Plea for compromise over plans for gardens

By Morag Lindsay

Published: 20/01/2010

One of the world’s leading architects was in Aberdeen last night to launch an exhibition which aims to save the city’s historic Union Terrace Gardens.

Edgar Gonzalez said he wanted to find a compromise between supporters of Sir Ian Wood’s plan to build a city square on the site and those behind the proposed Peacock Visual Arts centre.

The two sides have been split since Sir Ian revealed his £140million vision, just as Peacock was about to begin work on its contemporary arts centre, built into the slope of the gardens.

The Aberdeen public are being asked for their views on Sir Ian’s proposal in a major consultation led by Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (ACSEF).

Critics have complained it is too narrow and people are being asked only if they support the city square or the retention of the gardens in their current form, with no mention of the stalled Peacock scheme.

The new exhibition, taking place at the art organisation’s existing base in the Castlegate until February 20, asks: “What if ACSEF’s idea for a civic square and Peacock’s design for a new cultural centre could co-exist?”

It features a series of designs drawn up by Mr Gonzalez after he was invited by Scottish Enterprise Grampian to attend a meeting with the architects behind the city square plan in an effort to end the stalemate between ACSEF and Peacock at the end of 2008.

Mr Gonzalez’s practice, Brisac Gonzalez, came up with the original design for the Peacock centre, which had secured planning permission and 75% of its £13million cost when the alternative proposal was aired. His challenge was to explore options which might satisfy both sides, fulfilling ACSEF’s aim of creating a safer, more connected vibrant city, while preserving the Victorian gardens.

He came up with a number of options which cover over the Denburn dual-carriageway and the railway with a mix of green space and hardscaping, opening up the rear of Belmont Street to the public, but allowing the Peacock centre to go ahead as planned on the opposite slope.

Mr Gonzalez also looked at the wider picture and suggested Aberdeen should do more to enhance its existing civic spaces, such as the Castlegate, the Green, and Golden Square.

He also questioned the need for a five-acre city square, saying it would be of a similar scale to Red Square in Moscow, a city of 8million people, compared to Aberdeen’s population of about 200,000.

Last night, he said he was struck by the dramatic beauty of Union Terrace Gardens the first time he visited the city and wanted to do everything possible to persuade Aberdonians they should preserve the special attraction.

“We all want to see Aberdeen going forward as a better, more vibrant city, but we’re not convinced that erasing the Denburn valley is the best or most deliverable solution,” he added.

ACSEF chairman Tom Smith insisted yesterday his group was also keen to reach a compromise, but said the Peacock design could not be integrated within the parameters of its vision.

He said: “A positive outcome of today’s ‘What If?’ event would be that the arts community is prepared to work with ACSEF so that together we can develop proposals that would radically transform our city centre and provide the economic benefits we need, but also create a cultural arts hub that would enable a cultural revolution in Aberdeen city and shire.”

Reader's Comments

Would Edinburgh build over and ruin Princes Street Gardens? I think not!
Andrew Stephen
Report this comment

Would Edinburgh build over and ruin Princes Street Gardens? I think not!
Andrew Stephen
Report this comment

When will ACSEF start to understand that it is not just 'the arts community' (what's the definition of that anyway) that want to save the gardens AND see the benefits of a -sensitively designed - contemporary art centre for Aberdeen? Why don't they just admit that all their proposal is about is creating real estate and the most real estate will be created by building a streetlevel deck. End. Why do they still say they want to create a 'cultural hub' if they keep on using the term 'arts community' in a negative way? (i.e. 'vocal minority')
nina higgs
Report this comment

What this exhibition, article and Tom Smith's uneducated comments on Brisac Gonzalez' ideas shows is ACSEF's reluctance to consider anything other than a full decking option. The designs on show last night were all put together in mind of maintaining the Gardens and completing ACSEF's objectives. As Edgar put it last night, there is no council appraisal or ACSEF document from before Sir Ian's offer that identifies the Denburn Valley as a problem, gap site or chasm. The real issue here is the fact that Sir Ian's offer is not open to compromise, it must be "walk on, walk off" from Union Street, Rosemount Viaduct and Union Terrace and if it is not, and if the public don't want it then he will invest nothing. 21st Century philanthropy investing in a 25 year old plan which has never happened because it is not necessary.
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

