Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 705 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I thought I'd start a thread for the regeneration of Tradeston as the £300 million scheme is to go before GCC in the autumn.


Tradeston 1 12 floors £300 million
Tradeston 2 11 floors
Tradeston 3 11 floors





_______________________________________________

Tradeston Tower, 17 floors


_______________________________________________

Neptunes Way, £40 million
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
Name That Bridge??

Isn't the competition winner 'Neptune's Way' Bridge the new bridge that Glasgow are running a competition to name?

[/QUOTE]

And if the bridge design itself was a competition winner, why don't they stick with the competitor's name, after all HE/SHE designed AND NAMED IT, ie the Neptune's Way Bridge :bash:
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
resistme said:
Isn't the competition winner 'Neptune's Way' Bridge the new bridge that Glasgow are running a competition to name?
And if the bridge design itself was a competition winner, why don't they stick with the competitor's name, after all HE/SHE designed AND NAMED IT, ie the Neptune's Way Bridge :bash:
Personaly i like Neptunes Way, and i think it may stick like it did to the Armadillo @ the SECC. :)


Story on the Naming of Tradeston bridge in th ET today

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/hi/news/5042472.html




DRS report on the Tradeston Bridge

Glasgow City Council
Policy and Resources Committee
Report by Director of Development and Regeneration Services
Contact: Iain Macnab Ext: 78503
Broomielaw Tradeston Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge and Public Realm Works
Purpose of Report:
To inform the Committee of the progress made to date in taking the glasgowbridge.com project
forward towards implementation.
Recommendations:
That the Committee
1. Notes the progress made in taking the glasgowbridge.com project forward to date;
2. Instructs the Director of Development and Regeneration Services to report to Committee
at the Contractor Appointment milestone.
3. Approves the proposals detailed in the report to assist the identification of a suitable name
for the bridge.
Ward No(s): 17, 54 Citywide:
Local member(s) advised: Yes X No Consulted: Yes No
L:\Cmtserv\POL&RES\PARENT\MEETINGS\Meetings 2005\230805\Item 9.doc
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 At its meeting on 4 May 2004, the Policy and Resources Committee agreed that :
• Faithful and Gould should be appointed as Lead Consultant for the
glasgowbridge.com project.
• the Director of DRS places an advert in the OJEU to commence the process for
appointing the contractor.
• the Director of Development and Regeneration Services reports to Committee at
the Contractor Appointment milestone.
1.2 Further to this, at its meeting on 9 November 2004, the Policy and Resources Committee
noted that :-
• the total gross expenditure on the Glasgow Bridge/Broomielaw Public Realm
Phase 2 Project was currently estimated at £31.5 million.
• the gross costs of ancillary works within the Broomielaw area was currently
costed at £3.1 million.
• the total estimated cost of the project therefore amounted to £34.6 million.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Since the agreement by Committee to progress with this project, the Project Steering
Group has now achieved the following:
• Appointed the project’s Lead Consultant, Faithful & Gould.
• Secured planning consent on 14 October 2004
• Secured Listed Building Consent on 27 October 2004
• Secured a £4.7m ERDF grant towards the project costs.
• Applied to Scottish Enterprise Glasgow (SEG) for co-funding.
• Arranged the relocation of the Renfrew Ferry from Tradeston to the Broomielaw.
• Concluded the missives with Euroyachts Ltd to relinquish the lease at Tradeston.
• Applied for a Section 75 consent to the Scottish Executive .
• Commissioned Hamilton Glen, Chartered Surveyors, to research the viability of
the Pod and the Broomielaw pavilions in the current foodservice market.
• Adjusted the design to incorporate the proposed Clyde Corridor Translink
transport system.
• Liaised with Alburn Tradeston Ltd, the preferred developer for Tradeston, on
design and construction programme issues.
• Issued the tender for the construction works.
L:\Cmtserv\POL&RES\PARENT\MEETINGS\Meetings 2005\230805\Item 9.doc
3 PROJECT ADJUSTMENTS
3.1 The original competition submission incorporated several elements which were not
included in the final brief for the project:
• A ‘Pod’ Structure in the river adjacent to West Street (not costed).
• A River Basin built back from the Tradeston river edge to the west of West
Street.
• A Public Building or hotel overlooking the New River Basin to the west of West
Street (not costed).
• An Underground Car Park under Tradeston Public Realm.
3.2 Pod Structure
Hamilton Glen, Chartered Surveyors, carried out a feasibility study that concluded that
the construction of this expensive element would not attract an economically viable use.
The Pod was not taken up in the project, and was not included in the costings above.
3.3 River Basin
This element of the project has been omitted as it was never part of the original project
brief.
3.4 Public Building or Hotel
This proposed addition, incorporated in the winning project submission, was omitted as it
was never part of the original brief nor was it allowed for in the original competition
submission costs. The option for a landmark building on this site still however exists
since the site is contained within the boundary of the site of the Alburn/Council
Development Agreement area in Tradeston
3.5 Underground Car Park / New Quay Wall
Since the submission of the winning design, proposals submitted by Alburn Tradeston Ltd
to move the building line forward across Clyde Place have included underground car
