Kelbourne Street drop-in event for proposed development
Latest news
The new planning application is now live on the Council website: 23/03108/FUL.
Closing date for comments: Wednesday 17 January Friday 2 February 2024.
Kelvin Properties are holding a community information event for the development of the disused site at 10 Kelbourne Street. As we all know, the site is an eyesore and litter trap.
The original plans were widely opposed within the community and initially refused by the City Council. Concerns included:
- the height of the building compared to the surrounding tenements
- overshadowing of the playpark
- increased traffic in an already busy area.
However, the plans were allowed on appeal, subject to conditions.
The developers propose to change the use of the site to purpose-built student accommodation. According to their leaflet:
The change of use removes the need for basement car parking and the traffic impact associated with private flats. The student apartments will have on site management and there are no changes proposed to the external design of the building – which already has planning permission.
Drop-in event: when and where
Drop in any time to find out more:
- 4pm–7pm, Wednesday 6th December 2023
- North Kelvinside Primary school, Queen Margaret Drive
Further information
- Developers’ leaflet: Kelbourne Street flyer
- Planning appeal on GCC website (20/00062/LOCAL)
- Original plans on GCC website (20/02110/FUL)
They’re saying this change is not classed as “major” – but as I understand it the original planning permission was contingent on the car park being built. This seems quite a radical change of direction.
Leaves me wondering whether something has emerged during the preliminary work on the site that has informed their decision to abandon the car park idea. Hence the repurposing to student accommodation.
I mean it seems fanciful that someone at Kelvin Properties has suddenly said, “Wow, the student accommodation situation is still less than ideal – let’s change our entire strategy, to try and help out.” What has driven this?
This is such a bad idea. Open google maps and look at that intersection mid morning. Note the shade profile on the five story building across the street. Then consider the 10 Kelbourne development proposal and consider the shade profile on the children’s play area. One corner won’t start to warm up until afternoon. The other corner will turn into a moss garden.
North Kelvinside and Kelbourne Street are unique for its family oriented open spaces. This has all gotten a huge boost as the new school opened. It seemed like it was a place to invest in living for the long term, a place where families and older people coexist in harmony. The few students that are here either blend in or move away. Parking is not easy with the recent changes.
Beyond that from a development with parking to a claim to be serving the needs of the community with more student housings and no parking; basically means more units and more income for the developer. Not to mention radical changes to street culture and the community as students and rental properties become more dominant.
BAD IDEA in the WRONG PLACE.
I went to the drop in event last night which was not reassuring. The issues re size of the proposed building/loss of light, effect on play area don’t appear to be anything the builders will be changing. The building works will take 18 months. The situation with water which appears at the end of Kelbourne street after rain doesn’t seem to be something the builders are considering. The fact this is a residential community is not something the builders were concerned about. Rather depressing all round. The drop in event was a bit unsatisfactory in the sense that people kept dropping in so the same questions were being asked and answered over and over. A public meeting with. a set time ,would have been better.
Seems to me that the one good thing about this Change of Use proposal is that the scheme has to go in front of Planning again – and hopefully this time will face the rigours of the full Planning Committee, rather than the Local Review loophole that was exploited last time. The majority of reasons for refusing the smaller proposals for the same site (21/03226/FUL and 22/03218/FUL) apply even more-so to this larger proposal.
The fact that the massing is inappropriate, by taking the roofline from the top of the pitched roof opposite then applying that to a flat roof; the misleading sunlight calculations for the play parks by lumping them together as a single area rather than two separate areas; the increased vehicle traffic (visitors, tradespeople and delivery vans) to a building with this number of occupants, in an already congested area – these issues and more were highlighted against the original proposal. Indeed, as “reasons for refusal” in the Council’s own Planning guidance, that proposal was found contrary to CDP 1 & SG 1: Placemaking of the City Development Plan; CDP 6 & IPG 6: Green Belt and Green Network of the City Development Plan; CDP 7 & SG 7: Natural Environment of the City Development Plan; CDP 8 & SG 8: Water Environment of the City Development Plan; CDP9 and SG 9: Historic Environment of the City Development Plan. Hopefully these points will now get the full and proper scrutiny, leading to a revised proposal for a development of considerably reduced size.
The plan has been submitted
https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=dates&keyVal=S5PU0AEXFWI00
Deadline for comments 17 January 2024.
Thank you!
A quick look at the plans, average single floor design shows 25 units. So the development will now accommodate maybe 150 or so students ? The thought that stays with me, is that of the few buildings I know well on the street they average 16-20 people over four floors and eight units. Two buildings on my block (about the footprints of this development a accommodate 17 in one, 22 in the other, all two bedroom units as originally built. Where there are more than two people in a flat, they are young families and multi-generational families. Such a place . . .
Mind you behind each of these original tenements there is a sizeable garden space of the same foot print (or close to it) as the original buildings. Every proximate (historic) building in a two block radius has this pattern of housing and gardens with the exception of the firehouse development.
The western bits beyond Northumberland street have a completely different planning and development pattern. Getting the boundaries right is an essential feature of urban design – in the public interest.