Agree with Andrew Stephen entirely.
John Murray
Report this comment

I see a good "Torry Loon" like Edgar Gonzalez really knows what's good us Aberdonians then. If he has ever been to Moscow he'll know there's a lot more than Red Square. They have a small Arts Center there also I think it's called the Bolshoi Theatre!!!
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

How could there ever be a compromise with Ian Wood and Co when he has laid down a no compromise plan in order to use his money? The last thing we need in Aberdeen is yet another "Grey Square" shopping area and carpark. The guardens as they are right now are a great - ONLY - way to escape the shopping, the traffic and the urban environment right in the very centre. Peacocks plan to *enhance* the gardens further making it more appealing and safer to use are the only sensible plans in my opinion.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

How could there ever be a compromise with Ian Wood and Co when he has laid down a no compromise plan in order to use his money? The last thing we need in Aberdeen is yet another "Grey Square" shopping area and carpark. The guardens as they are right now are a great - ONLY - way to escape the shopping, the traffic and the urban environment right in the very centre. Peacocks plan to *enhance* the gardens further making it more appealing and safer to use are the only sensible plans in my opinion.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Only last week Sir Ian said: "I understand the arts community have their heart set on a particular building built in a particular way". And now Acsef tell us that the £50m pledge is contingent on one option only - the one that creates a multi-storey building in the excavated gardens. The option that Acsef's feasability study says repeatedly will contain a 490 space car park. That's the only option Sir Ian Wood will support. One more thing - the "public consultation" is being paid for by the City Council and Scottish Enterprise, as Sir Ian doesn't appear to want to back his vision prior to it getting planning permission. The planning process will cost millions. Who will pay for that once the consultation fudges a "result" out of fear of losing this highly conditional patronage?
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

How could there ever be a compromise with Ian Wood and Co when he has laid down a no compromise plan in order to use his money? The last thing we need in Aberdeen is yet another "Grey Square" shopping area and carpark. The guardens as they are right now are a great - ONLY - way to escape the shopping, the traffic and the urban environment right in the very centre. Peacocks plan to *enhance* the gardens further making it more appealing and safer to use are the only sensible plans in my opinion.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Can ACSEF please inform me of exactly who this separate stand alone entity 'the Arts community' is please if not citizens of Aberdeen? Also, can it not be said that ACSEF and the Wood square should 'work with' those pushing the accepted and ready to begin building, more or less, Arts Centre. This no compromise stance is simply proving that the best interests of Aberdeen are very far from core to the ideology of the City Square project. Mr Wood, show that you truly care about the city and its citizens and move your own goal posts. I fear that if not you will come, in time, to look rather insincere in your love of Aberdeen and your reputation may wane and legacy become folly.
Jim Ewen
Report this comment

"The arts community" I wish they would stop kidding themselves into believing it's just the art community who are against the Acsef plans, it's far beyond that right now.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

"ACSEF chairman Tom Smith insisted yesterday his group was also keen to reach a compromise, but said the Peacock design could not be integrated within the parameters of its vision." Perhaps ACSEF should look up the definition of compromise. Destroying the entire gardens and showing no willingness at all to adopt any aspect of Peacock's award winning design, which already has full planning approval, is no compromise. It's simply stubbornly restating the same stance they've had since day one, that the only option ACSEF want considered is Ian Wood's "vision".
Christopher Officer
Report this comment

"arts community" "silent majority" pointed outdated rhetoric. At the end of the day even if the problem lay with simply the arts community ACSEF are an advisory body working for Aberdeen City and Shire and it's people, so they should be "working with" the arts community not vice versa. Attempting to marginalise this to one demographic and then attacking that demographic because they don't want to see a huge money-eating monstrosity in the centre of town at the cost of a Garden, in effect ACSEF are demonising a portion of the community and ignoring the genuine issues that a high proportion of the people have about the plan.
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

All of the above hold their hands up if they've made use of the trainy park in the last 5 years?
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, in the summer yes I have and plenty people do. Not as often as I would like to use it but that's where Peacocks solution comes in perfectly.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

