Business leaders urged to stump up for £140m civic square project

Reader's Comments

Bob Collier thinks that the PVA centre would result in "stronger support". He is right. However, it would also result in Wood withdrawing his £50m as it would prevent the full decking over of Union Terrace Gardens. Perhaps Bob has trouble understanding this; clearly he and some of his business colleagues have trouble understanding the meaning of the word "no". Wood will only consider funding his own preferred idea, something that Collier knows and still chooses to ignore when justifying the increasingly desperate tactics of the vocal minority in the business community seeking to override public opinion.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Will they never give up? Will they never surrender to the People's Wish? Will there never be an end to this folly of expending what we don't have for the sake of some's dellusional "Grandeur"?
Vincent McDee
Report this comment

From ACSEF's letter sent to our councillors "we would like some reassurance from our city council that this opportunity will not be denied simply due to misunderstanding of the project among the public." A quote from todays Scotsman. http://heritage.scotsman.com/scotland/Reject-city-square-at-your.6275672.jp So according to ACSEF, we are too stupid to understand the City Square Project so we should be ignored by our councillors.
mike shepherd
Report this comment

And to repeat from yesterday: ACSEF News Update April 2010. (www.acsef.co.uk) "it is fair to say that the project had a very strong and well organised anti campaign - at a very early stage significant misinformation around the project was planted, leading people to believe it would be a flat concrete square with retain and other commercial developments. It has taken considerably effort to counter these claims and much of the ground was only regained during the latter part of the consultation. " What rubbish. ACSEF were very lean on information throughout their campaign. If you wanted to find out more, you went to the technical appraisal document listed on ACSEF's web site. These are all direct quotes: "The criteria on which this option is based are the provision of the following: a) Level access from all the surrounding streets which are Union Bridge; Union Terrace’ Denburn Viaduct and Belmont Street. ........... Steel frame construction with pre-cast concrete planks can be designed to maximise the amount of construction achieved during predetermined possession time frames. The pre-cast concrete planks would forma temporary and permanent deck if required. ......... Deliverable Uses Include: Multi-storey car-park – 490 Space multi-storey car park on basement floors. Potential income £250,000 – £300,000 p.a. ........ Restaurants/Cafés, Deli uses ...... Hotel/Conference facilities – Operators may offer around £500,000 p.a. for a 100 – 120 bed hotel ...... Retail – Aspirational retailers unlikely to consider the scheme. Boutique uses in conjunction with restaurant/café and tourism operations would be attractive. ..... There is an opportunity to provide a Large Size Unit with frontage to a good secondary retailing pitch on Union Street."
mike shepherd
Report this comment

Interesting that the online "Support The City Square Project" petition still only has 1594 signatures. This suggests that it is only supported by a small percentage of the Aberdeen business community, whose future allegedly depends on the City Square Project going ahead. Maybe Bob Collier should send out another e-mail to Chamber of Commerce members urging them to sign it.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Just think how far £200m+ wouldgoto sorting our crumbling roads. Priorities gentlemen !!
Ron Campbell
Report this comment

Even if this business sector of cronies were to pay double the 140 million, which it is more likely to cost, and build the whole thing themselves, and pay for a massive big opening party with their own money where every aberdonian can bathe in caviar and snorlke in champagne, I would still oppose it as it is just the wrong thing to do. Putting aside the financial risks, and future burden on the council, the main issue is that it's an unimaginative bland and permanantly destructive project, that will irreversibly wipe out a historic ciry centre garden that could be turned into so much more. The last thing we want to see now is more businessmen pledging to caugh up a larger percentage of the cost and the council buying into this and backing it. The scheme should simply be rejected for what it is (utter rubbish), not on the fact that it could never be afforded, which is true. And the other thing that worries me now is everyone trying to all of a sudden cling onto a compromise solution (councillors comments from the hustings debate)when this was clearly ruled out months ago. The only compromise that can be considered in this case, is that the PVA goes ahead as planned, as for decking over the dual carriedgeway and railway, well the business sector can sponsor their own competition, with their own money, come up with more visions in their own time and test them with the public again, but they Have to stay away from the gardens.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Well said Ved. Never were truer words spoken.
Ron Campbell
Report this comment

Here's another quote from the HFM feasibility study: "The scheme requires removal of all of the trees and existing ecological value currently on the site, this conflicts with Council Policies 33, 36 and Landscape Strategy Part 2." And Acsef accuse their opponents of putting out misleading information, at the same time as putting out images of their project showing lush, mature trees - a complete lie. Councillors cannot allow such distortions to inform their decisions.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

To pre-empt any "people whom support PVA should stump up the cash" - remember, artists and creatives in the north east contribute their TIME to projects, for very little return (voluntary, in a lot of cases) - so they rely upon "the powers that be" to support their professions. Some would say this is a waste of money (sadly) - whereas the "return" is worth more than money itself. Higher esteem for disadvantaged kids / adults, better understanding and confidence when expressing feelings and ideas, better community cohesion (crime reduction?) are just some of the results from well executed “creative” projects in communities. Many money focused people scoff at this angle, showing that they really don't care (or want to believe) that people matter. The arts are for all (despite the full page adverts by ACSEF telling people that Peacock's is "exclusive" (who's telling the porkies again?) and business benefits primarily the owners with profits (massive house in Bieldside anyone?) – so please think about whom and what these two projects benefit – and remember, life isn’t all about profit, it’s about experience and knowledge (and that’s free). I as a creative individual “up here” want to contribute to the community with my skills and enthusiasm, and I feel the PVA building is the best place for this, inspiring and invigorating. I don’t think a turret to an underground lair (out of sight, out of mind) is the place for creatives to live and work. Lets have Business by Business Providers, but please don’t forget - Culture by cultural Providers.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

