Should be declined if it can't meet proper environmental standards frankly. Classic example of profit before people and planet.

Define "proper" Mikey - surely any development has to conform to building regulations - is that not the level at which "proper" starts? Out of interest, how many buildings going up today meet "Gold standards"?? (serious question from an ignoramus)

In two minds about this one. Would love to see it built as I think it would genuinely make a positive impact to the built environment of central Glasgow, especially with the latest amendments that further improve the design.

However if Glasgow wants to be a carbon zero city by 2030, surely this development would be detrimental to that? I also think painting out Glasgow as some small regional town where developments have a weak or marginal economic viability is utterly ridiculous when it is the largest city in the country with the most lucrative market; as evidenced by the number of large projects on site or in development compared to other cities in Scotland.

Yes, the developer is at it with their reasoning behind their complete lack of care for meeting the environmental standards here.

If they felt the development wasn't going to make a profit then they simply wouldn't proceed with it and certainly wouldn't get the funding; which the vast majority of large PRS schemes in Glasgow now have.

I hope the council tell them where to go.

Build to rent simply allows the haves to further enslave the have nots......the design professions should not be facilitating this travesty of social justice.

Welcome to the Communist State of Scotland where developers should not be allowed to make a profit.
Much better to have a big empty site sitting there
No wonder Scotland’s Economy lags so far behind

#5 don’t disagree about your point regarding Haves and Have Nots and the wider injustices with the housing market. But to lump design professionals into this as somehow part of the problem is completely unfair. The inequalities in the housing market requires government intervention, investment and leadership, anything else is simply scratching the surface.

I'm skeptical as to whether BTR will ever be as big here as it is in the big regional English cities such as Manchester, Liverpool or Leeds, as we have coherent densified urban areas like the West End, Pollokshields-GH-Shawlands-Battlefield or Dennistoun/as well as a city centre easily convertible to high density residential.
But of course there must be a market in a city the size of Glasgow. The BTR market seems to be largely marketed to young professionals or those with large disposable incomes so I don't think this is a case of exploitation of 'social injustices'- and of course this is a central issue for a massively unequal society in general. Gap sites need filled & these sorts of projects are key to that. If these sorts of projects do go ahead I just hope we don't end up looking like Manchester, with its adhoc construction of poor design towers randomly jotted hither & tither. London has also been disfigured & defaced with this approach on an even larger scale.
If Glasgow does eventually go skyward I just hope we allow it to be in key cluster areas such as Broomielaw, SECC, or outwith the central conservation area- if we're going for densification I would much prefer an emulation of Spanish cities like Bilbao- we need to fill the gaps with traditional blocks as an extension of the areas in the city already mentioned such as Hillhead/Garnethill etc.
Personally my only gripe with this project was the destruction of the old Dumfriesshire sandstone John Street Registry Offices/those imposing old door ways could have been retained as a ground-level facade.

Why Post-Grenfell are architects designing residential towers with residential accommodation 22 storeys high served with a single escape stair?
Absolutely pathertic.

Classic "we have overpaid for the site based on our previous scheme" plea there.

Hard to tell how to take this really. BTR is a better option imho that individual/amateur landlords and this would get something moving on a site. Not sure important environmental policy requirements should be trumped by a developer overpaying for land though.

I'm sure you guys all thoroughly understand the financial implications and differences between Gold Standard, Silver Active and Silver Standard ?

im sure none of you would be sitting in your ivory towers throwing stones

Thought not

#11 Substance
What has that got to do with fire safety?

#12 - Fire safety? forget it. GCC just have recently blocked the frontage of massive apartment block in Dennistoun based on some fake reports from building management. Most of the flats have windows (fire escape route) facing this blocked side. No direct access to fire services. Anyone cares? You're right - let them burn.

If they cannot build safe, sustainable , maximum energy efficiency don’t build anything..