Revised Otago Lane plans submitted
February 17 2011
The west end development, adjacent to the River Kelvin, would house three separate elements, two substantial river facing blocks of flats and a mews development alongside the lane itself.
These will accommodate a mixture of 45 apartments and 4 townhouses which its architects, the ID Partnership, claim “provide an appropriate front to the river” and are “compatible with the historic form and urban grain of the Hillhead area.”
Though the developers admit their proposal will result in a loss of greenspace it is stated that the use of natural stone, facing brick, glass and render, together with formal landscaping, will serve to enhance the amenity of that which remains.
ID add: “Currently the greenspace on the site is not very functional due to the topography of the site and lack of maintenance by the previous site owner, which has caused it to become overgrown, as a result of this it does not appear to be frequented regularly.”
These words have failed to assuage some irate locals who have bandied together as the ‘Help Save Otago Lane!’ pressure group. They intend to thwart what they call a “ridiculous proposal” which will trample upon the “bohemian uniqueness” of the cobbled alley.
David Narro are acting as engineers on the scheme.
Objectors have until March 4 to dissent
The 49 home development is one dwelling shy of the minimum trigger for a formal consultation process
|
6 Comments
#1 Posted by jolene crawford on 18 Feb 2011 at 13:32 PM
that all looks utterly repulsive to me
#2 Posted by La hora verdad on 18 Feb 2011 at 14:53 PM
shame on you IDP
#3 Posted by Even-hand on 20 Feb 2011 at 20:54 PM
Given that there has been several redesign's; it shows the IDP are more than willing to go the extra mile to get a final scheme that will win over the doubters.
Just look guff that is next dor to the site, now that is repulsive. How the hell was that ever allowed to be built?
On the most part, I would admit that it is nothing spectacular but imho it is better than the majority of crap that has gone up in the city recently.
Just look guff that is next dor to the site, now that is repulsive. How the hell was that ever allowed to be built?
On the most part, I would admit that it is nothing spectacular but imho it is better than the majority of crap that has gone up in the city recently.
#4 Posted by Even-hand on 20 Feb 2011 at 21:03 PM
PS
Sometimes I think folks on here light their torches too quickly.
Read the article, look at the images, click on the link (if there is one) and find out some more about the topic from other sources (if you can). After doing all of this, and you still feel strongly enough to lambaste someone’s work or opinion, then feel free to light up.
I am just fed up with idiots flippantly throwing in derisive one-liners.
Either grow a set or shut up.
Sometimes I think folks on here light their torches too quickly.
Read the article, look at the images, click on the link (if there is one) and find out some more about the topic from other sources (if you can). After doing all of this, and you still feel strongly enough to lambaste someone’s work or opinion, then feel free to light up.
I am just fed up with idiots flippantly throwing in derisive one-liners.
Either grow a set or shut up.
#5 Posted by La hora verdad on 21 Feb 2011 at 10:11 AM
As a local resident and a property and design professional (and idiot, possibly) I feel suitably qualified to throw in a derisive one-liner, which is all this wretched scheme deserves. However, if you want the devastating Tafuriesque critique of such a cynical, place-destroying proposal, let me know.
#6 Posted by Iain Steel on 22 Feb 2011 at 13:28 PM
As a resident of Otago Lane and the Chair of the Otago Lane Community Association (OLCA), I feel more than qualified to comment on this proposal.
To Even-hand, yes, the proposal has gone through a number of redesigns during the consultation process; however, not one of these was done in concession to the residents or shop owners in Otago Lane. The changes that were made have been entirely for the benefit of the developer or to address a legal issue. There has been (and continues to be) a blatant disregard for both the GCC City Plan and the needs of the existing residents and workers of Otago Lane.
We at OLCA engaged fully in the original discussions regarding the plans, and the developer has not taken into account a single suggestion. Even the most minor changes have been completely ignored; even to the point of not even replacing or re-siting the refuse area for the existing residents anywhere on any of the revised plans despite repeated requests...