"All of the above hold their hands up if they've made use of the trainy park in the last 5 years?" One of the biggest falsehoods promoted by ACSEF is that the gardens are never used. I worked in the city centre for 2 years and walked past the gardens every day. There was always people relaxing in them, eating lunch, excercising or meeting friends. Except when it rained, but I don't see how a windswept, open air, concrete expanse will be any more appealing in the wet than a green garden full of trees.
Christopher Officer
Report this comment

Sandy, in the summer yes I have and plenty people do. Not as often as I would like to use it but that's where Peacocks solution comes in perfectly.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Not as often as I would like and walked past the gardens every day. Just as I thought point proved!
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

"Not as often as I would like and walked past the gardens every day. Just as I thought point proved!" Sandy, with spin like that you should work for ACSEF! I walked past them everyday to get to work. I've used the gardens many times in the last 5 years when I have been in the area and wanted somewhere to eat lunch or relax. Or even just stopped to admire the gardens from above. You don't have to go into them to use them. That's the great thing about a green space, it can be enjoyed in many ways.
Christopher Officer
Report this comment

Sandy, in the summer yes I have and plenty people do. Not as often as I would like to use it but that's where Peacocks solution comes in perfectly.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Sandy, how many of the above use the library? "Hands up" Should we destroy this too? "point" irrelevant.
Graeme Smith
Report this comment

I will raise my hand and say that I make use of the gardens. It's one of the few places in the middle of the city where you can enjoy pleasant surroundings of grass and trees. Makes you feel a bit more human when you can escape the grey harshness of the city for a bit. Perhaps those keen to give the impression that they don't ever set foot in the gardens may also be keen to ignore just how many other people do.
Mark McAulay
Report this comment

Sandy, in the summer yes I have and plenty people do. Not as often as I would like to use it but that's where Peacocks solution comes in perfectly.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Libraries are a thing of the past. We've got the biggest library at our fingertips it's called the Internet. Sorry for stating the obvious but we live in a whole new world nowadays. Try going to the library and look up Luddites and Nimbys.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

I've used the UT gardens a lot more than the public library. That does not make me assume that the library is of no use to the public.
Anita Jean Stewart
Report this comment

Sandy, in the summer yes I have and plenty people do. Not as often as I would like to use it but that's where Peacocks solution comes in perfectly.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

The internet complements libraries it doesn't replace them. If you think we can replace them with the internet society is doomed.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

The internet complements libraries it doesn't replace them. If you think we can replace them with the internet society is doomed.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

The internet complements libraries it doesn't replace them. If you think we can replace them with the internet society is doomed.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Echo!
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Sandy, try going to the internet (as the library is so old and irrelevant) and look up "straw man". Your argument suggests that it ought to be fine to demolish Pittordrie, every church in town, the theatre, etc etc and so on, just because not everyone uses them. It's clearly nonsensical. As many folk have stated here, 1: the gardens ARE used, and 2: they offer benefit from simply being there - it's a great view of the gardens from the viaduct or Union St bridge, and the city would be a poorer place if that view is excavated and replaced with a car park.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Echo!
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Sandy http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/miss+the+point
Graeme Smith
Report this comment

Sandy http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/miss+the+point
Graeme Smith
Report this comment

This "whole new world" is the same one where shops are irrelevant as we have this thing called *the internet* so pushing that point one further notch along, the vast majority of us certainly don't need to drive into the middle of town for any reason these days and logically we should actually need fewer parking spaces than we currently have. A good point well raised Sandy
Mark McAulay
Report this comment

Good debate going here guys. I'm not against Green Space or Places of Learning but we've got to move on and be relevant for today. Stand still and not embrace change is the worst thing that can happen. We have one of the best architectural cities in the country here and if we don't enhance what we've got we'll lose investment,jobs and a whole lot more and definitely be a poorer place
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, that's a fair point. However, most forward-looking corporations have "corporate social responsibility" policies these days, many of which focus on issues such as sustainability and ecological issues. To imagine that Aberdeen would become an investment magnet through the excavation and removal of the only city centre park (not to mention replacing it with a reinforced concrete and steel structure for car parking) seems highly counter-intuitive. In two years time there will be a brownfield site at St Nic's, with nobody to hug the mud or chain themselves to the old council offices in protest. That could be developed at significantly less cost but with all the benefits. In the meanwhile, Aberdeen could also benefit from a new contemporary arts centre just as Dundee has. Win-win. Why there is such a burning desire to consider only one site, and only one option within that site, is a mystery that only Sir Ian Wood can answer.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

