Design Forum – Project Appraisal
Project Ref/Title: GLC 65 Port Dundas
Workshop Date: 24th March 2016
Venue: A&DS, The Lighthouse, Mitchell Lane, Glasgow
Workshop ref/ Series Workshop 4 Series 1
Workshop Stage: Appraisal of proposals for 100 Acre Hill
Issue Date: 12th April 2016
Planning Authority: Glasgow City Council
Planning Status/ Ref: Pre-Application / Planning Permission in Principle
Client / Developer: Glasgow Canal Regeneration Partnership/ BIGG
Lead Designer(s): HTA Design
Project/ Category: Housing / Public Realm / Infrastructure / Masterplan/Strategic Mixed Use
Location Type: Within Settlement
Previous Workshops: 29th April 2015, 2nd July 2015, 22nd January 2016
1.0 Introduction (This summarises project status and background information that was indicated to A&DS prior to the workshop or clarified by the parties during the workshop. In the event that any of the statements made in this introduction are considered incorrect A&DS should be advised and the report will be amended.) 1.1 Port Dundas and the adjoining Sighthill initiative were first identified as Locally Significant Projects eligible for A&DS support in 2013. Since that time the site has been the subject of a Scottish Government supported charrette process led by Kevin Murray Associates in 2014.. Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) is being prepared to cover the wider Port Dundas area by Willie Millar with Kevin Murray Associates working for Glasgow City Council.
1.2 Development of the former Diageo site, 100 Acre Hill, is being led by BIGG Regeneration. “The aim is to deliver a residential led, creative mixed use scheme (targeted at the city centre living creative sector), together with meanwhile and longer term urban adventure sport uses.” This seeks a delivery process led by Custom Builders, (co-designing their own homes), and sets out to be a ground breaking approach for Scotland.
1.3 A first Design Forum workshop was held with the City Council and BIGG on 29th April and this addressed the strategic context of Port Dundas, the council’s intent for supplementary planning guidance and briefing for the 100 Acre Hill development. A second Design Forum workshop was held on 2nd July 2015 to discuss the emerging proposals for 100 Acre Hill development by BIGG. A third workshop was held 22nd January 2016 to carry out an appraisal of draft supplementary guidance prepared for the City Council by Willie Miller Urban Design. Our separate appraisal report on the SG was issued to the City Council on 10th February 2016.
Progress Since Last Workshop:
1.4 The council indicated that A&DS advice on the Draft Port Dundas Supplementary Guidance is being addressed by the Council and Willie Miller. Some elements of this advice were addressed in the Draft that was approved for public consultation at 8th March 2016 Planning Committee. The consultation period is due to run for 6 weeks from 11th April following which the Supplementary Guidance will be reviewed and updated, including further addressing A&DS’s advice alongside feedback from other consultees. The Supplementary Guidance is expected to be finalised in the autumn.
1.5 There has been significant progress in advancing the business case for the City Deal projects planned in conjunction with Port Dundas. The Canal Partnership has also been taking steps to co-ordinate the delivery of infrastructure. ZM architects have won the design competition for the Land Art Generator Initiative including a proposed wind forest of bladeless turbines using experimental Vortex technology. This is planned to provide power for 50% of the new homes at 100 Acre Hill with the turbines now proposed to form an integral part of parks and open space.
1.6 An application for Planning Permission in Principle for 100 Acre Hill is intended at the end of April and the workshop was convened to review draft Masterplan and Design Code proposals that will be finalised and submitted in support of the application. The current proposals for 100 Acre Hill were presented by BIGG, HTA and Rankin Fraser at the beginning of the workshop and extracts from this presentation are included as an appendix to this report.