The wider points of; layout and density of dwellings, overcrowding, overshadowing, overlooking, removal of protected parking, disturbance of a green corridor, removal of protected trees, lack of appropriate drainage, inadequacy of road access, increased flood risk due to disturbance of the river, the planning requirement to build no more than 2-storeys in a lane, the cultural and conservation impacts and the fact that this 'will' close at least one established employer (and potentially another 5 businesses providing long-term employment to c35 jobs), have been entirely ignored by the developer throughout the last 2-years of disruption this proposal has brought to our lives.
The latest plans have a huge number of inaccuracies, they repeatedly refer to earlier plans to incorporate commercial units and refer to old documents that have not been updated (or have not been supplied) for the latest iteration of the proposal. There are also supportive comments from various groups and professionals in the design and access statement that have been ‘copied and pasted’ all the way through the various design changes and obviously do not refer to the current plans, while giving the impression of approval…
I would welcome anybody to look at the plans in full, read the cases for and against and to make up their own minds, however, I fully stand by my statement that, in my opinion, this is a ‘ridiculous proposal’, and there were c4,000 people who took the time and energy to write to GCC in agreement along with a further 3,500 who signed the petition of objection.
Should you wish to know more about the Otago Lane development, please have a look at www.saveotagolane.co.uk the plans are there in full and you can make up your own mind. If you agree that this development is inappropriate, please write to GCC at planning.representations@drs.glasgow.gov.uk quoting Ref: 10/03061/DC before 04 March 2011 and we would be grateful if you could copy us in to your email.
To Even-hand, yes, the proposal has gone through a number of redesigns during the consultation process; however, not one of these was done in concession to the residents or shop owners in Otago Lane. The changes that were made have been entirely for the benefit of the developer or to address a legal issue. There has been (and continues to be) a blatant disregard for both the GCC City Plan and the needs of the existing residents and workers of Otago Lane.
We at OLCA engaged fully in the original discussions regarding the plans, and the developer has not taken into account a single suggestion. Even the most minor changes have been completely ignored; even to the point of not even replacing or re-siting the refuse area for the existing residents anywhere on any of the revised plans despite repeated requests...
The wider points of; layout and density of dwellings, overcrowding, overshadowing, overlooking, removal of protected parking, disturbance of a green corridor, removal of protected trees, lack of appropriate drainage, inadequacy of road access, increased flood risk due to disturbance of the river, the planning requirement to build no more than 2-storeys in a lane, the cultural and conservation impacts and the fact that this 'will' close at least one established employer (and potentially another 5 businesses providing long-term employment to c35 jobs), have been entirely ignored by the developer throughout the last 2-years of disruption this proposal has brought to our lives.
The latest plans have a huge number of inaccuracies, they repeatedly refer to earlier plans to incorporate commercial units and refer to old documents that have not been updated (or have not been supplied) for the latest iteration of the proposal. There are also supportive comments from various groups and professionals in the design and access statement that have been ‘copied and pasted’ all the way through the various design changes and obviously do not refer to the current plans, while giving the impression of approval…
I would welcome anybody to look at the plans in full, read the cases for and against and to make up their own minds, however, I fully stand by my statement that, in my opinion, this is a ‘ridiculous proposal’, and there were c4,000 people who took the time and energy to write to GCC in agreement along with a further 3,500 who signed the petition of objection.
Should you wish to know more about the Otago Lane development, please have a look at www.saveotagolane.co.uk the plans are there in full and you can make up your own mind. If you agree that this development is inappropriate, please write to GCC at planning.representations@drs.glasgow.gov.uk quoting Ref: 10/03061/DC before 04 March 2011 and we would be grateful if you could copy us in to your email.
Post your comments
Read next: Greenlaw Town Hall restoration completes
Read previous: Scottish Parliament still hoovering up taxpayer cash
Back to February 2011
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.