parks in each urban block. This component has therefore been removed from the
project The existing quay wall is now to be replaced and not refurbished as was the
original proposal.
3.6 Clyde Corridor Transport System
During the development of the design a transport corridor was incorporated adjacent to
the Broomielaw highway to accommodate the future proposals for the Clyde Corridor
Translink transport system.
4 CONTRACTOR APPOINTMENT
4.1 The initial advert in the OJEU attracted 8 expressions of interest from contractors, of
whom 5 were short listed. However 3 have subsequently withdrawn citing the buoyancy
of the construction market, and the difficulty of finding suitable sub-contractors for the
specialist work involved, as the main reason for their withdrawal.
L:\Cmtserv\POL&RES\PARENT\MEETINGS\Meetings 2005\230805\Item 9.doc
4.2 During the bridge’s detailed design stage it became apparent that due to its unique
nature, the appointment of a contractor prior to finalizing the detailed design of the bridge
would be a risk to the Council. With the detailed design now complete, the contract can
be tendered allowing a Value Engineering exercise to be undertaken in the work
associated with the bridge’s deck, arch and foundations and the methods to be employed
for their fabrication, construction and erection.
4.3 In order to keep the remaining contractors abreast of the project’s development, pretender
meetings were held which have been beneficial to all parties allowing the
formation of early partnerships with the potential contractors.
4.3.1 Tenders were issued on the 29 July 2005 for a return on the 4 October 2005. The
contractor’s appointment is to be made under the Engineering & Construction Contract
(ECC), 2nd Edition, Option C, Target Contract with Activity Schedules. The intention is to
let the construction contract in December.
5 PROJECT FINANCE
5.1 The Project remains within the original committee approval (9 November2004) with net
costs presently projected as £34.6m inclusive of fees.
5.2 Following an evaluation of the variety of contract types available to the Council, the
Director of DRS and the Chief Executive (Legal) propose to use the ECC form of contract
as it allows for an equitable distribution of risk between the client (Council) and the
contractor. The ECC contract introduces a “Pain and Gain” mechanism that allows for
the Council to share in any savings achieved or conversely to share in any additional cost
up to an agreed level. This form of contract requires an open book approach.
5.3 Scottish Enterprise Glasgow (SEG) are progressing an application for co-funding to
complement the Council’s and ERDF funding for the construction phases of the Project.
5.4 Ongoing consultations / presentations have been made with Land Services staff and a
full set of tender documentation has been passed to them for comment and consideration
of required maintenance costs.
6 LEGAL AND PROGRAMMING ISSUESE
6.1 Legal procedures still to be concluded are the approval under Section 75 of the Roads
Scotland Act 1984 to build a public highway over a navigable stretch of water, and the
granting of the scheme under the Coastal Protection Act 1949. Both are required before
the construction contract can be awarded. Subject to these being satisfactorily
concluded, the project programme indicates commencement on site in December 2005
with a completion date of autumn 2007.
6.2 The Section 75 was advertised in the Glasgow Herald on the 20 August 2004 and a
decision is still awaited. Three Objections are currently being addressed. Once
approved, an application will be made for the granting of the scheme under the Coastal
Protection Act 1949. Committee should note that both a Section 75 and Coastal
Protection Act 1949 approval have already been granted by the Scottish Executive for the
Finnieston Bridge which lies downstream of the Broomielaw/Tradeston Bridge.
L:\Cmtserv\POL&RES\PARENT\MEETINGS\Meetings 2005\230805\Item 9.doc
6.3 Agreement with Crown Estates and Clydeport with regard to river foundations and the
pontoon remains to be concluded. Both organisations have indicated there are no
objections in principal.
6.4 Agreement has also been reached with Clydeport to progress the possible purchase of
the Clydeport car park on the Broomielaw. This acquisition will also assist with the
options for routing the proposed Clyde Corridor Translink transport system. Formalisation
of this acquisition has now commenced.
6.5 Detailed discussions are also ongoing with Alburn Tradeston Ltd to ensure that the
construction of the glasgowbridge project and their development proposals can progress
in tandem. Issues surrounding this will form part of the Heads of Terms in the formal
agreement with Alburn Tradeston Ltd, the preferred developer for Tradeston.
7 BRIDGE NAME
7.1 Since the inception of the Broomielaw / Tradeston Bridge there has been a desire to
secure a suitable permanent name. The intention is that the Policy and Resources
(Regeneration of the Clyde) Working Group will choose the bridge name following a
consultation with the public through the local media, and through an opportunity to view
the latest project model.
7.2 The model of the Bridge is currently on display in the foyer of the City Chambers, and will
remain there until early September. Further opportunities to display the model
elsewhere are under consideration to ensure that the general public have the opportunity
to express a view on possible names. The official name would be announced at the
contractor appointment stage.
8. SERVICE ISSUES
Financial Issues The project is currently expected to be in line with the original
budget
Legal Issues Detailed in section 6 above
Personnel None
Service Plan This project is identified within the DRS Services Service Plan
(Section 4.10 – River Clyde Regeneration.
Development and Regeneration Services
IM
16 August 2005
 