2 2.0 Workshop Scope 2.1 This fourth workshop concluded the Port Dundas Design Forum series with an appraisal of the developed 100 Acre Hill proposals by BIGG. The appraisal addressed the discussion topics and advice arising from dialogue at earlier workshops, including:
A Design Code
B Connecting and Moving Around
C Design of Built Form and Typologies
D Design of Parks and Open Space
E Phasing
F Drawings to Consider
G Strategic Working and Leadership
3.0 Workshop Outcomes / Project Appraisal (This section of the report records the advice and appraisal of A&DS arising from discussion at the workshop and subsequently consolidated in order to provide a clear statement of appraisal.) (It begins with a summary of the appraisal by A&DS including the overall rating given for design at the conclusion of the Design Forum process, considering in particular whether buildings and environs have been successfully designed to meet the needs of users and the wider community.)
3.1 Summary Appraisal 3.1.1 Proposals are strong with quality in drawings and analysis underpinning a clear, place-led vision. Character is coming out with a much clearer definition of landscape, topography and public realm as the driving force. Clarity on the main urban design armatures and spatial hierarchy are now much more clearly expressed in the emerging code. The principle frontage/scale/massing elements of the proposed built form are getting much simpler, informing clearer design principles for those limited elements which are essential to define and code at this stage.
3.1.2 However we considered that there was scope for further testing in particular areas and refinement of aspects of the coding. Our detailed appraisal addresses topics discussed and developed during the workshop series. Recommendations include:
• a change of emphasis around what is transferred to guidance;
• working on key views to and from the site;
• further detail required to plan interfaces along important routes;
• weaknesses remaining in the movement framework in connection with the managing of car parking, public transport and pedestrian accessibility up the hill;
• the need for greater clarity on the location and timing for provision of local amenities;
• further work on the SUDS strategy;
• further work on the SW corner which is less resolved;
• massing at city scale
3 • important urban elevations that need to be tested;
• looking at meanwhile uses;
• up-front infrastructure and early development phases;
• further sectional drawing and massing/topography work and modelling.
3.1.3 The project is rated as 2 - Well Considered and Supported. However there is potential to reach a rating of 1 – Potential Exemplar. To become a potential exemplar the recommendations set out below would need to be addressed [see bold text].
3.2 Appraisal by Topic
3.2.1 Design Code We welcomed the response to advice in the tailored-back code and the qualities of simplicity, strength and robustness that are becoming increasingly evident. The essential elements of the spatial proposal are simpler and more clearly defined, building on the distinctive characteristics of the site and topography. The hierarchy and the main urban design armatures are now much more clearly expressed. The drawing back and zooming out to establish principles that was sought last time has been addressed allowing specific qualities to come out.
Recommendations:
• However there remains a need to extend the thinking to address interfaces with the wider cityscape. Clearly expressed urban strategies and hierarchies need to be set out from city scale though to site scale.
• The code should provide design principles addressing scale and massing in relation to views to and from Dundas Hill. [see recommendations on city walls and massing item 3.2.3 below].
We were not convinced at a detailed level by the illustrative layouts for the platforms. There is a risk that the detailed layouts of the ‘Proving’ diagrams as shown counteract the intent of the code for a well-defined primary framework of streets and blocks. The top platform [platform 4a] was discussed as a particular example where internal street layouts differ between the two diagrams for the same area. This also applies at North Canal Bank Street [platform 1a and 1b] and Harvey Street [platform 3].
Recommendations:
• We recommend a change of emphasis around what is transferred to guidance, including a withdrawal of illustrative ‘Proving’ diagrams for each platform that counteract the intent as noted above. The consistency and clarity of intent needs to be carried through and any anomalies removed as the coding is consolidated and finally presented. At the same time it will be important to strengthen and amplify the ‘Design Principles’ planned for each Character Area for example highlighting more strongly the importance of well-defined public edges to parks and open space.
• We recommend that a clear and robust phasing strategy is set out linking development phases to the delivery of key elements of infrastructure [see also 3.2.5 below].
3.2.2 Connecting, Moving Around and Amenities Internally the primary framework of routes and public realm has become simpler and better defined and the removal of parking courts was welcomed. This breaks down to some extent
4 at the southwest Cooperage corner and where the responsibility is shared beyond the site boundary.