"We have one of the best architectural cities" hmm have you seen some of the recent architectural monstrosities? Union Square, Talisman House, AECC… amongst many, the Grey Square proposal would be yet another on the list of insipid architecture springing up in recent years. Where the Square brings yet more shopping and car parking, Peacocks proposal would bring *real* culture, education and entertainment to the city. If Aberdeen want's to go forward THIS is what it really needs, not more opportunities to shop. The Arts Centre *is* taking a step forward while utilising a valuable space that many other cities would kill to have dead in their centre.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

When ACSEF and Abereen Council get out of Sir Woods pocket and see and hear what people want instead of spending money on a "Public consultation" which is the biggest farce they have come up with yet. Loaded and biased in favour of Sir Wood's "Vision" (nightmare more like) For a council to give planning permission and the go ahead for Peacock, then to renage on it when some millionaire comes along smacks of a lot of corruption to say the least. At the end of the day at least this architect talks sense not like the patter and fawning that ACSEF are doing. Thiis architects plan looks, better, fits the original plans and costs a lot less. Also our council goes on about "Carbon footprint" etc. So why do we need another car park in the centre of town???? Thought they wanted us to use the bus more. Speak about total hypocrasy. This behaviour does no favours for either the Council ASCEF or Sir Wood. His reputation in my opinion is not very high. Seems that our area is being run by the millionaires in the area. As they say money talks. Very loudly in Aberdeen
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

And just because you're a "Torry loon", doesn't mean you don't understand what a city like Aberdeen needs. We should embrace international skills and expertise coming in to improve the city and make it as cosmopolitan as it aspires to be. Aberdeen will never go one step forward if people keep on being inward-looking.
nina higgs
Report this comment

I went to a meeting held by ACSEF on Monday night at the Grammar School. ACSEF had given the impression to local politicians that this was a public meeting to discuss the plans. When I turned up, it was instead organised as a focus group to be held with selected members of community councils in the city. The organisers did not want to let us in (15 of us) but eventually they decided we could attend. Unfortunately, this is as close to a public meeting on the "city square" development as you are likely to get this side of a planning application. ACSEF, Scottish Enterprise and the PR company involved all gave presentations. The themes of the presentations were all more or less focused on selling the scheme and negative aspects such as chopping down 78 trees were not mentioned at all. Even so, my opinion is that the meeting was more anti than pro. There were questions at the end about the trees, about the undemocratic and slanted nature of the 'consultation', about the narrow range of costs, given that the detailed nature of the plans are ostensibly up for discussion. It was also clear that there are three camps, not two involved. There is a substantial opinion behind the idea of keeping the gardens intact independent of the Peacock people. A politician friend of mine reckons that this is heading towards public enquiry territory, particularly if everybody that has commented against the plans puts in a planning objection when the time comes.
mike shepherd
Report this comment

Just because you're not a "Torry loon" that should read.
nina higgs
Report this comment

Just because you're not a "Torry loon" that should read.
nina higgs
Report this comment

And just because you're a "Torry loon", doesn't mean you don't understand what a city like Aberdeen needs. We should embrace international skills and expertise coming in to improve the city and make it as cosmopolitan as it aspires to be. Aberdeen will never go one step forward if people keep on being inward-looking.
nina higgs
Report this comment

Lord Ian Wood just you landscape Nigg Tip with your stolen millions. I suppose this makes me anti-wood & my views on this Union Terrace Gardens ignored? Just leave it as it is. It has history & character.
Fiona Cooper
Report this comment

