Shawlands Arcade to be redeveloped following sale
February 25 2016
The joint partners have pledged to remodel and redevelop the ageing complex in a bid to enhance its attractiveness to tenants and shoppers in the face of fierce competition from out of town retail parks such as Silverburn.
Bailie Philip Braat, chair of the Strathclyde Pension Fund commented: “For our members, it is a solid investment and the whole development is underpinned by leases to big high street names. However, we plan to add real value to that investment in a way that will benefit not only the fund, but also the local community in Shawlands and across the Southside.”
In addition to 28 retail and leisure units the complex includes a multi-storey car park and 11,500sq/ft office block. An indicative appraisal of the site by Cooper Cromar however indicates it could be suitable for a mixed use development of 500,000sq/ft of retail and leisure alongside 200 apartments together with retention of parts of the existing centre.
Shawlands Arcade was built in the late 1960’s and was last refurbished in 1995/6.
An aerial view shows the full extent of the current centre
Despite its down at heel appearance Shawlands Arcade retains some big High Street names
|
29 Comments
#1 Posted by Edward Harkins on 25 Feb 2016 at 17:45 PM
I've have a strong positive immediate response to disseminating this online. A lot ridding on this prominent Glasgow location. Let's hope it's an end to shabby decline and the catalyst for wider regeneration of the heart of Shawlands.
#2 Posted by Pete on 25 Feb 2016 at 17:51 PM
Great news for Shawlands if it's to happen although it should include a significant provision for an external public space too.
Can't say I've much faith in Cooper Cromar as architects though I'm afraid (not helped by that illustration). Would be nice if the client might approach a practice with a better track record in design, rather than one that has a shopping centre or two under their belt.
Can't say I've much faith in Cooper Cromar as architects though I'm afraid (not helped by that illustration). Would be nice if the client might approach a practice with a better track record in design, rather than one that has a shopping centre or two under their belt.
#3 Posted by D to the R on 25 Feb 2016 at 20:16 PM
Peter I have to agree - Shawlands has the potential for a real draw to the Southside but it needs further establishment as a place .... The images suggest anything, anywhere. Let's get a Glasgow design practice to design a place and not a 'development' - sorry CC but stick to the out of town shopping centres
#4 Posted by David on 25 Feb 2016 at 21:07 PM
This looks promising....decent urban scale for the density of the area, ground floor street frontage in the form of retail, and outdoor space in the form of balconies/terraces for the apartments, and large windows. A really high quality of stone will be needed to match that of the surrounding tenements. Must agree with the above comments...initial render looks promising, but Cooper Cromar don't exactly have the best track record in delivering high quality buildings...they all age terribly within a few years, especially their residential work
#5 Posted by David on 25 Feb 2016 at 21:43 PM
This looks promising....decent urban scale for the density of the area, ground floor street frontage in the form of retail, and outdoor space in the form of balconies/terraces for the apartments, and large windows. A really high quality of stone will be needed to match that of the surrounding tenements. Must agree with the above comments...initial render looks promising, but Cooper Cromar don't exactly have the best track record in delivering high quality buildings...they all age terribly within a few years, especially their residential work
#6 Posted by Neil C on 26 Feb 2016 at 15:52 PM
The CGI looks hugely promising with its ground-level retail and wraparound terraces - a hundred times better than the concrete monstrosity currently in place - but surely this isn't so much "redevelopment" as "complete demolition"?
#7 Posted by Stephen on 26 Feb 2016 at 17:18 PM
@6
Strong praise there Neil C!!? Ground level retail is good relative to the current disconnected situation but 'hugely promising' is over stepping it. It's the least we could expect. As for wraparound terraces, they might be an acquired taste.
Brick is not the predominant local material, especially not grey brick. In fact it shows little in terms of design that demonstrates anything specific to its location.
Strong praise there Neil C!!? Ground level retail is good relative to the current disconnected situation but 'hugely promising' is over stepping it. It's the least we could expect. As for wraparound terraces, they might be an acquired taste.
Brick is not the predominant local material, especially not grey brick. In fact it shows little in terms of design that demonstrates anything specific to its location.
#8 Posted by TomM on 28 Feb 2016 at 11:29 AM
why the blue/black brick. Sandstone not viable? The lower rise part of the scheme looks ok but the high rise apartment block is a clear case of any design principles blown out the window at the expense of squeezing as many flats as possible in...
