside the fridge, KFC corner etc.; the new road layout; were these included in the budget for Windrush Square?
One thing's for sure, the project was more than a simple bit of re-paving and landscaping.
Click to expand...

My hunch (in the absence of any firm information): the figure of around £10M relates to the entire scope of work including the high street and all the things you mention above; something like £4M relates to the square itself, inasmuch as it is possible to isolate it from the grander scheme.
 
Saw an old woman having a great big pee while sitting on one of the chairs the other day.
 
innit said:
Saw an old woman having a great big pee while sitting on one of the chairs the other day.
Click to expand...

The proposals produced after the first public consultation included drains under each seat for exactly this purpose but they were taken out as a cost cutting exercise.
 
Rushy said:
The proposals produced after the first public consultation included drains under each seat for exactly this purpose but they were taken out as a cost cutting exercise.
Click to expand...

A seat with a hole in it and a drain underneath... I think there is a technical term for this...
 
Even in Aberdeen, the great granite city itself, granite these days is sourced from China and Portugal and all sorts of places...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Homophobia in Brixton
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
Tulster218
T
editor
It's a grim Christmas around Brixton: no lights, no tree and no funfair
Replies
1
Views
655
skyscraper101
skyscraper101
editor
Where to watch England vs Spain Euro 2024 final in Brixton
Replies
6
Views
394
madolesance
M
Rushy
Ros Griffiths & Co. Reclaiming Windrush Square
2 3 4
Replies
105
Views
6K
blameless77
blameless77
story
Palestine support action in Brixton
Replies
23
Views
1K
8ball
8ball
Back
Top Bottom