Recommendations:
• There should be more detail to demonstrate important assumptions made on how on and off-site interfaces will work, and the significance that the external planned changes have for the 100 Acre Hill proposals. The way the interfaces are drawn must dovetail with proposals in the council’s wider Supplementary Guidance for Port Dundas.
In particular:
- Future planned links from the hilltop north to Eagle Street, then both east towards Craighall Road/Canal/Whisky Bond and north towards Keppochhill Road/Cowlairs.
- Pedestrian accessibility around Cooperage Corner including the proposed link from the new hilltop housing down to ‘Cooperage Corner’ then downhill again towards Garscube Road at the ‘metal petals’.
- Interface with facilities in Sighthill masterplan and the planned M8 bridge.
• The managing of car parking remains a concern as discussed at earlier design forums and the council were urged to consider working to a 100% standard or less to encourage low car use.
• This consideration is connected to the location and accessibility of new community facilities and amenities which also need to be provided at Port Dundas to ensure that basic facilities are accessible on foot. This is an important part of the deliverability of a vision for low car ownership. The provision and timing of delivery for a local corner groceries shop and community hub on site are important for example. Such provision needs to be set out in the code in conjunction with development phasing. Coding should link with commitments to the phased delivery of community uses and amenities both on and off- site.
• The lack of defined public transport principles, bus routes in particular, remains a weakness to be resolved. We support the proposed initial subsidised service and recommend as a minimum the inclusion of a bus service along North Canal Bank Street.
• More detail is required to set out how the road infrastructure needs to change towards the intended shift in form away from haulage intensive civil engineered road infrastructure towards a place-before-movement [Designing Streets] approach suitable for a mixed-use area. This may for example include measures by The Council to reduce haulage traffic and heavy through traffic along North Canal Bank Street.
3.2.3 Design of Built Form and Typologies The proposals for the principal urban structure have developed significantly and the intent for scale, massing and managing the topographic complexity are becoming ever clearer. It was noted that with the extra elevation of the higher platforms the blocks planned as 3 - 5 storey or 5 - 8 storey will be very prominent in the city landscape. The elevated north facing edges towards the remaining Diaggeo buildings, buildings above the high wall over Eagle Street and at the platform edges over the cutting of Vintner Street were particular cases in point that were discussed in more detail.
Recommendations:
• We recommend that the ‘city walls’ that will be prominent in the wider city landscape should be further tested and design intent for these established. Whilst we were
5 encouraged by the opportunities presented this needs to be better understood to ensure that scale is managed as a positive attribute. The code should be extended to set out an approach to how the massing of hilltop buildings are composed, especially as perceived within the wider city landscape. Design intent for density, scale, groupings and city-scaled walls of buildings should be planned with a mind to a series of urban roles including, for example: forming edges facing the neighbouring city; as gateways and markers at key transitions and moments; or a planned profile across the hill. This could build further on ideas of layering, topography and growing out of the hillside. All of this creating a planned identity compatible with the scale of this city gateway/hilltop site and precedents such as Park Circus.
• Within this a much stronger design intent needs to be set out for the important urban gateway at Cooperage Corner.
• We also recommend a consolidation of intent for the mix and typologies for each Character Area. The distinctive characteristics and roles of various models need to be highlighted alongside the conditions and demographic needed to encourage a pioneering community, articulating the essential components of this vision such as custom build, live/work, vertical stratification of uses and other characteristics that have been consolidated during the establishment of a mix of uses such as robustness, meanwhile uses, adaptive workspace, allotments, activity sport and space for creative industries.
3.2.4 Design of Parks and Open Space The landscape framework has become the primary armature with work to evolve ribbons of open space and woodland across the contours, responding to topography, mature trees, re- purposed industrial archaeology, the Land Art Generator Initiative [LAGI] public art and the ideas around re-inhabiting and pioneering; all promising a very strong and believable focus for the new community and this was very much welcomed. Within this the response to, retention and incorporation of historic elements, both built and landscape, is welcome. The canalside public realm improvement and proposed street tree planting was similarly promising. Some concerns were expressed that the framework needs to work with or without the LAGI which should not of itself become a constraint for the built form.