#9 Posted by Edward Harkins on 28 Feb 2016 at 15:52 PM
Have to say that some of the comments here have me concerned about what the actual delivered product quality is going be. After all, the existing complex is one that, arguably, just did not 'work' from day one. As I commented earlier, the scheme has had a good initial positive public response online, and there is a deal of community goodwill being invested.
#10 Posted by Stephen on 29 Feb 2016 at 19:03 PM
There MUST also be a strong pedestrian connection from Kilmarnock Rd to Pollockshaws Rd, which doesn't exist at the moment (unless you count the scary back entrance to the shopping centre). A central square and depth of the site could accommodate quite a bit of height to make the numbers stack up and a good connection could help regenerate the very sorry units along Pollockshaws Rd.
Please get this right CC. Would pre-cast not be better than brick?
Look forward to seeing more images emerge.
Please get this right CC. Would pre-cast not be better than brick?
Look forward to seeing more images emerge.
#11 Posted by Ken Livingstone on 29 Feb 2016 at 21:28 PM
More like Brent Borough than Shawlands
#12 Posted by Catherine Boyd on 2 Mar 2016 at 13:32 PM
Does anyone know if the flats above whale of a time will stay or go? hopefully if they stay they will be upgraded like the existing block's as l know the owner's haven't been consulted as to what is happening.
#13 Posted by Stephen on 3 Mar 2016 at 10:19 AM
@ Catherine
If there are flat owners then then it'd be nearly impossible for those who've bought the arcade site to do very much to the flats that those owners don't agree with - tenants are obviously different. I know there are plenty of Housing Association flats along Pollockshaws Rd that the above article also suggests are part of the site. Land Registry could tell you the various owners for a small search fee (unless of course you own one of the flats, in which case you already know).
That whole stretch though is a bit of an eyesore in its current state and from an urban design perspective isn't really helping the area. If there's to be a good new connection between the two main roads here, then somewhere along this elevation is probably the place to do it (though that doesn't need to mean demolition).
Would be good to see someone at least of Reiach and Hall's calibre get the design work.
If there are flat owners then then it'd be nearly impossible for those who've bought the arcade site to do very much to the flats that those owners don't agree with - tenants are obviously different. I know there are plenty of Housing Association flats along Pollockshaws Rd that the above article also suggests are part of the site. Land Registry could tell you the various owners for a small search fee (unless of course you own one of the flats, in which case you already know).
That whole stretch though is a bit of an eyesore in its current state and from an urban design perspective isn't really helping the area. If there's to be a good new connection between the two main roads here, then somewhere along this elevation is probably the place to do it (though that doesn't need to mean demolition).
Would be good to see someone at least of Reiach and Hall's calibre get the design work.
#14 Posted by Cadmonkey on 3 Mar 2016 at 11:33 AM
Loving the trendy external towel rails!????????
#15 Posted by D to the R on 3 Mar 2016 at 12:53 PM
@ Stephen .... CPO .... CPO .... CPO .... CPO
#16 Posted by Stephen on 3 Mar 2016 at 14:07 PM
@ D to the R
My experience is that CPOs are hard to enforce and take years even in the most obvious circumstances and when a development is council led. If the flats are in use and maintained it'd be very very difficult to place a CPO on them. Add to that that this is just some developer wanting to make money and the flats in question aren't central to the development and it seems a very remote possibility. I could be wrong though. What do you think?
My experience is that CPOs are hard to enforce and take years even in the most obvious circumstances and when a development is council led. If the flats are in use and maintained it'd be very very difficult to place a CPO on them. Add to that that this is just some developer wanting to make money and the flats in question aren't central to the development and it seems a very remote possibility. I could be wrong though. What do you think?
#17 Posted by arbroath on 3 Mar 2016 at 19:11 PM
The illustration is to my mind far fetched, over budget and unachievable. It would assume that the property prices to be raised are that of newly fashionable east london which would be a big stretch.
there is a proportional issue as well, with glasgow trying to reduce the heights of buildings as seen in the demolition of high rises nearby for the building of tenement sized social housing.
I would love to see something more suitable for the area that is more modest in its aspirations, real homes for real people, shops that people want to shop in, outdoor space that achieves the simple pleasure of just a little greenery. nothing fancy just useable and functional, with a touch of aesthetic understanding of the local vernacular thrown in for healthy measure
there is a proportional issue as well, with glasgow trying to reduce the heights of buildings as seen in the demolition of high rises nearby for the building of tenement sized social housing.
