Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy

Holmes Miller submit Oatlands plans

May 18 2012

Holmes Miller submit Oatlands plans
Holmes Miller have submitted plans to erect 32 homes at Elmfoot Grove, Oatlands, the latest phase in regeneration works for the south Glasgow district.

Developer Bett Homes is backing the scheme which will consist of a mixture of terraces, detached homes and cottage flats assembled around a central square.

On-site parking has been ‘maximised’ with both private side parking and on street visitor bays. Landscaping will attempt to mitigate this impact with some homes brought forward to enclose the street and maximise garden space to the rear.

Moving away from the design of past architectural styles employed at Oatlands this latest scheme will introduce solid blocks of materials and larger windows, whilst maintaining the palette of stone and render.
An open 'square' divides the central roadway into two halves
An open 'square' divides the central roadway into two halves
Buildings will be clad in buff and red stone as well as white dry-dash render
Buildings will be clad in buff and red stone as well as white dry-dash render


#1 Posted by SAndals on 20 May 2012 at 09:13 AM
Words fail me....
Art Vandelay
#2 Posted by Art Vandelay on 20 May 2012 at 14:05 PM
Initially I wasn't sure if it was the renders that were the worst part. Turns out its all of it.

There's something inherently naff about recon stone on a bog standard 4P house too. Awful!
#3 Posted by SAndals on 20 May 2012 at 15:12 PM
For "Cottage flats around a central square" read "tiny flats around a brick pavior chicane". Also the reporting of "on-site parking has been 'maximised' " as a positive...WTF...good luck to the landscaping (a dozen trees) mitigating the 80+ parking spaces.
Even on a slow news day I'd rather see a blank page than this...not saying regeneration isn't positive, but there's no need to showcase this drivel.
Rem CoolBag
#4 Posted by Rem CoolBag on 20 May 2012 at 17:25 PM
Indeed, the combination of bog standard housing scheme plus sub-standard architectural reporting really is a but of a depressant isn't it?

AJ100 has HM partnership in the top 20 uk practices - surely with the resources at their disposal they could at least spend some effort on polishing the images of this turd? Instead we get free-to-download Sketchup visuals with more effort put in to getting the right cars on maximised parking than anything that may raise the actual housing standard.....
#5 Posted by Pennypacker on 21 May 2012 at 10:21 AM
I don't see what's so bad with it.
Rem Koolhaas
#6 Posted by Rem Koolhaas on 21 May 2012 at 10:37 AM
Lucky you. You could read the above comments above as a guide to where the scheme, if not poor, certainly doesnt rise above the most base of design ambition.

Or you could look at the images and deduce it for yourself!

Or, you could read
#7 Posted by Egbert on 21 May 2012 at 12:25 PM
A large part of the problem is just that so little care and effort looks to have gone into the presentation work - it's all so basic and bargain-basement looking, 'will-this-do?' standard which I'm afraid looks applicable to the architecture too. Doesn't bode at all well for the finished product.
Bottom Feeders
#8 Posted by Bottom Feeders on 21 May 2012 at 12:29 PM
eh? this is Holmes Miller we are talking about and for them this is a high standard
Steven B
#9 Posted by Steven B on 21 May 2012 at 12:35 PM
I'm very happy this is meeting with widespread condemnation. Housing and urban design of this standard is unacceptable in this day and age.

The presentation is pathetic and doesn't exactly show holmes miller in a positive light, but really the fact the basic design principles are so bad really shows them up. It doesn't say much for a practice when they cant even produce a respectable design for housing.
#10 Posted by SAndals on 21 May 2012 at 12:56 PM
My criticism was not so much at the design - OK I did have a pop and granted it is poor - but at the fact that this proposals has been reported - and approved - for publication on UR.
We all have some pretty mundane stuff in our back catalogue I'm sure - we all have to eat, but you don't make a bug deal out of it.
What was the submission process for this to appear on the UR website?
Surely HM didn't propose this to be showcased themselves - or is there no such thing as bad publicity?
#11 Posted by urbanrealm on 21 May 2012 at 14:21 PM

Hi Sandals. It’s a judgement call. Irrespective of the design choices Oatlands is an important chunk of Glasgow’s inner city fabric. As the next phase of development following on from New Gorbals and presaging Laurieston I think its inclusion is valid.
#12 Posted by SAndals on 21 May 2012 at 15:55 PM
Of course you do, or I'm sure you wouldn't have published it - but you didn't answer the question. Did HM propose this inclusion on the website or did you find the news/planning application etc, rehash and include under your own steam? Just want to understand the process better...maybe nominate some projects for inclusion.
Mr Architectural Assistant
#13 Posted by Mr Architectural Assistant on 21 May 2012 at 16:51 PM
I don't believe it matters if Holmes Miller intended the world to see this design or not. They should be named and shamed for producing such tripe.

Surely someone senior within the company should at least have the backbone to stand up and say "thats *insert expletive*!!!" Surely they could hire someone out their with housing experience rather than relying on stadium and prison drones!
#14 Posted by urbanrealm on 21 May 2012 at 18:27 PM
Hi Sandals - yes, it's sourced from GCC Planning (linked to above). It's not a press release.

Any nominations would be warmly received.
#15 Posted by Davey on 22 May 2012 at 10:14 AM
mr architectural assistant. your last comment is uncalled for. attacking people personally while sitting behind a keyboard is juvenile and pathetic. Why don't you grow some balls and go to the Holmes Miller office and take up your problems face to face and meet these so called "drones" you talk about and tell them what you think..... you should be ashamed!!!
#16 Posted by dirige on 22 May 2012 at 10:19 AM
The sad fact is that only a base attempt at design of houses/urban-community layout/visualisations are attempted in order to scrape through planning with the minimum of man-time spent on it, as these house-builders know that the potential buyers are oblivious to such benefits.
Art Vandelay
#17 Posted by Art Vandelay on 22 May 2012 at 10:21 AM
@Davey - Yes, personal attacks aren't too clever. But I didn't see any there, and incidentally, he's completely correct.
Methilated Spirits
#18 Posted by Methilated Spirits on 23 May 2012 at 16:03 PM
I suppose the more venomous comments about the proposal are to be expected from certain quarters but they are ill-founded and it's about time that the knee-jerk detractors took a reality check! Consider the context: the proposed 32 houses form part of an overall masterplan providing a strong urban design framework, a hierarchy of frontages and building heights - this is a two-storey section behind some of the main frontages, intended to provide inner-city houses with gardens for people who might otherwise move to the suburbs. The materials must also be seen against the context of a palette which will give a distinct character to the Oatlands area, rather than the usual facing brick which could be anywhere. Finally, I believe that the detractors should complain more, and do something positive about, the 95% of suburban housing nowadays that is 'bog-standard' and has never seen an architect in its design.

Post your comments


All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.


Back to May 2012

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.