The Pock Mark Award

A71 miniroundabout (Scotland)

Area: Strathaven Reason: Now even more difficult to cross the village Nominated by: J Newton

Argos/Homebase retail park (Edinburgh)

Area: Linlithgow Reason: Linlithgow is a beautiful little town with real architectural merit and a clutch of truly historic buildings. It is a town that cries out to be lived in. The nominated retail park is being built on a hugely visible and central part of the town where there should be houses, a park, anything but two lumpen tin sheds. It drags the entire area down. There were ideal sites on the industrial estate at the north-west edge of the town, or in Bo'ness on a brownfield site. But no, these developers have to destroy a site at the heart of one of our few really charming towns Nominated by: Gordon Struth

Auchenkilns Roundabout (Lanarkshire)

Area: Cumbernauld! Reason: Disgusting, disgraceful, horribly planned, massive traffic burden, too many cars trying to go through and no clear alternative route given...and the mock village that has been built next to it for a pub chain? Disgusting and ever-so-twee! Nominated by: Iain Podesta

Beinn Mhor Power windfarm, Muaitheabhal Windfarm (Highlands)

Area: Eisgein, Harris, Western Isles & Lewis, & Highland region Reason: The proposed windfarms are vastly out of proportion & unsympathetic to the native Hebridean vernacular landscape. The installation of hundreds of turbines and infrastructure in this area implies a lack of respect for the landscape value, conservation interest and a complete lack of concern about carbon emissions. Active peatlands are a carbon store and have an important role in regulating climate change. Wetlands, including bogs, store over three times as much carbon for a given area as tropical rainforest. When peatlands are disturbed, CO2 is returned to atmosphere. There are also the direct effects on landscape and drainage, the many concrete-filled bases underground to stabilise turbine towers will cause serious environmental damage – all conveniently ignored by advocates of the windfarm industry. Nominated by: ruari beaton Reason: The proposal plans windfarm development on an industrial scale in an area of outstanding natural beauty, this is an iconic landscape of Scotland, one of very few truly remote and wild landscapes left in the country. This landscape is a unique asset to Scotland & will be irrevocably damaged by the schemes of 200-300 wind turbines which will be visible from Callanish Standing Stones. Nominated by: Mairi Robertson Reason: Local council approval in the face of thousands of objections Nominated by: Murdo Morrison Reason: Totally inappropriate development on some of Europes rarest and most designated habitats (the North Lewis peatlands). The development is vehemently opposed by the vast majority of the areas indigenous people, who have used and looked after the land in question for centuries. Nominated by: Anne Campbell Reason: industrialisation of most of the island which is crofting/agricultural land Nominated by: stan davey Reason: The most diabolical planned destruction conceived by anyone in the Highlands and Islands which will have a colossal irreversible impact on the environment. It totally fails to fill people with joy and optimism and the intended plans are despised and deplored by thousands except by councillors who are ostrichean with their heads in the peat revealing the only part of their anatomy that functions. Nominated by: Murdo M Reason: As a regular visitor to the Isle of Lewis for the last 42 years,it is beyond my level of thinking why any goverment would want to desecrate an island of such natural beauty and real importance to nature,especially the birdlife. Who benefits? Would any British goverment back a similar plan in the Serengeti plains in Africa (not a chance).Where is the proposed electricity from these windfarms going, Lewis or mainland Scotland(not a chance).Will the local people be employed in the manafacture or construction of these towers of doom in any significant numbers(not a chance). All in all if this plan goes ahead,not only will it destroy the lifes of thousands of people( who stand to gain nothing from the proposed plans)but already rare bird/animal life will be put in further jeopardy,never mind the 10s of thousands of migratory birds that use the island as a stopping off point on there journeys. Tourism was and still is an important part of the local economy; would that continue with windfarms(not a chance). Talk to the people of Stornoway,Ness,Barvas,Bragar,Carloway etc ,you won't find optimism in these villages,no change since the clearances ............... Nominated by: Calum Shanks Reason: Destroying environmentally important and protected blanket bog in order to 'save' the environment with renewable energy. Nominated by: Catriona Campbell Reason: Does the landscape of North Lewis have to be sacrificed,and flung into the vortex of 'negative inflation';in order to save the vanities of some of the bumbling incompetence of 'Orwell House',Springfield Rd,Stornoway...Hmm?..If ever a new broom was needed! Nominated by: John Smith