The defined roles of tree planting in blocks for shelter or for filtered views is a strength. This obviates earlier concerns that public realm was too disparate and extensive and that housing would be insufficiently enclosed and sheltered on the exposed hillside.
Recommendations:
• SUDS perhaps needs further teasing out – e.g. testing with the council whether permeable paving will be adoptable and checking what is needed beyond the investment in the canal as a flood prevention buffer.
• The thinking needs to be extended to the south-western gateway as previously discussed and including:
- developing the potential of a public space at Cooperage corner;
- a shallower graded accessible route to the hilltop as an alternative to the main Vintner Street spine;
- integration with proposals for the improved link to Garscube Road.
• We are concerned that the challenge of the gradients for pedestrian accessibility should be fully addressed. Sections drawn along the primary pedestrian routes should test this more fully. Alongside this it would be helpful to draw out ideas for secondary steps/ramped
6 routes that build on the early thinking and precedent imagery on Italian hilltown streetscape discussed at previous Design Forum workshops.
• The discussion and consideration of the potential of meanwhile and temporary uses for undeveloped sites should not be lost, particularly along North Canal Bank Street.
3.2.5 Phasing Earlier advice was to concentrate effort initially on the mixed-use elements along North Canal Bank Street [NCBS] based on the existing assets of the canal; watersport centre; skate park and the early delivery of city deal public realm improvements. However the need to balance these benefits with a viable business model for a first phase was recognised - hence a first phase may need to go to a simper site than NCBS to deliver. It was recognised that this will be more feasible to deliver initially than the proposed mixed-use elements along North Canal Bank Street which will need to be more established before it’s value can be realised. We recognised that beginning with custom-build housing in a first phase has the benefit of bringing in a pioneering community as a seed for change at Port Dundas.
Recommendations:
• The intended City Deal public realm improvements to North Canal Bank Street, and the proposed strengthened city connections, are essential catalysts and these must be delivered up-front by the city as a model and marker of high quality public realm to attract investment towards the mixed use element, and to set the scene for the quality of place intended.
• The establishment of the North Canal Bank Street frontage will remain a vital part of the process of establishing the new identity of the area and this should be delivered as early as possible.
3.2.6 Drawings to Consider The quality of drawings were considered to be strong – some excellent. The testing of site characteristics by 3d sketching, the humanity of some of the earlier sketches and the value of the aerial visualization are great strengths recognized by the panel and this work can animate the code as long as it is made clear as non-prescriptive guidance. However we noted the limited detail in section drawings and the wider work needed to fully develop and demonstrate proposals interacting with the larger urban interfaces.
Recommendations:
• Sectional work should be added at a larger scale to demonstrate how the steep gradients of the site become usable and habitable.
• Key urban elevations should be drawn [see 3.2.3 above].
• Full exposure of the 3d modelling should also be used to further test and demonstrate how massing is intended to relate to the wider cityscape and to explore un-tested elements of the complex topography.
• Important views in and out should be defined in the code, with clarity on how these are to be safeguarded and enhanced. Views in might include the approaches from the city, from Cowlairs of from Sighthill. Sketches from key viewpoints would help demonstrate planned layering of what is seen as foreground, middle ground and distant elements, the urban edges, the landmarks.
7 3.2.7 Strategic Working and Leadership We welcome the strategic leadership role of the Canal Partnership; providing a commendable framework of governance to manage planned investment via city deal, the work of Scottish Canals and the innovative custom build model to be brought forward by BIGG and other 3rd party developers and investors.
Recommendations:
• The supplementary guidance and the code for 100 Acre Hill both need to be developed further to knit together and become integral with one another.
• Continued leadership by the city is vital including maintaining commitment to up-front delivery of the planned city links and infrastructure improvements within and external to the site. Plans for managing parking, changing road character and public transport need to be added. The provision of suitable local facilities and amenities also needs to be added.