"Stand still and not embrace change is the worst thing that can happen." Great point Sandy. Although surely this accusation should be aimed at Ascef / Wood who halted significant progress on the already approved arts centre, delayed their initial 'public consultation' period in the hope Peacock would lose some of their time dependent Arts Council funding, and continue to obstruct any viable and sensible means of compromise. So who is really to blame for standing still and not embracing change?
Mark McPherson
Report this comment

"Stand still and not embrace change is the worst thing that can happen." Great point Sandy. Although surely this accusation should be aimed at Ascef / Wood who halted significant progress on the already approved arts centre, delayed their initial 'public consultation' period in the hope Peacock would lose some of their time dependent Arts Council funding, and continue to obstruct any viable and sensible means of compromise. So who is really to blame for standing still and not embracing change?
Mark McPherson
Report this comment

Ah, I was wondering how long it would be before someone came up with the campaigner's favourite words..... "Pulic Enquiry". So, the plans at this moment don't include your waste of money arts centre that a minute percentage of the public would use (hands up who visits the current Arts Centre in Aberdeen). All of a sudden, there's talk of a public enquiry??? This is a public consultation for which ANYONE is allowed to voice their concerns, desires or thoughts. Let's see what the majority want out of this project after that consultation process before anyone starts pointing the finger and saying that Aberdeen are being denied an arts centre or that no one wants a 'grey square'. For heavens sake, the design is not even been thought about - that is for us to give our thoughts on. Blinkered campaign groups rarely manage to think outside the box and are so self centred about the wants and desires of the rest of the community, they often forget the bigger picture. The bigger picture here is what is practicle, affordable and most importantly, required by Aberdeen citizens. Let the public consultation do it's work and see what the majority would like to see before venting your emotions on some Art Centre that I for one, never asked for in the first place.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

"Stand still and not embrace change is the worst thing that can happen." Great point Sandy. Although surely this accusation should be aimed at Ascef / Wood who halted significant progress on the already approved arts centre, delayed their initial 'public consultation' period in the hope Peacock would lose some of their time dependent Arts Council funding, and continue to obstruct any viable and sensible means of compromise. So who is really to blame for standing still and not embracing change?
Mark McPherson
Report this comment

Fiona Cooper - libel court action heading your way with that comment about stolen millions. Ouch!!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Joe, interesting that you say campaign groups are self centred about the wants of the community. Whilst at the same time stating with such certainty that the community don't want a new arts centre. Are you in a campaign group of some sort? It would appear that by your own definition, you are. You say that "the design has not even been thought about" but this is manifestly not the case, as Sir Ian Wood's £50m pledge it explicity conditional on the inclusion of a four story subterranean building (the "square" being the roof of this structure). And the contents have been thought about to the extent that the £120-£140m budget includes £12m for the provision of 490 car parking spaces. That's rather a lot of "thought", wouldn't you agree?
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Mike Lowson, page 12, Garden plan must aim at greatness, says it all. The beach front also needs vision - a good venue for the Peacock Visual Arts. This area, beloved of Aberdonians, has been long neglected and used as a dumping ground for fast food, Retail parks and plastic fun.
Jeff Roberts
Report this comment

Mike Lowson, page 12, Garden plan must aim at greatness, says it all. The beach front also needs vision - a good venue for the Peacock Visual Arts. This area, beloved of Aberdonians, has been long neglected and used as a dumping ground for fast food, Retail parks and plastic fun.
Jeff Roberts
Report this comment

Nina international expertise is great, but just look at the last time we in Scotland engaged the services of a Spanish Architect. Holyrood went from a budget of £45M to £440M. Surely we have one of the greatest Architectural schools in Britain right on our doorstep Scott Sutherland and Archibald Simpson will be turning in their graves. Ryan take a tip from me the next time you walk down Union Street look up and appreciate the wonder of some of the buildings and the skills and expertise of our forefathers. Do you think they needed public enquiries and consultations and I'll bet they were lambasted at the time but have left a lasting legacy.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy there is definitively some fantastic architecture in Aberdeen, down Union St and elsewhere. My comment was about architecture in more recent years.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Sandy there is definitively some fantastic architecture in Aberdeen, down Union St and elsewhere. My comment was about architecture in more recent years.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Definitely not definitively.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

