I can't really believe the gall of this proposal. Imagine the outcry from locals. More than that though its the gratuitous & wanton destruction of a historically interesting, structurally intact, substantial sandstone building - for no purpose other than excess profit margin. Other local care providers and their Architects work within the confines of historical buildings rather than sloppily suggesting their wholesale destruction. This would be lazy & very bad for where we all live. Yes it isn't listed, does that mean you should destroy it? No, it means you are an architecture firm lacking in integrity and backbone when the client/QS suggests the cost advantages of starting afresh. An adaptive reuse of the existing fabric will unqestionably lead to a more imaginative, context rich response that allows the building to continue on potentially long after a care homes use has come and gone. It is entirely possible to provide a home in that position without the loss of a historical asset to an otherwise featureless street. Yes, you will have to actually do some involved designwork and it will cost more in the short term. However, i'm sure an extension or too will provide the necessary room quota for the business model and the extra c.cost will be recouped after only a few years. If it doesn't suit your model, find another brownfield site locally that does. I don't feel it's even worth commenting on the context-less design proposal. To DCC Planners, is this really respecting the character and nature of the local area - and can you justify the demolition of a robust, non-dilapidated & historically significant building in your recommendation report? No, didn't think so.

And ............................ breath.
Looks ok to me and in 20 years when you have your own clients - and employ people in a REAL practice - working for a REAL client - you might agree. Chill.

I genuinely cant work out whether #1 is just a disgruntled neighbour or a slightly out of touch (and massively frustrated) Architect? We'd all love to adhere to what you preach, but unfortunately back in the real world, the client will ultimately provide the brief and believe it or not, this will primarily be aimed on cost versus profit.

I agree wholeheartedly with #1. The destruction of a beautiful, functional building that connects the communities of Broughty Ferry, Monifieth and Barnhill to make way for a newly-constructed building that will make no such connection is something the planning department should be ashamed of. It's hard to accept that there were not alternative venues for the construction of the care home that would enable this wonderful, historic building to remain.

No community survey or meaningful poll of the locals - surely that would enable the correct course of action to be followed. A decision that should be reversed with this shared asset preserved for decades to come.