February 28 2020

Third phase plans for expansion of Glasgow’s Laurieston district have been beefed up in response to the city centre leapfrogging the River Clyde at Buchanan Wharf.

With the latter serving as a commercial hub for the area a public realm and landscaping strategy will enhance connectivity to neighbouring Laurieston which will receive an increase in both density and scale through the introduction of a third grid line to the interior streets and upping the scale along Norfolk Street.

Led by Urban Union the proposals emphasise variation in design, abetted through collaboration between Stallan-Brand and McGinlay Bell who have worked with a shared ‘kit of parts’ that allows fine detailing around windows and entrances while ensuring a unified brick aesthetic throughout.

Commenting on the phase three plan the architects wrote: “The increase in density has been an integral feature of the regeneration masterplans for Laurieston, dating back to the initial Urban Initiatives proposals.

“Increasing the density supports Laurieston as an inner-city district, promoting urban living and strengthening the ambition of knitting into the city.”

Phase three will include several distinct character zones from an urban frontage of apartments blocks along Norfolk and Gorbals Streets with embedded ground-floor commercial spaces, culminating in a reinstated Gorbals Cross. to a series of ‘park pavilions’ bordering a new linear green space to smaller-scale terraced streets nestled behind.

Aside from civic parkland residents will also have access to pocket gardens providing a more intimate aspect.

21 Comments

#1 Posted by Robin B's Discount on 28 Feb 2020 at 09:41 AM

Nice, that looks fab. Particularly the massing to recreate a solid traditional looking street.

#2 Posted by Unpleasantfield on 28 Feb 2020 at 09:57 AM

Cubic? Cue Pleasantfield....

#3 Posted by ffs on 28 Feb 2020 at 10:26 AM

Lovely architecture. Disappointed by the car-dominated streets. Driveways in a city centre site?! Give me a break.

We need to stop pandering to the bloody car.

#4 Posted by MoBo on 28 Feb 2020 at 10:53 AM

Yes looks good but please don't call it intimate terraces when there are cars parked which is really disappointing. It would be good to see the ' series of ‘park pavilions’ bordering a new linear green space to smaller-scale terraced streets nestled behind' that is mentioned.

#5 Posted by Gandalf the Pink on 28 Feb 2020 at 11:02 AM

Cycle infrastructure?

#6 Posted by Urban Realm on 28 Feb 2020 at 11:17 AM

Smaller 1-3 bed properties will be sold as car-free, larger properties will be allocated one in-curtilage space - save Norfolk Court which is served by an adjacent car park.

Cycle stores will be provided in communal courtyards with one place per home. Cycle stands will be included throughout the public realm with cycle routes crossing the park to the city. Visuals have been added.

#7 Posted by Egbert on 28 Feb 2020 at 12:03 PM

Agree with #3 and #4 above - the architecture looks fantastic, good, solid and urban and a worthy heir to the tenements that once stood there - but someone really needs to have a word with GCC about the on-frontage parking. Nothing really kills an urban scheme quite like driveways across the front of each plot and it's directly contrary to current SG planning guidance - why on earth are they still doing this?

#8 Posted by The G Man on 28 Feb 2020 at 12:09 PM

Definitely a climbdown from the initial plan (pre-credit crunch) where Thomson's block that stood on the Sheriff Court corner was to be replicated, looks like a scheme in London though there would be more attention to detail but it is The Gorbals after all, got to be some limitations in the eyes of planning and development but far better than the patch of grass that existed on this corner for 45 years which was probably seen as a remarkable re-development of Laurieston at the time..

#9 Posted by Pleasantfield on 28 Feb 2020 at 12:17 PM

Ok " Unpleasantfield" I'll just start cutting and pasting. Except the corner building which is something like a better attempt. Interesting it occurs to you its" cubic"

#10 Posted by ffs on 28 Feb 2020 at 14:11 PM

Thanks for clarification UR (#6).

The whole scheme should be car free or, at the very least, have concealed parking (e.g. below ground). Pavement parking will be rife on a street like that shown in image 3.

And one cycle place per home? For one bike? If so, very poor. Cycle stands are not a solution to long-term storage and are vulnerable to thieves. Are the proposed cycle routes segregated? Or are they shared pedestrian/cycle routes? If the latter then this is not good enough. Are these routes connected to a wider segregated cycle network?

As ever this all feels like BREEAM point scoring, rather than actual, proper change.

#11 Posted by Urban Realm on 28 Feb 2020 at 14:35 PM

@FFS - Yes, one bike per home. The option is left open for 'double stacking' if future demand requires it.

Cycle routes would plug into the South City Way along Gorbals Street, which is being delivered by Glasgow City Council.
https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/scw

Interior private and semi-private roads and pavements will be built 'at grade' as shared homezone spaces.

#12 Posted by Unpleasantfield on 28 Feb 2020 at 15:09 PM

Pleasantfield, I believe a chamfered cube to still be 'cubic'. See you on the next one.

#13 Posted by Modernish on 28 Feb 2020 at 15:27 PM

@ffs - this site isn’t in the ‘city centre’. The city centre is delineated in the city plan and is the other side of Norfolk Street. Therefore parking standards for sites outside the city centre are applicable.

#14 Posted by ffs on 28 Feb 2020 at 15:54 PM

Regardless what some arbitrary line on a plan says, it's within the city proper and as such private motor vehicles should be on the absolute lowest rung of priority for such a development. One bike per home is piss poor. Shared spaces 'built at grade' usually mean car strewn hellscape. Cool.

#15 Posted by nico on 28 Feb 2020 at 16:51 PM

Bit too tall. Can't see the Carling Academy on any of these/ Is it staying?

#16 Posted by Chris on 28 Feb 2020 at 19:20 PM

Jesus, since when is 5 storeys too tall? The 02 is safe.

#17 Posted by Pleasantfield on 28 Feb 2020 at 22:26 PM

"Unpleasantfield" I was trying to be kind to the corner. You still think it 'cubic' I see. Perhaps I should put my hand up and say I was directly involved in the Crown St project with Mike Galloway. I consider designs there miles ahead of this. For me design in Glasgow is really dumbing down partly caused by encouragement from the Scottish Exec planners seeking more contemporary design.

#18 Posted by Damp Proof Membrane on 2 Mar 2020 at 10:17 AM

I think these look really great. This is the scale that's required for central districts of the city. I think the red / pink blocks look really good. The external framing / skeleton on some of the biege / brown blocks looks like it might weather.. Great to see this. These practices should be doing some of the work at the replacement Glasgow Uni campus.

#19 Posted by Unpleasantfield on 2 Mar 2020 at 12:02 PM

#17 Pleasantfield - Yes I think it's cubic, I looked at more than 1 image and decided that was an appropriate description for the discussed cubic buildings. In addition I think this is fantastic development! I wouldn't throw your hand up too quick in regards the monstrosity you consider 'miles ahead' (with the minor grace that it was in 1997) in the Crown Street Development. Also not sure what relevance your name drop has to any of this but I hope you still keep in touch. See you on the next one.

#20 Posted by Charlie_ on 3 Mar 2020 at 09:59 AM

Are the densities actually increased here at all? Looks to mostly be the same mix of tenements and townhouses as previous blocks with the point blocks probably being lower density. That aside this looks good and its a relief to finally see some retail. It'll be exciting to see how the final phases at Eglington street play out - proper local high street, please!

#21 Posted by Flux Capacitator on 3 Mar 2020 at 21:01 PM

Did I read correct that it's to complete over the next 9 years? Seriously? That's snail slow.
I'm sure we could grow houses quicker....

Post your comments