Definitely not definitively.
Ryan Roberts
Report this comment

I am a member of the Aberdeen community, as are my wife, my sone, my Mother, My father, numerous cousins uncles and aunts, friends and colleagues. Yes, 'I' am an artist and musician bu not my extended family and friends. As far as I am aware none of them want to lose our historical Gardens either. Pleas stop assuming that simply because some of us artists are against the square that we are somehow not part of a wider community. This is my city as much as anyone else and I get very offended that I am presumed, by the very nature of career choice, to be part of a cooky bunch of tree hugging artist luddites. This is offensive and so far off the mark. I think you will find that many many creative people are very foraward thinking and by their very nature progressive. I want change, I want to see Aberdeen prosper and grow for my Son and his family and their family to come, if he indeed stays here, which I feel like discouraging to be honest. And for this very reason I want to see our lovely Gardens retained and brought to life not lost to historical photographs. Jim Ewen A member of the community of Aberdeen and an Artists. Get it yet?!
Jim Ewen
Report this comment

Ryan my comment was todays carbuncle is tomorrows thing of beauty. Albeit that's not always the case but who are we to pre-judge the future. Mike here's my solution for the beach front pedestrianise the prom from Burger king to Nobles and invite Merlin Entertainment to put a Sea Life centre in the Amadeus building. Great for tourism and education given Aberdeens association with the sea.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Ryan my comment was todays carbuncle is tomorrows thing of beauty. Albeit that's not always the case but who are we to pre-judge the future. Mike here's my solution for the beach front pedestrianise the prom from Burger king to Nobles and invite Merlin Entertainment to put a Sea Life centre in the Amadeus building. Great for tourism and education given Aberdeens association with the sea.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

I was beginning to miss the scribing of mr Mich...sorry...Joe Blogs! We do need someone just as bias and openly aggressive to balance out mini moan alot... ho ho. the arguments of "non progressive" "against change" are just not sticking lovely ACSEF backers! Give up on that one! You stopped a plan from happening, how’s that for progress. It’s just not “your” progress, I fear. If I am to believe mr Michi, when I met him before Christmas, the "problem" with PVA is that it's not exclusive; or it's not world class...but "small beer". Not big enough for the Businessmen to be “iconic”. I argued that it's not the size of a building that matters (careful not to stray into saucy euphemisms here!) - it's what goes on in it - it's the confidence that it can bring, ideas are worth more than anything - and to alienate the very community that is primed to bring new thinking, new ways of seeing and communicating is a tad "shooting yourself in the foot". (as ACSEF purport to provide space for these very people for the very same reasons that Mr Blogs wishes the were not part of the picture). The rubbish talk of "exclusivity" is also terribly misinformed - just visit the peacock exhibition (in the sad, dilapidated gallery space, open to all - if they can find it, or risk walking up the urinated dark alleyways to it!) and you'll see a range of work / shows that they have put on "for the public" and especially "for the regeneration areas and disadvantaged". Tip of the iceberg stuff really. Instead of trying to raise some form of justification as to why not to trust “the arts community” – why don’t you start telling us what the city square IS (instead of pretending to say that it’s the public that will decide). If you had a solid plan – we can all have a proper debate, a bit like PVA – as that’s how their argument seems to be easy to defend – it’s solid and you know what you get. A world-class building (for all) and the retention of the Union terrace Gardens. Simples.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

I think that its a sad day when businesses like Peacock and Wood Group try to make improvements to the city and it is met with such opposition. The gardens are beautiful, yes that is correct, but I think that the city centre would really benefit from the positive changes. I am not saying cover the gardens in concrete but it is a fact that Aberdeen is so far behind such cities like Glasgow and Edinburgh and for the "Oil Capital of Europe" it has little to offer in comparison. As a young person who lives in Aberdeen I have never once used the gardens (after seeing the "suspicious" people that hang around there) and if most people are honest they probably don't use them as much as they should or could do - maybe for the same reasons as me. I would probably use them a lot more if the proposed changes went ahead and I think most other people, if they were totally honest, would too.
Miss Ramsay
Report this comment