Borders rail project (Scotland)

Area: Edinburgh - Borders Reason: Its the most ridiculous waste of money - pure pork barrel decision Nominated by: Rob Malcolm

Buchanan Street and Sauchiehall Street (Glasgow)

Area: Glasgow Reason: Buchanan street and Sauchiehall street: the upkeep and execution of public realm improvements. GCC spend a fortune on public realm improvements, win a prestigious Congress of New Urbanism award (something to be rightly proud of), and it falls down at the first hurdle of maintenance and upkeep. As a council tax payer I really object to this. I want my city to get the best and not for it to be sold short by people who can't be bothered and have lost sight of the vision. The public realm improvements, in particular, made Buchanan Street shine. So why is it that there are already potholes in the street? That paving slabs pop up all the time? That rather than replace the expensive uplighters when they break, they are just patching them up with asphalt? Why is it that the improvements ran out of steam in St Enoch Square and we are still stuck with the diabolically bad 1970's underground entrances and the shoddily sited Air Quality Monitoring station that could have landed from outer space? And the last straw this week was seeing that rather than properly replace one of the black granite benches that was knocked over by a lorry last year, they have instead opted for one of those annoyingly squiggly steel benches, that are meant to be confined to the IFSD public realm improvements, presumably because it was expedient. It looks all wrong in Buchanan Street! These streets are meant to be Glasgow's answer to Barcelona's Las Ramblas, and the quality of materials indicated that these improvements should last for a considerable time, but if they keep this up it will degenerate fast and the money spent will be squandered. C'mon Glasgow get your finger out! Depressing.... Nominated by: Gweilo

Custom House Quay (Glasgow)

Area: Glasgow Reason: The tower is 24 floors tall, on a riverfront of buildings of only perhaps 10 floors tall maximum, this will ruin the look of the area. People will be filled with neither joy nor optimism at this project, they might have had it been intended for another location. Nominated by: Peter Mack Reason: This scheme, in all it's variations, is knee-jerkingly vapid, anadine, destructive and shambolic. As Clyde Street eventually starts pulling itself together we see the worst planning decision by Glasgow City Council since Stirlingfaulds. I still don't understand how replacing a second rate public realm project with a third rate scheme like this will encourage an active river front? The standards and materials employed look shoddy to say the least, and as a result it all looks like one big compromise and, in my view, has no merit whatsoever. This will be the single-most regretful development of the decade, sets a worrying precedent for the river-front and will NOT attract me to the river-front! ...if GCC wants an end to vagrants and drug addicts using this area as sporting ground then move the hostels out of Carlton Place and St Enoch Square! Nominated by: P Cavin Reason: Building on the very riverbank will mean that the view of the river will be blocked except if you are actually within feet of the water. Access even to there will be effectively curtailed. The Council had the opportunity to clear the ill-advised 1970s hard landsacaping which was a resort for every sort of ne'er-do-well and replace it with lawns gently sloping to the river, a haven for the citizens, easily maintained and a pleasant spot for tourists and Glaswegians alike. The present plans will diminish the attractiveness of the graceful suspension bridge. The development will create an ugly canyon in Clyde Street and encourage muggers, drunks, druggies and prostitutes. A thoroughly bad idea. Nominated by: Vince McGlennan

Elgin Place Congregational Church (Glasgow)

