Queen St developments??

[RapidAssistant]

As a non-resident ex-pat who lives up north, I need to keep abreast of things. What's happening with the following developments:

Ex Bank of Scotland on Queen St/Ingram St. I know its condemned, and then the developer ran out of money (or something like that) so this is why it was still standing at the last call. The hoardings have been up for years now. Are they finally flattening it - and I can't recall ever seeing what the replacement building will look like. Needless to say it will probably be another boring glass box like all the rest of them.

Charlotte House - I saw somwewhere it was being cleared for conversion into a Travelodge??

[SomeRandomBint]

Not sure about Charlotte House, but the old bank building is being cleared at the moment I think.

Didn't know it had been condemned, so perhaps they are clearing it for demolition? I remember walking past and being quite disappointed as I'd seen some fairly talented artists spraying some interesting art work (officially) on the hoardings representing the Merchant City, and they've all gone now.

[The Egg Man]

Not sure about Charlotte House, but the old bank building is being cleared at the moment I think.

Yeah. Charlotte House is supposedly becoming a Travelodge type in time for the Commonwealth Games.

Didn't know it had been condemned, so perhaps they are clearing it for demolition? I remember walking past and being quite disappointed as I'd seen some fairly talented artists spraying some interesting art work (officially) on the hoardings representing the Merchant City, and they've all gone now.

The whole thing is coming down.

It's going to be chaos at an already bad corner if both jobs go onsite at the same time.

[SomeRandomBint]

http://www.urbanrealm.com/news/3124/110_Queen_Street_plans_submitted.html

RBS building plans.

Ugh. I'd rather they left the concrete monster there rather than replace it with this... fishbowl?

More on both developments on this thread:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=501391&page=20

Doesn't seem like planning has been granted for either yet.

[Lucky Poet]

Ugh. I'd rather they left the concrete monster there rather than replace it with this... fishbowl?

Having looked through both links, aye I can see your point. It really is something that the proposals manage to make the current lump look good.

I'm not actually against the big black glass design in principle (ultra-modern sometimes looks great next to older buildings), but it really doesn't work.

[SomeRandomBint]

Agreed. I used to live in Ipswich and walked past the Willis Building, designed by Norman Foster, every day. It's a stunning piece of architecture.

I think it's the wobble in the middle that I dislike. It just looks completely incongruous on that corner. I agree with someone on that thread who says it would look great down on the Broomielaw or somewhere where there's more modern buildings around it. That whole area is so dominated by the big sandstone buildings, right along Ingram Street, and all down Queen Street - it just doesn't look right in that position.

[The Egg Man]

Ugh. I'd rather they left the concrete monster there rather than replace it with this... fishbowl?

Having looked through both links, aye I can see your point. It really is something that the proposals manage to make the current lump look good.

I'm not actually against the big black glass design in principle (ultra-modern sometimes looks great next to older buildings), but it really doesn't work.

The current building has lain empty for years. Nobody wants to use it.

Do we really think leaving it like that is preferable to getting the site back into use, employing people in the construction phase and once it's completed?

[SomeRandomBint]

Ugh. I'd rather they left the concrete monster there rather than replace it with this... fishbowl?

Having looked through both links, aye I can see your point. It really is something that the proposals manage to make the current lump look good.

I'm not actually against the big black glass design in principle (ultra-modern sometimes looks great next to older buildings), but it really doesn't work.

The current building has lain empty for years. Nobody wants to use it.

Do we really think leaving it like that is preferable to getting the site back into use, employing people in the construction phase and once it's completed?

Only if the other option is to leave us with a carbuncle of a building that's not in keeping with it's surroundings.

You can't divorce aesthetics from purely economic benefits when you're designing a building for an area of the city which has such a high proportion of old and historic buildings. That's how the north side of George Square happened...

[The Egg Man]

If anyone is happy to pay for the design and construction of a building that's in keeping with it's surroundings I'm sure there'll be no shortage of builders rushing to do the work.

In the meantime ......................