·
Jacobsian sentimentalist
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Yeah seriously what was wrong with Neptunes Way? Ok it has nothing to do with Glasgow but it has a ring to it.

Other options (I'm scratching me head here):

1. the spinaker ? (as sailing ships used to come up the Clyde to the Broomielaw and the curves does knid of echo a full sail. Er... shame Portsmouth got there first)

2. The stern? (it looks more like a stern than a bow to me)

3. The 'I'm the king of world' bridge? (ok if it is a bow of a ship why not go for a Titanic cheesy tribute?)

4. The meander? (well its a long way to go a short cut)

5. The curve? (barf...too pretentious and iconic sounding. Will date fast)

6. The Irn Bru bridge! (made in Scotland from girders...or will it be?)

Or what about the Henry Bell bridge? A connection to one of the great men of the Clyde plus we would have two Bells bridges on the river! Hurrah!
 

·
School for Scoundrels
Joined
·
75 Posts
Tradeston

I suppose it's curtains for this building on the corner of Centre Street if/ when construction gets underway that is?.


Pity! I kinda like it minus the corner shop decor on the lower portion. Mind you it does add a splash of colour! :)

 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
Looks like some of the original elements of the tradeston project will not go ahead as originaly planed I:e the Pod and underground car park and probably the public building.. shame.....:| i was looking forward to the pod being a focus piont for people to gather on the south side of the bridge.