• It is vital that the strategic delivery partnership is maintained to continue an integrated approach to implementation in the longer term.
4.0 Next Stage (This section of the report indicates further A&DS involvement proposed or discussed at the workshop.) 4.1 No further Design Forum workshops are intended. However we can provide an updated staff- led appraisal when and if our recommendations are addressed.
5.0 Attendance
Project Team
Gary Watt BIGG Regeneration
Sandy Morrison HTA
Dan Shanahan HTA
Chris Rankin Rankin Fraser Landscape Architecture
Planning Authority and Stakeholders
Heather Claridge Glasgow City Council
Ian Briggs Glasgow City Council
Raffaele Esposito Glasgow City Council
A&DS
Rod Kemsley A&DS Design Forum Lead Panellist
Gordon Murray A&DS Design Forum Panellist
Sheena Raeburn A&DS Design Forum Panellist
Eugene Mullan A&DS Design Forum Panellist
8 Johnny Cadell Facilitator (A&DS Design Advisor)
Steve Malone A&DS Design Advisor
LIST OF APPENDICES The following appendices are attached to this Appraisal:
APPENDIX 1 – KEY IMAGES
9 APPENDIX 1 – KEY IMAGES A – Site Analysis [extracts]
Topography and access diagram 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture
Site photo Site photo 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture landscape architecture 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Masterplan Principals Massing Principals A – Site Analysis [extracts]
Topography and massing analysis 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016 B – Vision and precedents [extracts]
Birds eye perspective 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Masterplan Principals Public Realm B – Vision and precedents [extracts]
Wider Context Amenity Primary Amenity
in /10m 0m On-site active amenity 80 Active leisure
*Public Open Space On-site park * Pedestrian/Cycle Route On-site visual amenity Off -site * * * * *
Function Age groups
Play space Toddler 0-4yrs
Communal Allotment Young child 4-11yrs
Amenity space Teenager 11-15yrs * Sport Adult 16+yrs * * Public realm infrastructure 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
100 Acre Hill The Masterplan B – Vision and precedents [extracts]
Sketch masterplan 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Precedents and Materiality B – Vision and precedents [extracts]
Princess Gate Princess Gate - Edinburgh Developer: Bryant Homes Architect: Malcolm Fraser Architects
De Melaan - Mechelen, Belgium Design: OKRA 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture
Brentford Lock Lock West West - London Accordia - Cambridge Developer: ISIS Waterside Regeneration Developer: Countryside Properties Architect: Duggan Morris Architects Architect (Masterplan): Feilden Clegg Bradley Architects
De Melaan - Mechelen, Belgium Design: OKRA 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture
Precedent images C – Landscape framework proposals [extracts]
Landscape framework plan 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architectureScale 1:1000 @ A1 rankinfraser landscape architect C – Landscape framework proposals [extracts]
1
1
1
2
3
2
2 4 3
4
1 Top tier 2 Mid tier - SUDS/Wetlands 3 Lower tier - Tanked 4 Canal outlet
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework SUDS Layout
rankinfraser landscape architect SUDS diagram 100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework Key Pedestrian Connections
rankinfraser landscape architect
Pedestrian100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas connections Presentation to A+DS diagram 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture C – Landscape framework proposals [extracts]
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework Scale 1:1000 @ A1 rankinfraser landscape architect
Section A
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework Scale 1:1000 @ A1 rankinfraser landscape architect
Section B
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Landscape Framework Scale 1:1000 @ A1 rankinfraser landscape architect Section C Site sections proposals
100 Acre Hill - Port Dundas Presentation to A+DS 24 March 2016 rankinfraser landscape architecture 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
100 Acre Hill
Masterplan Aspiration D – Built form design code [extracts]
Application Boundary Line Cowlairs Residential Development Platform boundary TWB + NTS Studios, stages, workshops and coff ee Access Strong Frontage