I think that its a sad day when businesses like Peacock and Wood Group try to make improvements to the city and it is met with such opposition. The gardens are beautiful, yes that is correct, but I think that the city centre would really benefit from the positive changes. I am not saying cover the gardens in concrete but it is a fact that Aberdeen is so far behind such cities like Glasgow and Edinburgh and for the "Oil Capital of Europe" it has little to offer in comparison. As a young person who lives in Aberdeen I have never once used the gardens (after seeing the "suspicious" people that hang around there) and if most people are honest they probably don't use them as much as they should or could do - maybe for the same reasons as me. I would probably use them a lot more if the proposed changes went ahead and I think most other people, if they were totally honest, would too.
Miss Ramsay
Report this comment

I've spent a lot of time these past few weeks looking at the history of these proposals and earlier plans for the city centre from the council. It seems that the Bon Accord Quarter consultations back in 2006 are a distant memory for most, particularly ACSEF. Those plans, which due to the high public support, have been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance for the area by the council and also incorporated into the Aberdeen Local Plan in 2008. From those, there is clear guidance from the council, supported by the public, about where the Civic Center is and where the Civic Square of Aberdeen should be and also what the future of the Denburn Valley should be. The Civic Square should be in front of Marischal College once St Nic's house gets pulled down. With respect to UTG and the Denburn Valley I'll just throw in a few quotes from the Public Consultation and Local Plan documents; "Maximise the potential of the gardens, improve access and promote activity", "reinforce the presence of the green civic space in the fabric of the city", "celebrate the topography which is fundamental to it's [the gardens] character", "bring the gardens to life". To wrap up, the most telling comment in all of this is Tom Smith and ACSEF's continual stance that Peacock's design could not be integrated into their vision. Not so long ago Peacock's design was a priority for ACSEF, but now it is apparently not even worth consulting the public with. ACSEF's vision for the city center is clearly their own. It is not one adopted by the Council with the support of the Aberdeen public just 2 years ago. That vision, relating to UTG, has been realised through Edgar Gonzalez's excellent plans for an iconic Art's Center and meets all the plans and ideas discussed by the Council and Public over the past 4 years.
Brian Christie
Report this comment

Ian Wood and his grubby family are an embarrassment and disgrace to Aberdeen.
James Edwards
Report this comment

I wonder if the 140 million projected cost of the proposed Square includes purchasing snow clearing machinery and salt to keep it clear at this time of year... Or will it be another place in an icy Aberdeen to avoid in the winter months?! Anyone who thinks a street-level square would be a place to hang out or sit outside having coffee European-style would do well to try walking down Broad Street in anything but a modest breeze. When the weather allows, there are often groups of people in the current gardens during the daylight hours, so I do not think it is wasted or unused space. The main issue of unsavoury characters hanging around or the feeling of safety as it gets dark would I am sure be solved with the increased lighting and CCTV that are sure to accompany the Peacock development. I would also imagine that this would be open and in use until the late evening, helping eliminate the existing problems. Access to the gardens is easily solved with the suggestion of glass lifts being a sensible and low-impact one. The prior suggestion of siting the arts center down the beach is really just silly. Why would that be a better site, when the proposal for the gardens is beside the theatre, library, forum and art gallery? Surely putting the arts center in the gardens reinforces the existing arts focus of the area? I agree that the Denburn dual carriageway and railway line do detract and are wasted space, but it would be easy to cover these in, extend the current gardens and make the valley seem much more open and attractive. I really do not see how an open square of such massive proportions would benefit Aberdeen? Even with green areas and landscaping, what is the proposed use? We need to be realistic about our normal weather and temperatures and the difference in culture between here and the continent. Ask yourself why the square proposal wants to put all that car parking in place, and whether Aberdeen will need yet more retail space when much of Union Street is not used well at present. Progress should not be in the name of destruction, and it is worth noting that Union Square has successfully kept and restored the frontage of the train station while still integrating it with a modern development. I'm not sure we needed the stores and retail at Union Square, but it has done a fair job of tidying and modernising the travel hub of Aberdeen and presenting a much nicer first impression to those who arrive in the city on public transport. If Sir Ian Wood was genuinely interested in the best interests of progressing Aberdeen, he would not be placing such a strict remit on the use of his 50m "gift". Why not allow the Peacock development to go ahead, and use that 50m to cover the dual carriageway and train line, and do something with the triple kirks? That would truely provide a useable and attractive space in the city for relaxation and recreation!
Rob Inglis
Report this comment

