Westpoint Homes fight back against Finnieston planning refusal
May 24 2021
Westpoint Homes have revisited their plans for a major apartment complex at the former Cranstonhill Police Station in Finnieston with moves to improve amenity, privacy and access.
Led by Norr and Erz the work called for the demolition of the vacant police station at 945 Argyle Street to build 84 flats above six ground floor commerical units but was dismissed because it would impede daylight and privacy of neighbours and was deficient in open space. Planners also voiced concern at the loss of a tree to the west, proximity of service access to a busy junction and the fact that 16 flats had no direct access to refuse storage or cycle parking.
Responding to this feedback the applicants have now returned with significant changes made to the original March 2020 application; notably a shared amenity deck at roof level and a reduction in massing towards the centre of the building.
Addressing the proposed amendments the applicant wrote: "The key matters discussed with GCC during the post-submission period relate to the building’s mass concerning the proximity of the neighbouring Minerva Court building on the south side of Houldsworth Lane. In addition, the tight urban site restricts opportunities to provide high-quality amenity space which complies with IPG12 (interim planning guidance) requirements.
"This, in turn, touches on landscaping proposals and a need to show a well-considered and meaningful design for the areas of amenity which are proposed. Finally, any reduction in building mass will effectively reduce flat numbers which will result in reduced pressure on amenity, car parking and daylighting."
As a result of these changes, the number of flats offered is reduced from 84 to 78 while Houldsworth Lane will remain open to all, not gated as originally envisioned.
Amenity decks at first floor and roof level will expand the range of outdoor space
Private fifth floor balconies will run the length of the north and south facades
|
18 Comments
#1 Posted by Georwell 84 on 24 May 2021 at 09:42 AM
There have been plenty of developments that have knocked down more than 1 tree. As for the sunlight issue poor excuse happens all the time. This is an impressive inner city build with retail.
#2 Posted by James Hepburn on 24 May 2021 at 10:13 AM
Good decision by the Council. Developers need to be held to account for the conditions people will live in. Having said that, who the hell wants to live at a busy junction with all that noise and Co2 emissions.
#3 Posted by Jaded on 24 May 2021 at 10:38 AM
High-quality amenity space? The loss of a tree?
Surely when people buy a high-density inner-city flat they accept that amenities are generally external to the flat. A 5 minute walk to the park, 3 mins to a train station, 3 minutes to a gym & swimming pool, 1 minute from a supermarket, bus on the street....
If they want a private garden or outdoor space they can move to Airdrie.
That said, the shared roof space seems a reasonable compromise.
Surely when people buy a high-density inner-city flat they accept that amenities are generally external to the flat. A 5 minute walk to the park, 3 mins to a train station, 3 minutes to a gym & swimming pool, 1 minute from a supermarket, bus on the street....
If they want a private garden or outdoor space they can move to Airdrie.
That said, the shared roof space seems a reasonable compromise.
#4 Posted by Jaded on 24 May 2021 at 10:39 AM
PS that whole junction needs 'avenueized' pronto.
It could be a real showpiece if it is greened and made more urban.
It could be a real showpiece if it is greened and made more urban.
#5 Posted by Fat Bloke on Tour on 24 May 2021 at 10:47 AM
Its called progress -- 2030 and battery electric vehicles.
Consequently the traffic on the street will be a lot different from now.
Consequently the traffic on the street will be a lot different from now.
#6 Posted by um on 24 May 2021 at 11:45 AM
#4, totally agree re: the junction/avenue.
#5 an electric car is still a car? I mean I hope it will be different in that there will be fewer private motorised vehicles but I doubt it. The cynic in me says it'll be the same or worse without the necessary action taken to discourage car use in our urban centres.
Finnieston is a prime example of an area that needs urgent action to restrict/ban through traffic (except buses and perhaps taxis) and improvement to pedestrian space/cycle infrastructure. So many great pubs/bars and restaurants in such a short stretch, hemmed in by near constant traffic and lines of parked cars on either side. Not a terribly nice place to sit out for a drink or lunch/dinner.
#5 an electric car is still a car? I mean I hope it will be different in that there will be fewer private motorised vehicles but I doubt it. The cynic in me says it'll be the same or worse without the necessary action taken to discourage car use in our urban centres.
Finnieston is a prime example of an area that needs urgent action to restrict/ban through traffic (except buses and perhaps taxis) and improvement to pedestrian space/cycle infrastructure. So many great pubs/bars and restaurants in such a short stretch, hemmed in by near constant traffic and lines of parked cars on either side. Not a terribly nice place to sit out for a drink or lunch/dinner.
#7 Posted by spike on 24 May 2021 at 11:49 AM
Suggest the top floor is removed and hopefully the scheme is then approved
#8 Posted by Sue Pearman on 24 May 2021 at 12:38 PM
The scheme looks a lot better with the height less prominent. The extremely wide angle of the render helps, though it does make the facade look VERY long. There is more than a little distortion involved, when you compare with the original rendered views. It's difficult to assess in this respect but the scale and quality looks better.
Finnieston Street is a major transport artery into the West End - this and the connection to the expressway there are unlikely to change. Also one of the key reasons there are so many commercial premises there is due historically to that passing trade and ease of access. Hopefully that will not change. Electric cars will mean less smoke pollution but the noise can only be reduced a little. More high quality streetscape (Shawlands, Rutherglen etc) would definitely benefit the place though.
Finnieston Street is a major transport artery into the West End - this and the connection to the expressway there are unlikely to change. Also one of the key reasons there are so many commercial premises there is due historically to that passing trade and ease of access. Hopefully that will not change. Electric cars will mean less smoke pollution but the noise can only be reduced a little. More high quality streetscape (Shawlands, Rutherglen etc) would definitely benefit the place though.
