Investors sought for £137m Glasgow office block
March 5 2018
The £137m scheme has been designed by Sheppard Robson Architects on behalf of HFD Group and is being championed by the Scottish Government as a key generator of inward investment.
Rising to 12 storeys the enlarged project is conceived as a succession of glazed elements bound by stone piers and will be topped by a rooftop running track to offer occupants the chance of a scenic jog.
HFD attained planning permission for an increase in floor space in February of last year and are committed to delivering the project on a speculative basis if no pre-let can be secured.
27 Comments
#1 Posted by Charlie_ on 5 Mar 2018 at 14:56 PM
Glasgow: desperately seeking investors.
#2 Posted by A Local Pleb on 5 Mar 2018 at 15:03 PM
Does Glasgow not deserve better than this? Yet another massive glass 'BOX' lacking in any imagination. Lets maximise the lettable space at all costs? No doubt the developer will be pushing for the marketing potential of BREEAM excellent or outstanding without really thinking about how to truly create an innovative yet sustainable piece of architecture.
#3 Posted by juan de los angeles on 5 Mar 2018 at 16:04 PM
We said Pleb. Glasgow does deserve better than this off the shelf, architecture by numbers building that could be anywhere. Singapore, Dallas, Cleveland, etc. This is definitely not sustainable development. Anonymous. Who could ever love this building?
#4 Posted by bannister fletcher on 5 Mar 2018 at 17:00 PM
...yet another component assembly building.
and the making of an architecture is where ...?
This is complete and utter P.I.S.H.
Why can't these architects be told by planners where to go?
and the making of an architecture is where ...?
This is complete and utter P.I.S.H.
Why can't these architects be told by planners where to go?
#5 Posted by Billy on 5 Mar 2018 at 20:00 PM
It’s a drive to the bottom and Glasgow is leading the way. Well done Glasgow City Council. Other cities are approving interesting and higher buildings. We are getting this dross. Charles Rennie and Greek Thomson would be appalled.
#6 Posted by E=mc2 on 5 Mar 2018 at 23:18 PM
Geezuz that’s a brute of a building.
#7 Posted by Mick Morton on 5 Mar 2018 at 23:39 PM
Soul suckingly banal. Corporate bully boys and their dull vision of anywhereville. Does anyone have any ideas how to stop them?
#8 Posted by Cadmonkey on 6 Mar 2018 at 09:55 AM
On this site we really need more affordable housing, community theatre, a drug rehabilitation centre, artist residences, crèches, cycle parks, a benefits agency and a free dentist.
We MUST fight against this kind of disgraceful capitalist development that only creates wealth and jobs and generates tax revenues for the state.
We MUST fight against this kind of disgraceful capitalist development that only creates wealth and jobs and generates tax revenues for the state.
#9 Posted by MV on 6 Mar 2018 at 09:58 AM
Any architect that has worked on any city centre office building will know, its all the agents fault. They want "the last thing that was built" - because they know they got it sold. Its therefore difficult for the architect to change the perception of the agent and therefore ultimately the client, in that regard.
Tail wagging the dog... and it mostly always leads to big glass box from anywhere and maximising Net internal area.
Tail wagging the dog... and it mostly always leads to big glass box from anywhere and maximising Net internal area.
#10 Posted by HWD on 6 Mar 2018 at 10:08 AM
UR there appears to be a mistake in the description as it refers to the building being 'designed'. Could this please be amended to either 'copied and pasted' or 'thrown together'. Thanks.
#11 Posted by outraged on 6 Mar 2018 at 10:19 AM
The cheek of it, fancy having the audacity to build a commercial office block in the centre of town
Im with Cadmonkey we must all rise up and fight for a new community allotment so we can all grow carrots and cucumbers
Im with Cadmonkey we must all rise up and fight for a new community allotment so we can all grow carrots and cucumbers
#12 Posted by bannister fletcher on 6 Mar 2018 at 10:30 AM
#8 & #10 - i think you miss the point.
- with this building, the only thing that is being made here is money.
As architects, I'd be looking to see from them some synthesis in design, some multi-valency, some art in their craft, some public urban realm positive addition to the city in terms of language -reference-recognition-memory, genius loci etc. all that sorta sh**. . Not just a big glazed sample panel. Now that to me is surely not to much to ask now is it?
- with this building, the only thing that is being made here is money.
As architects, I'd be looking to see from them some synthesis in design, some multi-valency, some art in their craft, some public urban realm positive addition to the city in terms of language -reference-recognition-memory, genius loci etc. all that sorta sh**. . Not just a big glazed sample panel. Now that to me is surely not to much to ask now is it?
#13 Posted by Charlie_ on 6 Mar 2018 at 12:29 PM
Am I the only one who thinks this render looks pretty good?
#14 Posted by Chris Ditchfield on 6 Mar 2018 at 13:09 PM
MV - agents fault? Really? Nothing to do with the architect designing the building to the clients budget? I think design teams are more complex than simply hanging on the agents input.