[Josef]

If anyone is happy to pay for the design and construction of a building that's in keeping with it's surroundings I'm sure there'll be no shortage of builders rushing to do the work.

In the meantime ......................

You are saying "It's Glasgow, any old shite will do" there, yes?

[The Egg Man]

If anyone is happy to pay for the design and construction of a building that's in keeping with it's surroundings I'm sure there'll be no shortage of builders rushing to do the work.

In the meantime ......................

You are saying "It's Glasgow, any old shite will do" there, yes?

I'd rather have a working building than what's there now. I'd rather the working building fitted in better with its surroundings than the proposal but after (how many?) years, that doesn't seem to be an option.

[SomeRandomBint]

Why does it have to be a working building? The current building isn't exactly falling apart. In fact, from what I can glean, the only issue with the current building is that it's too Brutalist. I quite like brutalism, personally, so I'll be sad to see it go. And that's not my only issue.

The current building, because of its stepped heights, manages to give office space without actually overwhelming the victorian architecture surrounding it. Apparently, planning permission was granted on the basis that the new building reduced the height from 11 stories to 9. So can someone explain how the new building is taller than everything round about it, whereas the current building is on a line with it? Cunning stunt, developers.

Ingram Street is a straight line all the way to High Street. Queen Street is a straight line running onto George Square. This corner forms part of the vista from the front doors of the GoMA. The wobbles in the building disrupt the symmetry of both streets. It's out of kilter from every angle. The black glass being used means you loose all the plus points of a glass building in a conservation area (namely, the lessing of impact on the building surrounding it). Black glass is a bold statement, not an attempt to harmonise with surroundings.

The reasons given for demolishing the existing build is that it's unsympathetic to the buildings round about it. How the HELL is this going to be any better? The only good thing about this development, from my point of view, is that it's managed to make a set of concrete steps look MORE in keeping with a conservation area that it was before. That, certainly, is a skill.

[The Egg Man]

Why does it have to be a working building? The current building isn't exactly falling apart. In fact, from what I can glean, the only issue with the current building is that it's too Brutalist. I quite like brutalism, personally, so I'll be sad to see it go. And that's not my only issue.

........................

The problem with the current building is that nobody wants to rent it and it'll cost a fortune to bring it even close to 21st century standards, even assuming it's possible.

Glasgow has a shortage of large floor plate, environmentally sound (as far as possible) office space, especially with such excellent public transport nearby. I suspect this is pre-let but if it isn't, it won't sit empty long.

By all means try to raise the funds to make it look like its surroundings but don't take too long, it's sat empty for years already. For now, lets have the jobs.

[SomeRandomBint]

Straighten the curves on the side. Leave the curve on the corner to complement the curve of the building opposite.

Take 10ft off the front of the building to lessen the impact on the elevations of the historic buildings on either side, with the entrance to the offices and retail buildings at street level left untouched.

There's an inherent issue with glass vs other building materials in a conservation area. Although any material will look "new", glass is unique in that it will never weather to blend in with its surroundings. This building will always look the way it's designed to look. Its impact will never lessen other than from familiarity.

Even though I've spent 2 years on the dole here. EVEN THOUGH my husband can't get a job. Even though I'm woefully under-employed and whoever moves into that building would potentially have something that could keep me in the (life)style to which I could become accustomed...

I'm not willing to throw Glasgow's architectural heritage under a bus for money.

Why? See the north side of George Square. Takes 12 months to build, 20 years to get rid of. Better to not build it in the first place.

[HollowHorn]

glass is unique in that it will never weather to blend in with its surroundings. This building will always look the way it's designed to look. Its impact will never lessen other than from familiarity.

The problem with glass is not so much the glass per se, it's more about how the folk inside respect the effect that glass has on the outside world, how many buildings have you seen where the unwanted rubbish of a business is stacked up against the windows for all to see & to the detriment of the area? Walk up Virginia St. & look up to the right. Have a good look at the 'Burton' building in Paisley. Glass is ok if it does not have people on the inside of it.