#9 Posted by Office Fodder on 24 May 2021 at 14:35 PM
I've lived on busy streets and found it no problem with regards to noise, lots of other people choose to live on busy streets and enjoy it, I would sleep with ear plugs but didn't mind.
The only thing I did find terrible was if there was a manhole on the street next the flat, if the manhole covers were slightly lower than the road it would send vibrations up through the flats when an HGV drove over them, also some times the manhole covers would clatter.
I would avoid getting a flat next a road with manhole covers next the flats, I can't see any next this scheme though.
It is strange that they put manhole covers over to the side of the road where vehicle wheels will drive over them all the time, if they put them in the middle of the lane in so that vehicle wheels would pass either side of them there would be no noise. Also vehicles driving over them makes them slowly collapse, so it just makes no sense that they install them over to side where they will be driven over instead of in the middle where they won't.
The only thing I did find terrible was if there was a manhole on the street next the flat, if the manhole covers were slightly lower than the road it would send vibrations up through the flats when an HGV drove over them, also some times the manhole covers would clatter.
I would avoid getting a flat next a road with manhole covers next the flats, I can't see any next this scheme though.
It is strange that they put manhole covers over to the side of the road where vehicle wheels will drive over them all the time, if they put them in the middle of the lane in so that vehicle wheels would pass either side of them there would be no noise. Also vehicles driving over them makes them slowly collapse, so it just makes no sense that they install them over to side where they will be driven over instead of in the middle where they won't.
#10 Posted by Charlie_ on 24 May 2021 at 15:24 PM
This is clearly an excellent proposal....put it back into the council's 'random response' generator until the correct answer comes out.
#11 Posted by Parkguy61 on 24 May 2021 at 16:56 PM
I'm still trying to figure out how they have squeezed 84 flats onto what is not that big a development site. Just the stretch between Elliot Street and Finnieston Street?
As regards the comments about cars/ electric cars, they are the same thing a vehicle occupying road space. If anything I expect to see even more vehicles on the road with the possibility of small electric city cars and larger ex urban cars, also last mile delivery vehicles will proliferate. Not to mention ride sharing vehicles be they human operated or autonomous.
As regards the comments about cars/ electric cars, they are the same thing a vehicle occupying road space. If anything I expect to see even more vehicles on the road with the possibility of small electric city cars and larger ex urban cars, also last mile delivery vehicles will proliferate. Not to mention ride sharing vehicles be they human operated or autonomous.
#12 Posted by Failed Student on 24 May 2021 at 18:11 PM
The reasons for refusal seem very strange. Loss of light and loss of privacy for existing residents in the flats opposite seem the main reasons.
How is it that many other developments get approved that cause a similar loss of sun light and privacy? There seems to be no loss of privacy/light building standards that developers can follow, the standard just seem to as per the whim of the planning officials.
If flats didn't get build because they caused a loss of privacy and light there would be no flats in Glasgow, it is part and parcel of living in a city that people can see in other flat windows.
Windows In The West by Avril Paton is a famous Glasgow painting showing the view looking in other people's flat windows in Glasgow, planners today must really hate that painting, they don't what people to be able to see in any other windows.
How is it that many other developments get approved that cause a similar loss of sun light and privacy? There seems to be no loss of privacy/light building standards that developers can follow, the standard just seem to as per the whim of the planning officials.
If flats didn't get build because they caused a loss of privacy and light there would be no flats in Glasgow, it is part and parcel of living in a city that people can see in other flat windows.
Windows In The West by Avril Paton is a famous Glasgow painting showing the view looking in other people's flat windows in Glasgow, planners today must really hate that painting, they don't what people to be able to see in any other windows.
#13 Posted by Fat Bloke on Tour on 24 May 2021 at 19:56 PM
Personal transportation -- it is here to stay.
It might get smaller / it might get simpler and lighter but it is here to stay.
If you have issues with the traffic then what are they -- noise / emissions / safety?
Or do you just not like cars and subscribe to the "Hame'll dae me" theory of life?
When the tenements across the rod were built the huge plague of the streets of Glasgow was horse manure -- things change / get used to it.
It might get smaller / it might get simpler and lighter but it is here to stay.
If you have issues with the traffic then what are they -- noise / emissions / safety?
Or do you just not like cars and subscribe to the "Hame'll dae me" theory of life?
When the tenements across the rod were built the huge plague of the streets of Glasgow was horse manure -- things change / get used to it.
#14 Posted by Brian Donnelly on 25 May 2021 at 11:13 AM
#9 chuckle.
#15 Posted by 7yrsatuni on 25 May 2021 at 13:33 PM
Well Said #2...who do these people think they are to make their own decision. This site and should be retained with its wee tree to protect us from these nasty developers......take a bow
#16 Posted by HMR on 26 May 2021 at 08:06 AM
Loss of light and privacy seems very odd given the blocks just finished further along on Argyle Street.
Elevations look good, however, some detailing to the stone would help with the masonry panels. They look very flat and will only weather badly.
Elevations look good, however, some detailing to the stone would help with the masonry panels. They look very flat and will only weather badly.
#17 Posted by Gordon on 28 May 2021 at 09:44 AM
One of the beautiful things about Glasgow is the long low light of summer....shadowscapes. The builders of the old city understood this and created wonderful facades that engaged and played with the light. Our current clutch of architects haven't a clue. All the aesthetics of the box viva, but without the motor!
#18 Posted by Stephen Ferano on 31 May 2021 at 10:59 AM
Would be good to see a little vertical definition to break up the horizontality. All in all, a good scheme, however, that hopefully gets past the beard-tuggers this time
Post your comments
Read previous: Woodland homes to bring colour & variety to Braemar
Back to May 2021
Like us on Facebook
Become a fan and share
News Archive
Search News
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.