What IS the tallest building?

[RapidAssistant]

Settle a debate I am having with a few folk; it mirrors what is in the Wikipedia entry on the subject but would be interesting to get some folks opinions anyway. What IS Glasgow's tallest building? It seems to be three different structures, depending on whose view you take:

- Science Centre Tower - ultimately the tallest freestanding structure, but NOT a building in the strictest sense of the word.

- Gallowgate Twin Towers (Bluevale/Whitevale St) - the tallest building overall at 90.8 metres, but not the tallest in terms of occupied floor level (28, versus 30 for the Red Road multis)

- Red Road - the tallest in terms of highest occupied floor (30), and the roof (31st floor) is the highest man made point above sea level within the city boundary at which it is possible for a person to stand.

Whadya think?

Also - given both the Gallowgate Twins and Red Road are condemned, what will take their place as tallest building once they are gone. Popular belief is that it is the Balgrayhill multis which are 25 storeys high. Assuming that none of the pie in the sky schemes proposed for the city centre don't happen by then, of course.

[pingu]

- Red Road - the tallest in terms of highest occupied floor (30), and the roof (31st floor) is the highest man made point above sea level within the city boundary at which it is possible for a person to stand.

the highest point you can stand on a man made object is Balgrayhill flats because of the hill....from the top you look down on red road.

id imagine the highest you can stand and still be on the ground is the flag pole in springburn park...im not sure tho

[Boxer6]

- Red Road - the tallest in terms of highest occupied floor (30), and the roof (31st floor) is the highest man made point above sea level within the city boundary at which it is possible for a person to stand.

the highest point you can stand on a man made object is Balgrayhill flats because of the hill....from the top you look down on red road.

id imagine the highest you can stand and still be on the ground is the flag pole in springburn park...im not sure tho

Yes indeed - been on the 24th floor a few times myself, and they're also slightly taller than the Viewpoint flats across the road. Excellent views! I'm sure it was on this very forum I learned Balgrayhill is the highest point in Glasgow.

[BrigitDoon]

I would have thought the top of Dougrie Place in Castlemilk to be higher.

[Avenger]

Are we not talking about different things? One is the highest point you can get to ie tall building on a hill, the other is thetallest building, from ground to the roof, no matter where situated, and a possible third is the highest point (no building). If 25 storey buildings are contenders, the 25's in the Wyndford must be in with a shout. If I'd been asked, I would have said the flagpole at ruchill park was the highest point in glasgow, I have a vague recollection of being told that rubble had been dumped there, increasing it's height.

[BrigitDoon]

I think the whole idea is that we discuss the various ideas without actually coming to a conclusion.

...I have a vague recollection of being told that rubble had been dumped there, increasing it's height.

I can see all the way to Dexter from the top of that grocer's apostrophe

[Mori]

Anniesland Court is a 24-storey residential tower block in the Anniesland area of Glasgow, Scotland, designed by J Holmes & Partners and completed in 1968. It is the tallest listed building in Scotland, and is remarkably similar to Ernő Goldfinger's later and more famous Trellick Tower in London. It is the only tower block in Glasgow to have been granted category A listed status, the highest level of protection for an occupied building in Scotland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anniesland_Court

[oddjobby]

Mori, I am intrigued. I had no idea that a towerblock could be a listed building. I don't know why, perhaps because there are so many. Thanks!

[RapidAssistant]

Mori, I am intrigued. I had no idea that a towerblock could be a listed building. I don't know why, perhaps because there are so many. Thanks!

Any building that is unique or one of a kind qualifies - and there is no other tower block like Anniesland Court in the city. Let's face it 95% of the multis in Glasgow were off-the-peg, system built to generic designs, but a tiny number are that wee bit special I guess in the eyes of some people. Three I would have argued for Grade B listed status at least (sticking my neck out here, I am prepared for some flak over these nominations...but I am thick-skinned), but other events have overtaken them are:

- The Gallowgate Twins; for their unique and powerful design - but sadly their dire reputation has overtaken them and now they are condemned. If those towers were in a different area and had been "yuppified", it would have been different.

- Hutchesontown B, (by Robert Matthew) of all the Gorbals multis they were by far the best, and again, had a distinct look to them and not generic in any way. Spoiled now by all the crappy embellishments that were added and ruined even more by overcladding.

