Hmm.. Certainly reflects industrial units that would have lined the canal... Not particularly residential in character, certainly not a village or worthy of the setting. Why can no one in glasgow design a decent background building? It's not like there's no precedent, tenements make glasgow and are simple consistent buildings tha give both identity and structure. New gorbals is the only one that will stand tge test of time.Bit gutted as it looked good in the drawings.

I have to say this is astonishingly poor, especially regarding the potential of the site to cultivate an interesting mix of forms and house typologies as displayed previously by E&C and hopefully in the future by NORD.

It really highlights the paucity of both talented architects within the social housing sector and engaged, experienced clients who value design and the built environment as well as their tenants.

The recent completion of the New Gorbals Housing Association's Laurieston scheme shows that high quality social housing is eminently deliverable. Unfortunately the custodians of our built environment and public money are by and large unambitious Housing Associations, who wouldn't know quality architecture if they passed it on the street. Thankfully there are exceptions to this!

Its heartbreaking to see Glasgow littered with this trash on a frequent basis.

#2 - I completely agree with you regarding the quality of the architecture, but I wouldn't necessarily place equal blame on the architects in the social housing sector. More of an issue is the lack of forward thinking, ambitious RSLs who have an aspiration to use exemplar design as a driver for true regeneration. Too often, any aspirations from the designers at the outset of a project are diluted by a variety of factors - stemming from a reluctance on the part of HAs (and their contractors) to deviate from typologies and design principles that have been rolled out on countless sites previously. The result is that we now have a strand of architecture - the provision of public housing - that has stagnated for much of the past 20 years. There are exceptions (Laurieston being a good example, some of Collective's work for various clients too), but on the whole you could distil most 'social' housing into one dual pitched, buff facing-bricked morass. It's especially galling when you consider the role of housing as a kind of test bed for socially aware, response community architecture.

Is this actually inspired by industrial units? If so, WHY???...and the architect's interpretation seems a bit too literal! The massing is cumbersome and the material and colour palette leaves a lot to be desired. It's easy to criticise...but this is very easy to criticise. I hope the plan and organisation absolutely ingenious to compensate!

I've felt like the UR pictures on a couple of recent builds have been unflattering; these aren't - it's even worse in person. Toe curlingly bad.

these comments are in a response to poor photographs that to be fair do no credit to this project. there is a variety of massing and arrangement of house types which is interesting. Walking along the canal front quite often I've been watching the elevation along the waterfront take shape ( which is not finished in these photos or represented clearly.) It looks quite sharp and well detailed and a good response to the waterside and nearby housing context .. theres a lot going on here with some curious material choices and design decisions but not worthy of this criticism based on poor photos that do nothing for this project. As a photographer, its worth stressing the importance of getting good images - that could easily garner more positive responses here and give a better overview of the project.

I don't even think Cartier-Bresson could make those red windows look good...

Jesus Christ- Image 2 looks like someone ate a big book of housing typologies and then shat out every architectural device ever invented on the same page.... what a shambles.....

#6 - The comments are not in response to poor photographs, they are mainly in response to a very poor development. The canal-side buildings are the pick of the bunch, if you leave the path and look behind them then you will see the real dross.

And why is everything an "urban village" these days? What does that even mean?

Inspired by industrial units? Is that a negative observation?

Communities will become stronger and more resilient when/if their designers include diverse, affordable workspace in their midst. A canal frontage could be a great location for some 21st century light industry. Manufacturing at home in the pre-industrial era used to be known as 'cottage-industry'. In this post-industrial age, we should respect that tradition, not banish artisans to 'industrial estates'. Our cities have been allowed to dis-integrate, the product of a continuing segregation-mindset among planners and the narrowly-motivated ambitions of developers, private and public.

We get the 'communities' we allow ourselves to be fobbed off with.

Disappointing considering the quality of the original master plan.