Why on earth is this project being lead by architects? Is it because GCC procurement just don't understand that there is a difference between architecture and landscape...it's like putting electricians in charge of the plumbing! Sadly the lack of appropriate skills shines through...the appointed landscape team left to come up with a few latin names. Totally insensitive to and wasteful of the established environment. Expensive and shoddy.

This has been talked about for years. I wonder if any of us will be alive to see it happen?

It will never be built. Just like the trams, the metro system, the extension to the subway. All pie in the sky

Doom & gloom from the usual lot on here. The trams and subway extension were a wish list that was never ratified beyond the vision stage. There was no funding or political will to back them up.

The riverside has City Region funding behind it - there's every chance of it being scaled back due to costs but it will go ahead in some form.

Decades overdue and it looks good. Hopefully, it proceeds and is delivered as per the visuals above.

Glasgow doesn't need empty parkland along the river, we're well endowed with parks already. They need to make a bold call on city zoning. It's not rocket science to see that the best rover frontage redevelopment in the UK is a mix of park resi and restaurants facing the river.

This exercise seems a lot like, f*+k it we don't know what to do with it, so let's grass it for now and hope a developer throws some cash at us in the future for student accommodation.

Wait, is this not the same Glasgow City Council who cannot afford to repair the existing quayside walls that are crumbling and they have told the residents that they need to pay for it?

One of the most requested items at consultation was the provision of public toilets. It was not top of the list but near the top.
There are no public toilets planned so far as I can see.

Per post #6
Are you an architect in Glasgow? You don't seem to be aware of where this has all come from.

FYI This work is driven by the DRF from a few years ago where the consensus was that this section of the Clyde should be part of a linear park stretching from Glasgow Green to Govan. It is also driven by the paucity of green space in the city centre and the increasing city centre population. It actually may well be that new infrastructure like this helps to drive development ,which, again, is such an obvious phenomena. Are you really an architect, you sound almost incredulous that such a thing could happen.

Per post #7
The quayside walls are owned by the residents. It is in their title deeds. I really do sympathise, but the council on this occasion seem to have acted reasonably. They are after all legally obliged to obtain best value on capital expenditure. Costs have escalated and the council cannae afford it. There will need to be some other creative form of financing, and procurement or some other funding pot to draw from.

https://www.scottishhousingnews.com/articles/concerns-raised-as-ps45m-glasgow-quay-wall-repairs-left-unfunded

This doesn't seem like a significant improvement over what's currently on the site—or even much of a difference, to be honest.

#9 I don't imagine you've been down the riverfront much recently then?

Longest drum roll in history.

20 plus years of civic gum bumping highlighting our complete lack of drive / ambition / energy / delivery.

All the money being spaffed on contractor welfare at a rate of knots through the Avenues programme and the riverside is left to rot.

Middle class welfare -- why build anything when you can make a good living of imagineering / proposals / masterplans ...

Recent hotel investment looking over a forgotten 70's wasteland suggests that Glesga PLC does not have its game face on.

Devolution hasn't helped / Nat teenage politics isn't helping / 14 years of Tory dog boiling austerity didn't help.

Does Andy Burnham fancy a new challenge?
Fine words and glitzy PR visuals butter no parsnips.

Riverside redevelopment ?!?
Low hanging fruit to the rest of the world.
Well out of reach for our political midgets.

Coming soon to the poetry section of all good bookshops- FBOTs first anthology. Includes such classics as,

Middle class welfare
Low grade filler design vibe
Civic gum bumping

& the political satire

Teenage politics
I don't like devolution
Tory dog boiling

This concept has merit and shares similarities with the Clyde Place development at Barclays; however, the fundamental issue remains: there is currently no compelling reason for people to visit this location. At best, a handful of office workers, of which there are relatively few in this part of the city, might use the space for lunch on the occasional sunny day. The IFSD sits on the opposite side of the King George V Bridge, and at present, the St. Enoch Centre effectively severs this area from the city. While plans exist to improve connectivity, there is currently no strong link, as highlighted in yellow on the diagram.
With Buchanan Galleries reconsidering its strategy and doubling down on retail, it seems reasonable to question whether St. Enoch might follow a similar path. Instead of investing heavily in this area without a clear driver for activity, why not take a bold step and create a River Taxi Hub? Imagine a simple, efficient loop running from the East End to East Renfrewshire (Brehead/INTU), with key stops at Barclays, the SEC (Hydro), and the Riverside Museum. This would give the river a genuine purpose as a transport corridor, encouraging landscape upgrades to follow organically.
Such an initiative could spark natural regeneration, attract pop-up venues, and create a popular, sustainable route that reactivates the river. It would encourage movement across the city, connect key destinations, and, crucially, generate revenue for Glasgow while reinforcing its identity as a forward-thinking, dynamic city. Glasgow will only thrive when it thinks like the old Strathclyde Council, and captures the people of the greater Glasgow Communities – to make Glasgow Fandabi Dozi Again.