- The three Anderston Centre blocks, like the Hutchie B towers they were designed by a famous architect (Richard Seifert), but again the integrity of the Brutalist design has been ruined by the addition of overcladding and tacky neon lighting.

I think the crux of it is that because everyone associates high rise council housing with decay, crime and failed urban regeneration schemes of the 1960s is that all tower blocks are automatically "bad" and should be removed. Not so - look at the Barbican Estate in London. It is designed just like any other 1960s Le Corbusier-inspired high-rise scheme, and its collection of 30-storey towers isn't a million miles away from Red Road in conception but because it is privately owned and populated by affluent City workers, it has a totally different reputation. And it is listed I believe.

Interesting debate!

[Josef]

What RA said.

[rabmania]

Seconded. I spent a couple of days last week around the Barbican. Fab.

[neilmc]

- The three Anderston Centre blocks, like the Hutchie B towers they were designed by a famous architect (Richard Seifert), but again the integrity of the Brutalist design has been ruined by the addition of overcladding and tacky neon lighting.

I've previously posted this on the 'Anderston' thread, and shows what was originally intended:-



Note the three additional, taller, residential blocks; and I reckon the large block in the upper centre (on what is now the Marriot car park) could've been a contender for tallest building in Glasgow.

But look at that building top right (on the site of what became the Albany Hotel) - why didn't they build that?

[RapidAssistant]

- The three Anderston Centre blocks, like the Hutchie B towers they were designed by a famous architect (Richard Seifert), but again the integrity of the Brutalist design has been ruined by the addition of overcladding and tacky neon lighting.

I've previously posted this on the 'Anderston' thread, and shows what was originally intended:-



Note the three additional, taller, residential blocks; and I reckon the large block in the upper centre (on what is now the Marriot car park) could've been a contender for tallest building in Glasgow.

But look at that building top right (on the site of what became the Albany Hotel) - why didn't they build that?

Agreed - The Albany Hotel was rather bland (I thought it was a lot younger than 1973, but there you go..)
although you can see that the proposed building is pure Richard Seifert in design terms - in it you can see echoes of Centre Point and some of his hotel towers that still exist in London.

I also like what is on the Argyle Street side (which is now where the Cuprum Building/Argyle Tower stands) - it actually has windows unlike the faceless concrete box that eventually materialised (the one that had the illuminated red "The Anderston Centre" sign on it) The massive large tower where the Marriott car park is now, mercifully didn't get built I think it knocks the whole thing out of balance. But the Cadogan Square office block more or less made it into reality exactly as the drawing.

Here is a great video, if you wait until 7 minutes 40 seconds there is a fantastic shot of the scale model of the Anderston Centre (which apparently still exists), which is more or less like that rendering. You can also, if you pause it at the right spot - see where the Bridge to Nowhere was supposed to go!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MioxCIa5 ... re=related

[Mori]

Mori, I am intrigued. I had no idea that a towerblock could be a listed building. I don't know why, perhaps because there are so many. Thanks!

The A listing is because the style used to design the building is Art Deco.

SSN

Building Specification
Status Complete
Construction start date1966
Completion date1968
Renovation Date1986
Heritage Status Grade I
Market Data
Primary UseResidential
Flats126

Style Art Deco

Roof Height (AGL)66.00

Total Floors (O.G)23

[oddjobby]

I think the crux of it is that because everyone associates high rise council housing with decay, crime and failed urban regeneration schemes of the 1960s is that all tower blocks are automatically "bad" and should be removed. Not so - look at the Barbican Estate in London. It is designed just like any other 1960s Le Corbusier-inspired high-rise scheme, and its collection of 30-storey towers isn't a million miles away from Red Road in conception but because it is privately owned and populated by affluent City workers, it has a totally different reputation. And it is listed I believe.

That's a good point!

Thanks for posting the pictures Mori and Rapid, it's given me a perspective of where they are. I think I've actually been in one of the top flats at a party in one of the Anderston towers (is it near Cadogan Street?) and the view over the city was excellent. I don't remember anything special about the interior of the flat other than the glass partition wall, which was an interesting feature in an otherwise bland space.

Thanks for the information guys!