Area: Glasgow Reason: It's absence since the beginning of the year being the worst recent scar on Glasgow's city centre townscape. It depresses me walking past it everyday in the knowledge of what was once there. Better known to most Glaswegians as the nightclubs Trash, Shack, the Temple, or Cardinal Follies this 'A' listed church by the architect John Burnet was one of the most memorable Victorian churches in Glasgow, if not Scotland, and a city centre icon. Once deconsecrated it seemed somehow appropriate that it's smoke blackened portico should house something as pagan as a nightclub. Such was the renown of this building that it even appeared on last summer's BBC Restoration programme as an example of the creative new uses old buildings could be put to, with Griff Rees Jones taking to the dance floor to illustrate the point. Sadly in late November of last year a fire in the basement club swept through the building. However, despite this conflagration all did not seem to be lost as the majority of the building appeared structurally sound. It was therefore met with incredulity amongst many Glaswegians when the building was brutally demolished on Christmas eve 2004. Intact features, such as the portico with its superb ionic capitals, and the handsome wrought iron balustrades and lamp stands, that were a tribute to the skills of Glasgow's Victorian craftsman, were smashed without any thought given to their rescue and potential for re-use. Documents issued under the freedom of information appear to indicate that neither Glasgow City Council Planners nor Historic Scotland officials were present when the decision to demolish was taken. These documents also appear to indicate that it was the ancillary accommodation to the rear of the building that was in danger of collapsing onto an adjacent tenement rather than the main church. Obviously this was a serious situation that required a prompt response but you have to question why instead of opting to surgically remove this offending part from either Bath Street or the adjacent service lane the route chosen was through the Portico, the one part of church known to still be sound! The portico could easily have been retained and incorporated into a new hybrid nightclub building and remained one of Glasgow's icons. Alas for the want of funds to shore up the building this option has been denied Glaswegians and a priceless piece of their heritage lost. Other cities would give their eyes teeth for a building of this calibre. It's a cheap shot but would this have happened in Edinburgh? I doubt it. And if the city is serious about applying for world heritage status for the works of Charles Rennie Mackintosh then lessons need to be learned here. It's building's like this church that provide the intellectual context in which to place Mackintosh. His talent didn't bloom in a wasteland afterall. However, though accusations of negligence towards it's built heritage have been levelled at GCC, its doubtful these lessons have been learned as the city recently granted planning permission for demolition. Puzzlingly it added a condition that a report outlining details on architectural salvage from the building, with a view to their retention and re-use shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority within one month of the date of this permission. The reason given for this was that it was in the interests of sustainability and conserving the historic environment. Perhaps the city could enlighten us as to how items from an 'A' listed building that were smashed up in the demolition and tipped into a landfill 8 months ago can be retained and reused? 'Trash' seems somehow apt now... Nominated by: gweilo

Glasgow Harbour (Glasgow)

Reason: In an era of resurrecting 60s and 70s films badly, this development badly recreates Hutchieston E, one of the worst planning decisions in Glasgow’s history. Ultimately divisive development, the uninspired and uninspirational aesthetics will spawn cold, characterless community. Without community, Glasgow would be very poor indeed! Nominated by: Raymond Quinn Reason: point blocks proposed for housing reminiscent of teh worst of 60's municipal housing - have we learnt nothing! Leisure/ retail element further reinv=frcing teh uninspiring and isolated architecture of Glasgow Harbour. A missed opportunity and triumph of private grreed over public need. Nominated by: M Land Area: Park Lane building Reason: dismal architecture - meaningless public spaces Nominated by: M Land Reason: Building high rises in Glasgow...really imaginative and forward thinking. havent we been here before. This time make them expensive...when the crash comes and the urban rich leave for their natural habitat of Bearsden, they will fall into disrepair and eventually by 2030 resemble the red road flats by the the river. Hurrah, then we can have another competition to knock them down and build some revolutionary new architectural concept. Living in the clouds it be the work of the devil... but it might just work...hmmm Nominated by: Bryan Donnelly

Govan (Glasgow)

Area: Govan Regeneration Reason: This area is soon to be the capital of design and build featureless offices. A missed opportunity.

Haymarket (Edinburgh)

Area: Edinburgh Reason: Reiach and Hall’s scheme for Haymarket was a well-designed, appropriate building for an area with more than its fair share of commercial horrors. Why then was it called in? Why did we end up with a planning inquiry? The heritage lobby are a scourge on Edinburgh. Can’t help but wonder whether well-placed representatives for the area also had a word in the ears of the Executive. Nominated by: K Crichton

M74 extension (Glasgow)

Reason: Evidence from Public Local Inquiry proved what locals know - environmental disaster, increased traffic, no economic benefit. Glasgow City Council and Scottish Executive nonetheless insisting on pushing ahead Nominated by: Chloe Stewart Reason: A disgraceful decision morally and a complete waste of money. Nominated by: Malcy Duff