why don't we just roof over the whole river like the Charing Cross proposals. ????

Glasgow city council need it make the repairs to the existsing walls of the Clyde near the city centre, whislt they state they only one the top 3 inches of top soil, it’s considered a core path within Glasgow but have left that development in a bit of a situation.

People in homes aren’t able to sell, it’s become attractive for unsocial behaviour in parts. This is due to the walk way at the clydeside being fenced off, it’s limited foot traffic and exposure attracts drugs and other unwanted behaviours.
This is actaully evident down the whole of the riverfront, to a point it feels unsafe.
GCC need to consider current issues around the city before embarking on any new ones.

But where will the drug dealers go?.. You’ve got a piece of vital infrastructure right next to what I would consider the jewel of the riverside that is the Barclays development currently closed off due to collapse, The core path has been closed off since forever and has now been given up as a migrant/deliveroo cyclist camp. Maybe deal with the fundamentals before spaffing public cash on flights of fancy.

Owners of walls pay for the upkeep of their walls.

No-one buys a wall without knowing about it.

I think this looks a good scheme and I would love to see it done and maintained to a high standard but there are so many questions as there is with anything Glasgow City Council do.
This area is a haven for drug addicts and undesirables, currently you could get high on the smell of cannabis as you walk by. Some new grass and stone slabs isnt going to change this, needs better policing, closing of St Enoch hostel and the removal of these folk before this will be a genuine public realm for the city.
Also this is probably the 5th time this has surfaced on these pages, and so the chances of anything ever happening are remote. Or like the Windmillcroft Quay they will decide they dont have enough money.
Lastly its only as good as the maintenance in place and looking at GCCs record on the other public realm this is unlikely to stay nice for very long...
I would love to see this happen but the reality is very far away.

It's so obvious! You're all overthinking it! What the site needs of course is a gigantic Ferris Wheel! Roll up! Roll up!...
Ther. Sorted.

I like it.

#1 - To be fair, Hawkins/Brown describe themselves as architects and urban designers – so designing a piece of urban realm such as a riverside park should be within their competence, no?

#4 - “The riverside has City Region funding behind it - there's every chance of it being scaled back due to costs but it will go ahead in some form.”
I’d be fascinated to discover how many City Deal projects will actually happen. I’m aware that quite a few in another Scottish city have been quietly shelved, and I’d put money on the landscaping being decimated once the quayside walls are priced up by Volker Stevin and whoever else is on the tender list.

#11 - “why build anything when you can make a good living of imagineering / proposals / masterplans”
Not forgetting the folks at GCC who make a good living by commissioning said imagineering / proposals / masterplans. One or two in the Glasgow City Region City Deal team started their careers with Pat Lally’s unbuilt follies and have clung on for 25+ years.

#12 - Neil Gillespie wrote a booklet of poetry inspired by the Bernat Klein studio, so why not?

#12 FBOT haikus - genius, well played.

Let's not pan this ... The Sighthill connection is probably the best piece of urban intervention GCC have done (especially aside the avenues!) It's also about time we dealt with that river/road edge too.

So I see 2 problems. First, whilst this is an improvement on what is there at present. There's nothing here that is going to act as a draw, bringing people to the riverside. Second, even if this were to be built, in typically Glasgow city council style, it will be abandoned and not maintained to a high standard. I'd give it a few months before the neds and drug folk move back in, back to square 1.

Why is there such a lack of vision? Why can Glasgow have some sort of attraction at the riverside, something like the London Eye. I know not exactly original, but it would draw lots of people to the riverside, restaurants or food outlets could be built nearby to add to the draw and cater for the people already there. This could all be house as part of a linear park setting.