Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy
 

Dennistoun apartments knocked back by planners

Bookmark and Share | Send to friend

May 11 2020

Dennistoun apartments knocked back by planners

A bid to build 46 flats on a prominent Dennistoun gap-site has been dismissed by Glasgow City Council after being found to contravene the city’s development plan through overdevelopment of the site and the failure to deliver a ‘design=led residential layout.

Authored by Stanton Brook Estates and their agents, Create Architecture, the infill build was first proposed at the tail end of 2018 when it was heralded as a positive addition to the spatial character of the area.

Ultimately the project generated friction through the specification of a flat roof which was deemed not to be in keeping with neighbouring tenements, while a failure to commit to meeting a gold standard of energy efficiency also counted against.

Sealing the projects fate was a failure to mitigate habitat loss, the absence of a mandatory flood risk assessment and a lack of available car parking to meet minimum levels, compounded by the inadequate provision of onsite open space.

Outlining the rationale for refusal the local authority wrote: “The proposal is contrary to CDP 1 & SG 1: Placemaking of the City Development Plan in that the density and scale of the residential development combined with lack of open space will result in overdevelopment of the site and would fail to meet placemaking principles which the Council seeks to promote to deliver high-quality residential environments.

“The proposal is therefore detrimental to the residential amenity of the proposed dwellings and the wider area.”

The developer may appeal the decision within three months.

An 88sq/m communal garden and drying area at podium level failed to meet the required standards
An 88sq/m communal garden and drying area at podium level failed to meet the required standards
Undercroft parking for 33 vehicles was deemed to be insufficient for the number of flats
Undercroft parking for 33 vehicles was deemed to be insufficient for the number of flats

5 Comments

IndyNoo
#1 Posted by IndyNoo on 11 May 2020 at 11:14 AM
Well done GCC. Finally you grow a pair and refuse this awful mediocrity - perhaps this is a start to improving Glasgow's drudgery? There are surely local Architects who can do better?!
Barry
#2 Posted by Barry on 12 May 2020 at 08:55 AM
Yes well done GCC (Facepalm) for refusing this development. Much better to have an empty site for the next 20 years. This is an area where sales values dictate the quality of the build. Your comments "Indynoo" are naïve in the extreme and stupidity like that is one of the reasons Scotland's economy lags behind the rest of the UK. Much better to have an empty site for the next 20 years eh ?
Bamber
#3 Posted by Bamber on 12 May 2020 at 18:00 PM
Well put something better in! Don't leave this stupid gap!
IndyNoo
#4 Posted by IndyNoo on 13 May 2020 at 12:47 PM
#2, not sure why my comments were naive or stupid. No one suggested having an empty site for any length of time, but if the Local Authorities demanded a better quality of building, then designers would quickly realise that in order to get the necessary consents in place for construction to go ahead, a better design would have to be submitted.

I think the attitude of "well, at least it is better than an empty site" is part of the problem why Glasgow is suffering so much from awful infill developments. There needs to be a whole attitude change, and you are clearly in need of one as well.
The Bairn
#5 Posted by The Bairn on 14 May 2020 at 09:58 AM
I don't think its that bad TBH.
Surely the clever Architect can tweak and improve on the items specified by GCC which were deemed negative and made it easy to refuse permission.

Post your comments

 

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

 

Back to May 2020

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