The demolition of a 1930s building which one housed Glasgow students is to go ahead despite objections, after plans to create new homes at the former Jordanhill teacher training campus were approved.

Glasgow’s planning committee has given the go-ahead to a proposal for 35 homes despite community opposition.

Douglas House, which was built in 1934 as student accommodation, will now be knocked down to make way for the housing.

The developer, Cala Homes West, had planned to convert the building, but told the council that restoration is now “unviable”.

It is not a listed building so planning permission for the demolition was not required, however 17 objections to the plans were submitted to the council.

As well as opposing the demolition, objectors were also concerned about the quality of the housing proposed and a lack of engagement with the community.

Iain Wotherspoon, of the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland, said: “The society objects to the proposed demolition of Douglas House.

“There does not seem to be a compelling structural reason for this demolition; any damp and other issues with the property would seem to have been caused by neglect of the building and could be rectified.

“The building would make a far greater contribution to the area than yet more bland houses.”

However, council officers reported that Douglas House was the least important of three buildings on the site and did not have “any statutory protection”.

Under Cala’s plans, Graham House and the David Stow building will be retained.

A statement submitted by Cala claimed restoring Douglas House was “unviable due to the extremely poor condition of the building fabric which has become evident through opening up investigations”.

The building’s structure and fabric is “far worse than originally anticipated”, they added, and has continued to “deteriorate with water ingress and increasing corrosion”.

A spokesperson for Jordanhill Community Council said Douglas House contributes to the “historical, social architectural, landscape, aesthetic and design significance of the site”.

They argued it was “imperative” to retain the building in order to maintain the relationship with the other buildings on the land.

Councillors had continued the item in June to allow for further information to be provided and voted to grant planning permission on Tuesday.