December 18 2018

Yeoman McAllister Architects are proposing to build 39 flats on the site of a disused printworks on St Andrew Street, Perth.

Located in the city centre conservation area the scheme will make use of multi buff brickwork and accent render.

In a statement the architects wrote: “Developing the architectural style and vernacular is essential to ensure that the development site becomes synonymous with quality design.

“We have developed an architectural language we feel is appropriate and applied this to detailed building elements. It is this level of detail which will distinguish this proposal from other developments.”

Just 20 parking spaces will be provided to encourage public transport use.
 

25 Comments

#1 Posted by James Hepburn on 18 Dec 2018 at 13:23 PM

If you are an architect or a house designer here in Scotland, I'd just like to take a moment to congratulate you all on reaching what can only be described as the height of mediocrity. It seems to be a goal amongst the profession to just try hard enough at producing buildings that will in the ensuing ten years become eye sores across the country. Since the 50's architects have excelled at producing the most mind numbing and often offensive houses and public buildings in our cities and towns. Long gone are some of the most impressive Victorian buildings and the talent that went with them. So well done all of you who have produced such drivel.

#2 Posted by CM on 18 Dec 2018 at 14:09 PM

Someone got an etch a sketch as an early Christmas present.

#3 Posted by HMR on 18 Dec 2018 at 15:25 PM

deep sigh..........

#4 Posted by Sue Pearman on 18 Dec 2018 at 16:23 PM

If I were a fly on the wall when this was being discussed I'd probably have heard:
'It's only Perth, it's backwater anyway, it doesn't really matter'
'nah, if busses crash into it, the insurance will cover them'
'the cheapest render materials possible, yes'
'privacy...activation of the street - no don't give them any doors and they can just use curtains'
'and for goodness sake don't spend any time on the visualisations'
....I could be wrong though?

#5 Posted by CM on 18 Dec 2018 at 16:43 PM

# Regarding the backwater comment. Why is it that some local authorities in Scotland demand so little from developers? Flimsy legislation or a desperation for investment of any kind?

#6 Posted by Neil C on 18 Dec 2018 at 16:44 PM

One of my pet hates involves developments which unnecessarily reduce pavement width. How are people supposed to get pushchairs or wheelchairs down that typewriter ribbon of a pavement, without being clipped by passing buses?

#7 Posted by Walt Disney on 18 Dec 2018 at 16:58 PM

Don't blame the poor architect. Blame the RICS, The Scottish Government, Perth and Kinross Council, The land owner, the financial lenders and most of all the consumer / customer who wants a cheap house and doesn't care what it looks like. The architect is just there to make all of their 'dreams' become reality.

#8 Posted by Grandpa Chatterji on 18 Dec 2018 at 17:10 PM

#1 - If you want a professional architect's job done.... like they good ol' Dickensian days - PAY THE ARCHITECT SOME DECENT FEES!

#9 Posted by Mucklevanchly on 18 Dec 2018 at 17:36 PM

2004 called and it wants its design statement comments back from the office that just worked out 'recangle -> extrude' in sketchup.

#10 Posted by symPathetic on 18 Dec 2018 at 19:14 PM

I'd be slightly sympathetic for this due to obvious constraints if the internals at least worked but alas....
Windows illustrated over kitchen units where high units are also indicated, along with over cookers.
Windows illustrated clearly clashing with wardrobes and furniture layouts never mind the ones directly over double beds.
Your visuals are also missing (assuming they will be present) boilers flues and weep vents which will, somehow, make this even worse.
Whoever done this needs a long hard look at themselves before considering a career change.....a real smh moment in Scottish 'Architecture'

#11 Posted by Stylecouncil on 19 Dec 2018 at 09:02 AM

#8 crap fees or not, this is poor. Lack of talent/ awareness of context is more attributable to the design.

#12 Posted by Egbert on 19 Dec 2018 at 11:20 AM

This is getting pilloried and deservedly so. It really does look like something dusted off from the early 00s - I count 7 (7!) different materials/colour treatments on the street elevation, like the worst of what Owen Hatherley called 'CABE-ism', totally unnecessary and extremely jarring on a site in inner Perth. Yeoman McAllister have done some decent contemporary schemes for Perthshire Housing Association nearby in recent years with a degree of flair and invention in terms of materiality and massing so I'm at a loss as to why they've seemingly gone into reverse here. Perhaps someone from YMA could (anonymously) enlighten us as to what has gone wrong?

#13 Posted by basho on 19 Dec 2018 at 12:37 PM

“We have developed an architectural language we feel is appropriate and applied this to detailed building elements."
Fabulous! Now, would you mind pointing out WHERE exactly?

#14 Posted by Graeme McCormick on 19 Dec 2018 at 18:05 PM

If it was a requirement that all urban developments had to be screened by semi mature trees on pavements at least the public would be saved most of the mediocrity.

#15 Posted by Gandalf the Pink on 19 Dec 2018 at 18:30 PM

This is so bad it makes Brexit sound appealing.

#16 Posted by Inahuf on 20 Dec 2018 at 06:51 AM

really bad urban design, every sorry resident has to traipse through the backlot parking to get home, with a path hard up against the windows of their neighbours. The poor souls on the ground floor have the public right outside their front windows and car headlights shining straight in the rear ones. How will they ever open a window in the summer and feel they’ve any privacy? This is the stuff of mental ill health!

#17 Posted by Nae Windy Cindy on 20 Dec 2018 at 08:30 AM

Bedroom 2 of the SW corner flats at L0/1/2 has no window - nice!

#18 Posted by Damp Proof Membrane on 20 Dec 2018 at 12:56 PM

If you produce a visualisation of such astonishing low quality, include it within a submission to a local authority and are therefore content that it come into the public visual realm says a great deal about you.

#19 Posted by In Perspective on 20 Dec 2018 at 19:29 PM

I wonder if any of the above contributors though have not produced work (maybe in their formative practice, perhaps) that in hindsight really didn't pass muster? Don't all rush, now.

#20 Posted by Inahuf on 20 Dec 2018 at 22:03 PM

#19 whatever the age/experience of the design hand, the firm’s principals shouldn’t let it out the office unless they’re happy and this wouldn’t pass a 3rd yr crit so has no place in reality!

#21 Posted by Nae Windy Cindy on 21 Dec 2018 at 09:06 AM

A lot of unwarranted abuse gets thrown around UR but to allow a scheme to get submitted to planning where a bedroom has nae windy is just astonishing - let alone the cartoon 'renders'. Reeks of a junior staff member carrying it out and not being checked so it does.

#22 Posted by Gerrup on 21 Dec 2018 at 09:58 AM

#19 Get a grip. Regardless of whether UR fleeced this from the portal or it was sent to them, the heads of the firm should be embarrassed with this!

#23 Posted by In Perspective on 21 Dec 2018 at 15:58 PM

It is quite remarkable how some folk just don't actually READ the comment and comment on THAT.

#24 Posted by wishtobeamazed on 27 Dec 2018 at 09:26 AM

I dream of seeing drawings of places I would actually want to live in, so that the people who will end up living in them might enjoy being there ... do any designers employ that precept?

#25 Posted by wishtobeamazed on 27 Dec 2018 at 09:28 AM

it's in a conservation area!! ah well ... who cares?

Post your comments