Sandy, your comment with regards to the employment of a "Spanish architect" is ill-informed and quite unashamedly pathetic - not forgetting a tad racist to some (most). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_Building#Problems
jaco skinny
Report this comment

Well a couple of folk deserve a comment. Joe Bloggs. - A public consultation that anyone can pass an opinion _ Who are you kidding. Have you looked at the on line site??? You only have 1 choice. What to have after the concrete is laid. So as far as thinking outside the box. You should maybe get out of your "Wood " box and see what is going on. Total hypocrasy from ACSEF and the council. One minute they want us to cut down on cars in the city then they want to build more in the bowels of the excaveted UTG. As said totaly hypocrats. Also why was Sir Wood allowed to put forward his plans after the PVA was already agreed upon. Abvious isn't it. Money and plenty of it only if done his way (that is Wood's) Again more hypocrasy and total bias. This ugly civic square (Namely Wood'f Folly) is purley for the benefit of making money not for the public benefit. We also have a perfect plan drawn up by a renowned architect with far more insight that a concrete 3 story block. Progressive yes for the PVA Backward and ugly the Wood project. As Brian Christie has already said, this civic square was already planned for when St Nicholas house came down. Does it not make you wonder what is going on, that all these plans can get so swept under the carpet, when £50 million pounds rears its head. When and if the council and ASCET and Sir Wood can come up with a proper Public Consultation that states all these options without the prejudiced and biased one they have set up. How much anyway has this Spin doctor consultation cost the public. Again is this coming out of his millions. If he had any real desire to put some pride into Aberdeen he would put his money on the original plans at Broad Street. But then again he did not get to be a millionaire by being compassionate to others.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Minnie I understand that the 'consultation' is being paid for by a combination of ACSEF and Scottish Enterprise, the latter a government body. Aberdeen council have given £40,000 to ACSEF. I'm told that sir Ian Wood is not contributing money for the consultation. The whole business of public money being spent for a public relations driven "consultation" rather than a warts and all, here are the options exercise, can at best be considered as misspending our tax money. At worst, it's pretty scandalous.
mike shepherd
Report this comment

Does it make you wonder about who is running the city???? Certainly not the people that voted. It seems that have a somewaht sycophantic council and that is definately not a good thing for the running of a city. If the Woodites cannot see this and the ACSEF and the council cannot see the total hypocrasy of the dealings in this issue. Then is there any hope for the future of Aberdeen. All very well for the ACSEF to waffle on about Energy Hub in the North East. If they cannot see what is wrong here there will be more money thrown down the drain by them with their pie in the sky dreams. What enery hub. We cannot even have a proper rail sevice, the bus station is rubbish, and the airport is more suited to a village. Where this will encourage enterprise, tourism and the Trump golf course is open to speculation. We now have another millionaire with his "Vishion" not of a beautiful city centre, but another shopping mall, car park and a concrete "Plaza" in other words a windy cold and bleak expanse of bland concrete. Which will presumably make him more momey. The people who are against this project are being subjected to some vocal expressions of I suppose nimbys, and anti progressive. Well I can say that to want another shopping area and a concrete mass in the middle of Union Street would be a travesty and an ugly wart on it. To be so arrogant to have no regard to the people and the city by both Sir Wood and the ASCET is nothing short of bulling and shameful. If he was so interested in doing something for the city he can pay for the original plans to put a Civic square where St Nicholas house. is. Not this dogmatic and selfish moral blackmail to withhold his millions if not done his way. This shows an arrognant and selfish man full of his own vanity to go again with his project I can only say name it "Woods Folly" He will certainly be remembered probably not for the reasone he would like.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Sandy, next time you walk down Union Street, you should have a look down too. Aberdeen is a 3-dimensional city, built on great vaulted arches equally as impressive as the buildings sitting on top of them. Nowhere is that more evident than the Denburn Valley, where the history from medieval times to present is visible to all. That should be promoted, not buried.
Brian Christie
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.