New Cathkin High School (Lanarkshire)

Area: Cambuslang, South Lanarkshire Reason: It is in contravention of the local plan and the Council are supporting the loss of a major open green space [a community park] quite unnecessarily as the new facility could be built on the existing site. Nominated by: EdV

Phase one Gorbals regeneration (Glasgow)

Area: The Gorbals Reason: Erasing any possibility of space for play/leisure/communal activity - encouraging this historic area of housing to be a space reserved for luxury flats. Nominated by: Ruth Hedges

Ravenscraig (Lanarkshire)

Area: Motherwell Reason: Re-doing the worst of the post war urban planning errors with complete lack of any attempt to generate a mixed-use and appealing urban environment. Cumbernauld mark 2? Nominated by: meagain Reason: for all the visionary posturing of the developer in last weeks Sunday Herald this is shaping up to be another dull business park, souless shopping precinct and low rise semi detached suburb anywheresville which will suck the life out of neighbouring towns. Just say no! Nominated by: William Young

Renfrew Riverside (Glasgow)

Area: Renfrew Reason: Abismal urban design and building design, affecton River Clyde, dictated by rapacious developers, ignoring public opposition Nominated by: M MacAulay Area: Renfrew Reason: A project to develop the river by putting up more flats and driving local industry out of the area and the country, contrary to Jack McConnells idea to encourage ex-pats back he is making skilled craftsman leave to other countries Nominated by: Maryellen Campbell

Scotish Provident Building (Edinburgh)

Area: St. Andrwe Sqaure, Edinburgh Reason: Edinburgh Council propose to redevelop the east end of Princess Street into a shopping Mecca to rival Glasgow. This would destroy the original layout of the New Town, where retail and commercial activity is located axially from Charlotte Square, to the west, to St. Andrew Square in the East. This would destroy the nature of the New Town, which is fundamental to its status as a world heritage site. If that weren’t bad enough in itself, the city’s best example of twentieth century architecture, the former Scottish Provident HQ, would be demolished to make way for the redevelopment. So much for learning from mistakes of the past – St. James Centre, anyone? Nominated by: John Lewis

Squiggly Bridge (Glasgow)

Area: Tradeston, Glasgow Reason: Thank heavens. For ages I’ve been wanting to make a long circuitous walk to Broomielaw. Now, I can. Nothing better sums up the current lack of ideas in Glasgow City Council than this frankly twattish concept. One, it is hugely derivative of Wilkinson Eyre’s Millenium Bridge between Newcastle and Gateshead. (And that owed a debt of influence to Calatrava). There is just no faith in doing something different here. No understanding that its OK for suspension bridges to look like each other because they are simply getting people from one bank of a divide to the other. For pedestrian bridges, which are supposed to be a focus to regeneration surely you have to say something new. Two, it doesn’t go anywhere. The Millenium Bridge goes between the Quay and Baltic; the one in London goes between a wee church called St. Paul’s and a wee gallery called Tate Modern. Three, it’s going to cost £40 million. People shall laugh at us. Nominated by: sean murray

Western Harbour (Edinburgh)

Area: Edinburgh Reason: It is frightening how many supposedly top quality designers have been involved in the creation of this monstrosity. In 1995 Forth Ports commissioned Conran and Partners to look at a masterplan for all its property. In 1999 Llewelyn Davies was commissioned by Waterfront Edinburgh to do a masterplan for the waterfront at Granton. The former was vague, the latter referenced James Craig’s new town. Square blocks around central garden spaces. Nice for the slopes of the New Town but by the sea, it looked like a convict settlement. It’s for this reason perhaps that the masterplan has been spectacularly ignored at Western Harbour. The developments are as opposite to the originally rigid street plan as could be imagined. A scrum of ugly high rise developments thrust out into the sea, as if each of them were struggling to be the least exposed to the cold winds that whip of the North Sea. Edinburgh was supposed to have the best people in the country working on this. Instead, the market has completely dictated development and a chaotic scramble of sub-standard residential blocks that could have been built anywhere at any time (but most probably in London Docklands during the 80s). Well done. Not. Nominated by: D Kelso