Home
News
September 2010
Inehaze resubmit student housing plans

Inehaze resubmit student housing plans

September 3 2010

Inehaze has submitted revised plans for their £3.5m student housing development at 134 Renfrew Street, Glasgow, after an earlier scheme was rejected by planners.

Taking its design cue from the adjacent Fleming House, upon whose car park the structure will sit, architects Lewis & Hickey have attempted to straddle the competing scales of post and pre war development on the street.

Comprising coloured glazed curtain walling and blockwork the eight storey build suffered a stinging rebuke from a design review panel who castigated its “inappropriate” scale, massing and design.

Ctiticism was also levied at the choice of materials and a “deviation from the building line.”

Inehaze, who had hoped to complete for the 2011 academic year, stressed that the structural costs associated with building on top of an underground car park severely constrained their available budget.

The developer has also refused to incorporate a green roof stating that, though affordable, such a feature would present irreconcilable “management” and “safety” issues.

25 Comments

#1 Posted by PJ Morris on 3 Sep 2010 at 19:59 PM

'inappropriate'? This is the type of development that gives architects a BAD name - what is it - the 60's? This is a dog of a proposal ...

#2 Posted by PMcG on 5 Sep 2010 at 18:53 PM

A truly deadful project, lacking in imagination and without any redeeming characteristics. Lewis and Hickey hang your head.

#3 Posted by S Stag on 6 Sep 2010 at 10:44 AM

Inehaze threatened the residents of Fleming House with legal action if they made representation to the Planning Department in respect to the application, suggesting this was in breach of the Deed of Conditions for the Fleming House property (not the case).

Innapropriate scale, massing and design appear to remain with this proposal - hopefully GCC refuse this one too!

#4 Posted by Emmanuelle Guibé on 6 Sep 2010 at 11:45 AM

Applicant developer has now applied to the Directorate for Planning and Development Appeals -and appealed refusal of the first (essentially identical bar additional plinth-based student rooms to South) development.
Let us hope that the Reporter in charge of the appeal 1) goes for the public inquiry option; and/or 2) demonstrate sense and vision over indigent design and short-termism.

PS: are Lewis and Hickey really an architect firm?

#5 Posted by Off the Record on 6 Sep 2010 at 13:30 PM

Threat of legal action
S Stag is this true or myth?

#6 Posted by S Stag on 6 Sep 2010 at 13:35 PM

Off the Record:

This is 100% true.

#7 Posted by Off the Record on 6 Sep 2010 at 13:41 PM

How can you veryfy it, it's of interest to the press
Is there a residents committee, again all off the record, no names ?

#8 Posted by S Stag on 6 Sep 2010 at 13:44 PM

Provide contact details and I can provide verification.

#9 Posted by Auntie Nairn on 6 Sep 2010 at 13:58 PM

Some developers, through sheer lack of respect for the built environment, just shouldn't be allowed to build. Inehaze are deluding themselves if they think this is anything other than dreadful. Just because you can bully potential objectors into remaining silent, doesn't make you right

#10 Posted by Off the Record on 6 Sep 2010 at 14:45 PM

S Stag
If you send a contact email to John Glenday, I'll do the same.

#11 Posted by PJ Morris on 6 Sep 2010 at 23:36 PM

the biggest problem is that this is a job....a real job...and as most architects know those aint in great supply - i predict ten years of crap like this getting built because the developers money talks - he pays our salaries...

#12 Posted by keithc on 7 Sep 2010 at 11:15 AM

This is dreadful!!! Surely someone who was taught Architecture never designed this? This just looks like more misuse of computer aided design.

#13 Posted by F L Wright on 7 Sep 2010 at 12:56 PM

You should have a look at the Minutes of the Glasgow Urban Design Panel from 3 June 2010. The Panel were extremely complimentary of the scheme. That gawd some some folk recognise good design.

#14 Posted by eskimo on 7 Sep 2010 at 13:21 PM

There been previous applications for this site with a more articulated facade, but the planners refused it wanting a building that pays homage to Fleming House. I think this project will do just that, complimenting what is a 1960's landmark building and completing the block. Student housing is in short supply in the area and this project will add a real boost to the economy and vibrancy of the area, while developing what has been a horrible vacant site for years.

#15 Posted by D Dan on 7 Sep 2010 at 23:31 PM

hey...lol. Its pj morris spouting more dross. This guy is hilarious

#16 Posted by jac on 7 Sep 2010 at 23:39 PM

the application was actually recommended for approval and supported by the city design advisor.

#17 Posted by derek on 8 Sep 2010 at 09:12 AM

It does give architects a bad name,just another grey monotone dull building that will look as if its always been there!

#18 Posted by uncle tom on 8 Sep 2010 at 09:29 AM

S Stag. yip. I heard a rumour too that the tooth fairy is being investigated for declaring income.

#19 Posted by PJ Morris on 8 Sep 2010 at 20:35 PM

Hey...D Dan .... D Do you have you own prediction?

#20 Posted by D Dan on 9 Sep 2010 at 11:32 AM

architects are bitches...they will destroy the profession...get out before its too late

#21 Posted by PJ Morris on 9 Sep 2010 at 13:44 PM

So you are a Technician Dan ....

#22 Posted by D Dan on 9 Sep 2010 at 17:23 PM

Nope..are you??

#23 Posted by brian on 9 Sep 2010 at 22:25 PM

Dan, don't see anything from PJ other than his impressive chip on his shoulder.
A technicial(?) beat him to a commission at some point? The world should know.
As if we care.

#24 Posted by Emmanuelle Guibé on 14 Sep 2010 at 16:45 PM

Have you ever read 'Faut-il pendre les architectes?' by Philippe Trétiack? -it's a pure jewel ;-)