Height Refer to plot code Marker building Existing public street 100 Borron Street Restricted access boulevard * Business, baristas and leisure Primary Street * Secondary Street Shared Surface Street Primary Pedestrian Route * Secondary Pedestrian Route Green visual buff er Speirs Wharf Art, students and ballet 1.5m Privacy strip * Open Space and play * Amenity and allotment Existing Structure Parking Court 20% - 40% Commercial * Principal view Sighthil Improvement Required Live, learn and play Arrival/Orientation space Desirable connection Character area boundary Retained trees Glasgow City Centre Work, explore and enjoy
Coding plan 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Masterplan Principals
Streets as places D – Built form design code [extracts]
Primary Shared Surface Street - Type 1 Primary Shared Surface Street - Type 2 Secondary Shared Surface Street Shared Surface Park Edge Street
diff erentiate areas diff erentiate areas diff erentiate areas diff erentiate areas •Perpendicular •Parallel parking •Parking on plot with •Parking to be parking bays, bays, 2.0 x 6.0m, tree planting every minimised adjacent 2.0 x 6.0m, four two consecutive two consecutive to Public Open consecutive parking parking bays front driveways. Space bays divided by divided by street street tree planting. tree planting. •Tree planting to park edges •Parking to be •Parking to be •Design speed 20mph minimised adjacent •Design speed 20mph minimised adjacent •Design speed 20mph •Design speed 20mph •Existing trees to Public Open to Public Open retained and new •Footway not required Space •Footway not required Space •Footway not required •Footway not required trees planted beyond entrance beyond entrance beyond entrance beyond entrance within existing ramp but paving ramp but paving ramp but paving ramp but paving sloped areas colour or texture colour or texture colour or texture colour or texture may be used to may be used to may be used to may be used to
Masterplan principles - streets as places 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Masterplan Principals Massing and Legibility D – Built form design code [extracts]
Residential Heights Typologies House 2-4 storey
Apartment 3-5 storey
Apartment/Commercial 5-8 storey
Commercial Spaces Marker Buildings
Commercial Stand alone Creative Industry *Building Facade Offi ce * Residential * * *
Massing and legibility 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Platform 4a Design Principals D – Built form design code [extracts]
Application Boundary Line
Platform boundary
Access
Strong Frontage
Height 2-4 4-6 2-4 4-6 Marker building Existing public street * * * Traffi c Restricted Street Primary Street 2-4 Secondary Street
Shared Surface Street
Primary Pedestrian Route 12m 8m- Secondary Pedestrian Route 2-4 2-4 Green visual buff er min 18m 1.5m Privacy strip
Open Space and play
4-6 Amenity and allotment 2-4 Existing Structure * Parking Court 20% - 40% Commercial
Principal view Platform 4a - design principles 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Platform 4a Proving Diagram D – Built form design code [extracts]
Parking On-Street
Off -Street
Garage
Apartment Spaces
Parking is provided at 125%. There should be various parking typologies, including allocated and unallocated spaces.
Amenity Open space
Amenity
Allotment
Amenity, play and open spaces should be in line with Glasgow City Council’s design guidance for open space.
SUDS
Expressed
Tanked
The SUDS strategy will develop the character of communal spaces and streetscapes. Platform 4a - proving diagram 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Platform 1a Design Principals D – Built form design code [extracts]
Application Boundary Line
Platform boundary
Access
Strong Frontage
Height 2-4
Marker building Existing public street * 2-4 2-4 Traffi c Restricted Street 2-4 Primary Street min 18m Secondary Street
4-6 4-6 4-6 Shared Surface Street
Primary Pedestrian Route
Secondary Pedestrian Route
Green visual buff er
1.5m Privacy strip
Open Space and play
Amenity and allotment
Existing Structure
Parking Court
20% - 40% Commercial
Principal view Platform 1a - design principles 100 Acre Hill - Design Forum Workshop - 24 March 2016
Platform 1a Proving Diagram D – Built form design code [extracts]
Parking
On-Street
Off -Street
Garage
Undercroft
Amenity
Open space
Amenity
Allotment
SUDS
Expressed
Tanked
Platform 1a - proving diagram