#15 Posted by Jonnie on 6 Mar 2018 at 13:23 PM
The new building next to this one (showing in the photo) shows amazing modern style with building lines and features which match the old 95 Bothwell St building further down - a real credit to the architect. This proposal just ignores the surrounding location - very poor
#16 Posted by outraged on 6 Mar 2018 at 13:29 PM
im with Charlie
this is smart ..... and much better than a big hole in the ground.
im sure neither the devloper or the end user will give 2 hoots what you all have to say.
id best get back to work and actually produce something
this is smart ..... and much better than a big hole in the ground.
im sure neither the devloper or the end user will give 2 hoots what you all have to say.
id best get back to work and actually produce something
#17 Posted by jimbob tanktop on 6 Mar 2018 at 13:31 PM
#13 Charlie
No, I think it's fine. Infinitely better than the hole-in-the-ground that's there just now.
No, I think it's fine. Infinitely better than the hole-in-the-ground that's there just now.
#18 Posted by Also outraged on 6 Mar 2018 at 15:25 PM
I'm with CadMonkey and Outraged - building offices in the centre of town is an outrage, and this should be left as an ugly gap site for ever after. Progress should be stopped wherever possible, long live vegetable patches!
#19 Posted by MV on 6 Mar 2018 at 16:29 PM
Chris. It IS all the agents fault and its that simple. The client has a budget - but commercial clients aren't particularly bothered about how it looks - as long as they can get their big wad of cash at the end of it. Agents determine what is "sellable". Client goes with it. Simples.
#20 Posted by Stylecouncil on 6 Mar 2018 at 21:25 PM
#19 Nah, developers like HF know exactly what they want and for how much without the relative wisdom of scrabbling, shiny agents.
HF don't give a monkey's about the product as evidenced with that massive vacuous Waterloo St office and the other lumps they have commisioned within the last 5 years. Big bland commercial architects are happy to swallow their pride for the cash, twas always thus. Great fee with little need to exercise the braincells on this one, just a simple glass curtain wall detail spread around four sides and 40 acres of suspended ceiling, jobs a good'un.
#18 This ain't 'progress'....not by a long shot.
HF don't give a monkey's about the product as evidenced with that massive vacuous Waterloo St office and the other lumps they have commisioned within the last 5 years. Big bland commercial architects are happy to swallow their pride for the cash, twas always thus. Great fee with little need to exercise the braincells on this one, just a simple glass curtain wall detail spread around four sides and 40 acres of suspended ceiling, jobs a good'un.
#18 This ain't 'progress'....not by a long shot.
#21 Posted by E=mc2 on 6 Mar 2018 at 23:04 PM
The developer had control over an entire city block and the opportunity to do something groundbreaking in terms of a making positive contribution to the the city.
#22 Posted by Treehugger on 7 Mar 2018 at 21:07 PM
I say we “Yarnbomb” the site with wool
That will teach those nasty capatalists
That will teach those nasty capatalists
#23 Posted by Stylecouncil on 8 Mar 2018 at 08:12 AM
#22 Aye, genius Treehugger et al.
Odd comments polarising and reducing the issue into capitalism Vs vegetable patches....although admittedly an inevitability in this small minded and stale development environment.
Quality architecture and positive contribution to the urban environment Vs Sh1te, banal dross is what we are faced with with this effort.
As HFD and Sheppard Robson are incapable of producing the former, Glasgow city Council planning need to step up and ensure that proposals try a bit harder.
Odd comments polarising and reducing the issue into capitalism Vs vegetable patches....although admittedly an inevitability in this small minded and stale development environment.
Quality architecture and positive contribution to the urban environment Vs Sh1te, banal dross is what we are faced with with this effort.
As HFD and Sheppard Robson are incapable of producing the former, Glasgow city Council planning need to step up and ensure that proposals try a bit harder.
#24 Posted by Charlie_ on 8 Mar 2018 at 13:03 PM
Let's face it, it's closing on 4 years since a speculative office build broke ground in this city, GCC aren't in a position to demand much of anything from developers. Never mind beggars vs choosers, they need the Scottish government to do their begging for them here
#25 Posted by Roddy on 8 Mar 2018 at 18:00 PM
Lets face it, this design will be value enginnered to death before it gets anywhere near site.
On the plus side you guys will have a rich new seam of things to moan about.
Win win situation
On the plus side you guys will have a rich new seam of things to moan about.
Win win situation
#26 Posted by Doc S on 9 Mar 2018 at 13:19 PM
Let's get back to the original question. Who is seriously going to put money into this other than the Scottish Government unless they have got a big public sector tenant lined up in case why ask? Can HFD not afford it?
#27 Posted by MV on 12 Mar 2018 at 14:20 PM
I just noticed the "cost", relative to the Sqft. Would this be the most expensive office scheme EVER in Glasgow? £517 per Sqft?. Really? Or is that the going rate now?
Post your comments
Read previous: Edinburgh St James rises as construction gets underway
Back to March 2018
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.