The proposals comprise:
• A new pedestrian and cyclist crossing over the River Clyde between the districts of
Broomielaw on the north bank and Tradeston on the south bank;
• New public realm works on both the north and south banks by way of quality linear parklands;
• A new 80 space basement car park on the south bank;
• Five new pavilions on the north bank; and
• A new ‘magnet’ building known as the ‘Pod’ on the River Clyde adjacent to the south landing
point of the bridge structure.

A ‘Pod’ Structure in the river adjacent to West Street (not costed).

Pod Structure
Hamilton Glen, Chartered Surveyors, carried out a feasibility study that concluded that
the construction of this expensive element would not attract an economically viable use.
The Pod was not taken up in the project, and was not included in the costings above.


During the development of the project, some elements had been removed or
adjusted to keep pace with the new developments proposed for the area of the river
corridor, these being pod structure, river basin, public building or hotel and an underground car park;

3 PROJECT ADJUSTMENTS
3.1 The original competition submission incorporated several elements which were not
included in the final brief for the project:
• A ‘Pod’ Structure in the river adjacent to West Street (not costed).
• A River Basin built back from the Tradeston river edge to the west of West
Street.
• A Public Building or hotel overlooking the New River Basin to the west of West
Street (not costed).
• An Underground Car Park under Tradeston Public Realm.
3.2 Pod Structure
Hamilton Glen, Chartered Surveyors, carried out a feasibility study that concluded that
the construction of this expensive element would not attract an economically viable use.
The Pod was not taken up in the project, and was not included in the costings above.
3.3 River Basin
This element of the project has been omitted as it was never part of the original project
brief.
3.4 Public Building or Hotel
This proposed addition, incorporated in the winning project submission, was omitted as it
was never part of the original brief nor was it allowed for in the original competition
submission costs. The option for a landmark building on this site still however exists
since the site is contained within the boundary of the site of the Alburn/Council
Development Agreement area in Tradeston
3.5 Underground Car Park / New Quay Wall
Since the submission of the winning design, proposals submitted by Alburn Tradeston Ltd
to move the building line forward across Clyde Place have included underground car
parks in each urban block. This component has therefore been removed from the
project The existing quay wall is now to be replaced and not refurbished as was the
original proposal.
3.6 Clyde Corridor Transport System
During the development of the design a transport corridor was incorporated adjacent to
the Broomielaw highway to accommodate the future proposals for the Clyde Corridor
Translink transport system.
4 CONTRACTOR APPOINTMENT
4.1 The initial advert in the OJEU attracted 8 expressions of interest from contractors, of
whom 5 were short listed. However 3 have subsequently withdrawn citing the buoyancy
of the construction market, and the difficulty of finding suitable sub-contractors for the
specialist work involved, as the main reason for their withdrawal
.


Heres one i made earlier :)

 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
gleegieboy said:
The pod was (IMO) daft. The restaurants/bars and cafes along the new promenade are much more important.
The restaurants and bars in the promenade were always in the plans, the pod would have been an extra special addition where we needed novelty space for the public to sit on the river and enjoy a 360 degree view of the suroundings..maybe not a lot to see but still an overall view of the clyde.
 

·
MORI
Joined
·
8,646 Posts
£300m Clyde scheme set for green light

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/print/news/5043385.shtml

A £300MILLION development of homes, shops and restaurants on the banks of the River Clyde in Glasgow was set to be given the go-ahead today.

Planning officials have backed proposals to build almost 1000 flats and leisure facilities on a rundown area south of the river and councillors were likely to officially approve the scheme.


AN ARTIST'S impression of how the £300m Tradeston development will look
 

·
Craaaaaazy Mutha F^cka
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
The pob would have been a good night club, I can just imagine being out my face looking at the lights on the kingston bridge and dribbling as some ned tries to get friendly with me in a dark corner of that crystal structure.

Ooops shouldn't speak out my thoughts!!
 
1 - 20 of 705 Posts
Top