CCG and Mast team up for Govanhill infill
January 6 2017
Offering a mix of one-bedroom through to four bedroom flats, all for social rent, the scheme has been set back to maximise on-street parking.
In their design statement Mast observed: “Large windows and tall storey heights have been included so as to establish an aesthetic that is consistent with that of its surroundings. Externally, the building is expressed as three distinct elements, with the circulation cores recessed and clad in darker materials (zinc) to further enhance this.
“Materially, a red-brown brick has been selected so as to complement the red sandstone of the adjacent tenement on west Inglefield Street. Additionally, both the Inglefield Street elevation, and the elevation to the back court, are characterized by recessed buff brick panels which have been included to give nodes of visual interest.”
Delivery will be fast-tracked by employing CCG’s off-site manufacturing process.
Dark brick will be used at ground level to signify entry to circulation spaces
Hard landscaped backcourts with raised planters will offer recreational space for tenants
|
12 Comments
#1 Posted by Mick morton on 6 Jan 2017 at 15:52 PM
Dear dear. Lazy, banal, dross
#2 Posted by Charlie_ on 7 Jan 2017 at 07:52 AM
Standard mast.
#3 Posted by Cateran on 8 Jan 2017 at 00:37 AM
As Jonathan Meades said about Scottish public housing, "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing badly." Monstrous.
#4 Posted by Derek Mc on 8 Jan 2017 at 19:23 PM
I think it's too easy to slag off projects like this. This is affordable housing being built for high demand within strict financial budgets set by the Scottish Government and by housing associations with limited finances trying to keep rents low. The projects which seem to get all the praise simply have more money spent on them. If 1, 2 and 3 don't understand the or appreciate the context they shouldn't jump to criticise.
#5 Posted by Mick on 9 Jan 2017 at 09:12 AM
Derek
We should aspire for the best, not race for the bottom. The world of architecture is littered with great buildings conjured from tight budgets. No one is suggesting it's an easy task. Why should something which is publically owned have to be so appallingly awful? Let our imagination soar. We need a proper public and transparent conversation in this country that holds this kind of building engineering to account. Do you not think so?
We should aspire for the best, not race for the bottom. The world of architecture is littered with great buildings conjured from tight budgets. No one is suggesting it's an easy task. Why should something which is publically owned have to be so appallingly awful? Let our imagination soar. We need a proper public and transparent conversation in this country that holds this kind of building engineering to account. Do you not think so?
#6 Posted by boaby wan on 9 Jan 2017 at 13:55 PM
Derek is entirely correct - it is too easy to slag off projects like this.
I mean, just look at the images, they haven't even tried to make it hard.
I mean, just look at the images, they haven't even tried to make it hard.
#7 Posted by What ever became of BC? on 9 Jan 2017 at 18:27 PM
There is no difference in content between these images and 4-storey boarded up housing stock in Drumchapel and Easterhouse of 25 years ago, for which numerous storey-height reduction feasibility studies were carried out on behalf of Housing Associations and implemented to two-storey housing.
Go figure.
FFS. - 'nodes of visual interest'
Go figure.
FFS. - 'nodes of visual interest'
#8 Posted by Cateran on 9 Jan 2017 at 21:59 PM
It seems we haven't learnt lessons from the past. Ok, we only have these renderings to go by, but these buildings are condemned to form the sink estates of the future as a result of inadequate funding.
#9 Posted by Senga McSporran on 10 Jan 2017 at 11:25 AM
Effortless architecture
#10 Posted by basho on 10 Jan 2017 at 12:37 PM
Whenever an architect's design statement includes the word 'nodes' - Be afraid. Be very afraid.
What gets on my giblets are all those genuinely innovative schemes to provide new archetypes for social housing (Homes for the Future Glasgow etc. etc.) that never make it past the pavement. There's no point to them if we're still produce dreary guff with cost as an excuse.
Countless projects have proven that cost is NO excuse to design lazy bland boxes for people that can't afford to choose where they live.
I need to lie down know. I've exhausted myself with impotent rage.
What gets on my giblets are all those genuinely innovative schemes to provide new archetypes for social housing (Homes for the Future Glasgow etc. etc.) that never make it past the pavement. There's no point to them if we're still produce dreary guff with cost as an excuse.
Countless projects have proven that cost is NO excuse to design lazy bland boxes for people that can't afford to choose where they live.
I need to lie down know. I've exhausted myself with impotent rage.
#11 Posted by Mrs Brown on 10 Jan 2017 at 13:50 PM
R Murphy might be right about Scotland being the worst place to be an architect. Only a mattter of time before we're all project managers if we don't make a stand. Nobody apart from the good folk at UR seem to care....
#12 Posted by kenny kitchens on 12 Jan 2017 at 16:32 PM
Another toothless streetscape
Post your comments
Read previous: Andy Murray seeks Cromlix House Hotel extension
Back to January 2017
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.