I would love to see something more suitable for the area that is more modest in its aspirations, real homes for real people, shops that people want to shop in, outdoor space that achieves the simple pleasure of just a little greenery. nothing fancy just useable and functional, with a touch of aesthetic understanding of the local vernacular thrown in for healthy measure
#18 Posted by D to the R on 3 Mar 2016 at 20:20 PM
Stephen - your right but I've seen many many CPO's fast tracked which makes you wonder how that happens ..... Money talks and when local government see/want/need investment anything can happen.
#19 Posted by Pete on 4 Mar 2016 at 16:01 PM
Can’t say I agree with that I’m afraid. On what basis won’t flats sell in Shawlands? They already do and it’s not like we can tell what size, spec or mix is being proposed. It’s impossible to judge the viability of a scheme from one (bad) render.
Relating a 9 storey block in Shawlands (and without knowing tenures (social, private, shared?)) to Red Rd and other examples is bizarre. This is much lower and in a totally different context, socio-economic and otherwise.
‘Real homes for real people’ doesn’t mean anything. That’s why politicians say that kind of thing all the time. And obviously the developers want ‘shops that people want to shop in’, how again can you tell that these proposals don’t respond to that?
None of the above in any way meaning to defend a very disappointing opening effort from Cooper Cromar.
Relating a 9 storey block in Shawlands (and without knowing tenures (social, private, shared?)) to Red Rd and other examples is bizarre. This is much lower and in a totally different context, socio-economic and otherwise.
‘Real homes for real people’ doesn’t mean anything. That’s why politicians say that kind of thing all the time. And obviously the developers want ‘shops that people want to shop in’, how again can you tell that these proposals don’t respond to that?
None of the above in any way meaning to defend a very disappointing opening effort from Cooper Cromar.
#20 Posted by Matthew on 5 Mar 2016 at 01:48 AM
This is great news for Shawlands, but the proposed image here is mundane and already looks dated. Yes to a mixed use development, and yes to reconnecting the two main roads. Yes even to a bit of height. But anything without some longevity will be a wasted opportunity and a poor investment, both financially for the firm, and in the future of this great and busy neighbourhood.
#21 Posted by Pete on 5 Mar 2016 at 17:02 PM
My last comment directed at Arbroath (#17) by the way.
Completely agree with #20 as well.
Completely agree with #20 as well.
#22 Posted by Inness on 10 May 2016 at 21:23 PM
Let's get a Glaswegian practice to design something that fits to the needs of a typical south-sider. We don't need an eyesore sitting for another sixty years, we need something modern that has the public in mind.
Shawland's lack of sunlight is one problem for me.
Shawland's lack of sunlight is one problem for me.
#23 Posted by Carlos Franco on 31 May 2016 at 00:04 AM
I just wish the Kilmarnock Road front wasn't so imposing. If it could lose two or three storeys over the high street, and keep it bright.
#24 Posted by Leeroy on 8 Jan 2017 at 11:58 AM
All went quite on this, has there been any movement or updates if this will be happening ?
#25 Posted by Southsider on 24 Jan 2018 at 11:44 AM
Tenants have now been given notice to vacate.
#26 Posted by Grumpyg*t on 25 Apr 2018 at 12:23 PM
I have just received a letter from Santander Kilmarnock Road branch in the arcade . . . . "closing 29 November, 2018 at 4pm" because they "can't renew our lease" and due to "planned redevelopment in the Kilmarnock Road area".
#27 Posted by Gordon Boyd on 1 May 2018 at 13:40 PM
The lack of information on this whole project is quite frankly a disgrace. I own one of the flats directly behind the arcade and have received no information on what the future holds for my property despite contacting the current owners of the arcade numerous times. They obviously have substantial plans but have not even bothered to contact the owners of the flats behind to discuss what the future holds for our property. It's pretty obvious the futures bleak with no grant being offered to us on the recent recladding and redevelopment of the adjacent flats. I certainly won't just be rolling over to the Glasgow city council pension hedge fund ( the current owners) .
#28 Posted by Robert on 4 May 2019 at 14:00 PM
The work that has just been finished in front of langside hall is emasculate & a great space to chill in the summer apart from breathing in putrid filthy fumes from the 1000s of cars & buses that pollute our wee minny city,getting short of the arcade is a must ,it's outdated & miserable.. Always & Forever Shawlands..bless
#29 Posted by James McCourt on 8 Jul 2021 at 02:03 AM
The Central Part with the Hotel was Demolished around Early 1996 I seem to recall, and Work began on the Current Look in Mid 1996, and was completed in Late 1997.
Post your comments
Back to February 2016
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.