Public will be asked if they back business leaders’ city square bid

By Morag Lindsay

Published: 05/01/2010

This is what could replace Aberdeen’s Union Terrace Gardens if the north-east public lend their support to the new city square being proposed by business leaders.

An eight-week public consultation on the £140million scheme to raise the gardens and cover over the Denburn dual carriageway and neighbouring railway line begins on Monday.

People will be asked if they back the civic square bid, led by ACSEF (Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future) with a £50million pledge from Sir Ian Wood and, if so, what they would like to see included.

But the omission from the consultation of a proposed new cultural centre was last night condemned by Peacock Visual Arts spokeswoman.

ACSEF chairman Tom Smith said the design, adapted from the feasibility study into the scheme, should act as a springboard for the public’s own ideas. He said: “We want people to start to imagine what could happen in such a space and share our excitement about the amazing potential.”

Mr Smith moved to deflect criticism that the project was about concreting over the historic green heart of the city.

He said the ambition was for gardens to make up at least half of the five-acre site – about the same as at present – but the open, street-level layout would also be suitable for market stalls, a Christmas tree and ice rink in winter and outdoor concerts, plays and opera in fairer weather, with European-style pavement cafes stretching down from Belmont Street.

He said: “We will be researching gardens and international garden designers around the world and may even launch an international design competition to see how we could deliver something extra-special and unique within the city square project.”

One option which will not feature in the consultation is the £13million centre proposed by Peacock Visual Arts, which had already secured funding and planning permission when the ACSEF project was announced.

The Scottish Arts Council, which was bankrolling the centre, with Aberdeen City Council and Scottish Enterprise, agreed to extend its deadline for Peacock to take up a £4.3million grant, but that too is running out and the whole future of the plan is now in jeopardy. An online petition in support of the Peacock bid had attracted 3,877 signatures yesterday.

Mr Smith said its omission from the consultation was deliberate, but there could still be a place for the arts in the civic square. “It would be completely inappropriate to consult on a scheme which already has planning permission and, therefore, we have not included the Peacock design in this consultation exercise,” he said. “However, there is the potential for a contemporary arts centre within our scheme and ACSEF is adamant that a cultural centre with wider appeal as part of the bigger scheme is a compelling proposition.”

A spokeswoman for Peacock Visual Arts said it was a “great disappointment” that its centre did not figure in the consultation, and the citizens of Aberdeen were being denied the right to have an informed debate on the full range of options.

“All Peacock would like is to be part of a fair, open and inclusive process of consultation,” she said. She added that the fact that the consultation was being paid for with public money made it even more important that it should be transparent.

“People must get the chance to show their support for alternative uses of the gardens, including Peacock's new arts centre which has had more than £1million of public money invested in it to date,” she said.

“The confirmation today that the public will not be consulted on anything other than Sir Ian's scheme means that this money risks being wasted while additional public money is spent on consulting on Sir Ian's scheme.”

Reader's Comments

It is a shame that our ACSEF can only see a concret expanse in the centre of town. Flat, boring and not many trees. How can they plant trees when there is nothing underneath??? As usual our civic leaders bow to prsssure from the monied folks. Perhaps if our council had not neglected this green area in the first place. It was always a populer place and much appreciated, until our illustrious council saw fit to disown it. Shame on them. Espcially now when being blackmailed by Sir Wood with his millions. What about the Peocock they have literally had a knife stuck in their bakcs by these supposed lovers of Aberdeen. Instead of the Union Square Mall they should have improved and upgraded Union Street. Will they never learn
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

£140m... That's at least 100 start up or spin out companies and I'd rather have those than an Ian Wood memorial park.
Wee Scamp
Report this comment

ACSEF chairman Tom Smith said the design, adapted from the feasibility study into the scheme, should act as a springboard for the public’s own ideas. He said: “We want people to start to imagine what could happen in such a space and share our excitement about the amazing potential." I met him and said "I'd like to see the PVA building in there thanks" - and I got "that's not an option"... so there you go, they want to HEAR your thoughts, but don't actually care if it's not what THEY want to hear.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

You know the saying " Do as I say not as I do" They are only giving lip service, as usual they will please themselves. They always do. I have written to councelors before and the replies were usually " We know better than you" So what a more waste of money asking for public opinion when it it a foregone conclusion they will do what they want. Pander to the millionairs
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

It's absolutely unbelievable that the Peacock Centre is not even part of the consultation. If the ACSEF had any respect for the people of Aberdeen, or any confidence that they had a better proposal they would include it. Clearly they have neither, so the consultation goes ahead without the only proposal that has any integrity whatsoever.
Iain Kay
Report this comment

The Press and Journal is happy to encourage discussion and debate on the topics featured within our newspaper and on our website.

However, we would urge people to respect the opinions of others even if they do not agree with them. We will not tolerate abusive comments of any type and such posts will be removed with the people responsible facing a ban from this website.

Only registered users can supply comments, and your registered name and location will automatically be appended to any comment that you upload.

We reserve the right to remove comments from anyone using a false name or pseudonym.

To post a comment, please login using the form at the top of the page, or click to register.