For an apposite and entertaining commentary on the CSP have a look at http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~ebarnes/python/dead-parrot.htm
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

"AN ABERDEEN councillor has called on north-east business leaders to “put their money where their pen is” and pay for a £140million city-centre civic square project." --- What city-centre civic square project project would that be? The one Aberdeen doesn't want? Right I see.
Funky Chunk
Report this comment

"From ACSEF's letter sent to our councillors 'we would like some reassurance from our city council that this opportunity will not be denied simply due to misunderstanding of the project among the public.' " --- They had £300K of public money, the full backing of Aberdeen Journals and various celebs, two PR companies and a pledge of £50Million. With all that they still failed to convince people of their project, either people know what they want and it's not CSP or ACSEF are incompetent and should scrapped for wasting public time and money.
Funky Chunk
Report this comment

What I find interesting is that "...50 prominent business chiefs and industry body Oil & Gas UK" are calling on councillors to approve the CSP. I don't like being cynical all the time but are we really to believe that these business men have anything other than money as an interest? Take a step back and have a look at what has been written over the past few months - these folk have been trying to masquerade their financial gains of this scheme through thinly veiled ideas of good intentions for Aberdeen to progress. It depresses me at how everything in life tends to be driven by money and that is something that I cannot change. However what I, and everyone else who is against the CSP, can do is continue to support the PVA. As Philip correctly pointed out above, the arts, culture and knowledge may not prove to be financially viable, but their inherent qualities throughout society cannot and should not be measured in monetary return.
Bill Simpson
Report this comment

Alasdair, brilliant comparison, oh i'm cracking up here.. thanks for that, made my day..
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Bill, you could always quote Sir Ian himself from the Scotsman on the 21st of April - "The vision is to maximise the attractiveness of our city to win the new energy opportunities and become a World Energy City. My offer of funds was to help achieve that, not to spruce up our city centre."
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Curse that "misunderstanding", eh. Here's another quote from the HFM study: "The floor slabs for the retail space will be insitu concrete, steel decking and steel bead". How on earth did people come to the conclusion that the CSP would be about shops and concrete?
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Bill, the thing is though, so far the arts have proved that they would be MORE financialy viable than anything the csp can produce. The PVA is not promising much, but what it is promising is entirely believable, and it's backed up by strong precedent. There is a clear business plan that is robust and fair to all scrutiny. An estimated 200,000 visitors a year, and an estimated 5 million pounds a year, other similar organisations have and continue to do just as well. On top of that it would provide much needed amenitied and access throguh the gardens, while keeping the undulating inherent aesthetic of the topography, and at the same time providing a landmark architectural gem that aberdeen can be proud of. The csp on the other hand has stated nothing coherent ot consistant that can be credited with any plausibility. The four storeys of concrete over 6.7 acres, that double the greenery, will provide car parking that isn't car parking, will provide retail witjout retail units, and hotels and a gym, but will just be an open space, will attract a future oil industry boom, but it is intended for all. Oh and it will have a basement guggenheim, although this will come from the funds that have already been approved for another arts scheme, eventhough these are non-transferable and project specific. Nothing in that is of any viability, financial or logical.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

And any acsef member that claims in their letter that this is public misunderstanding on my behalf, or a smear attemept by anti csp, or whatever is welcome to try and convince me where i went so wrong in reading a very in-depth and detailed feasibility report. And if the report is not what they are actually proposing of building, then what on earth is the 140 million for?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

And here's another HFM pearl, it's about obtaining fire ratings: "Car parks require to be ventilated/ sprinklered to reduce the effect of a fire. New British Standard on car parks and fires in them is expected soon( unknown fire rating) Atrium shops will require one hour fire rating if sprinklered subject to height depth compartment size sprinklers smoke extraction etc ( 1hour fire rating)". THERE IS NO MISUNDERSTANDING, apart from the distortions and misinformation marketed by Acsef, using public money to propogate their untruths.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Richard and all this misinformation is available from whose website?? oh.... www.acsef.co.uk
mike shepherd
Report this comment

It is not even about money! It is about democracy! It is about broken promises! Manipulation! Jobs for the boys and Vested Interests! The use of public money to promote a one-sided vision that had been rejected and ‘mothballed’ years previously. Public money to pay for a rigged, yes I say ‘Rigged’ vote! I say rigged because the default button was already highlighted YES in support of the civic square. Sir Ian Wood Promised that if the public did not show overwhelming support for the project then it would not go forward and that the money would be withdrawn! It has not been withdrawn but he keeps threatening to do so, honest, I will, if you don’t support me I will go away, I promise, you’ll be the losers, you’d better do what I say because if you don’t Aberdeen will be very sorry, I’m going, I am, I mean it! Now 50 Aberdeen businessmen plead with the council! 50 of them, is that the best they can do? Ten of these 50 businessmen happen to be on the ACSEF board ie Tom Smith, Dave Blackwood, Stewart Milne, Stewart Spence, Michael Clark, Melfort Campbell, Colin Crosby, Mike Salter, John Michie and Martin Gilbert. Not long ago the P&J ran an article, "Now 5,000 firms unite behind Sir Ian’s vision" but there was a big hoo ha when members of the Federation of Small Businesses said that they had not been consulted and that this was vastly misleading. Basically this was/is a case of ACSEF backs ACSEF. It is laughable that their letter to the council states "We believe a significant number of the silent majority have expressed a clear desire to pursue it". Silent majority expressed clear desire, LOL, just how was that done? Oh yes, we should go by your ‘belief' and not by the outcome of the vote where the majority voted NO we do not support the civic square - is that how the general election will work too? The majority would have been far greater if the default button had not been set as Yes! Stewart Milne of course is supporting this for totally altruistic reasons, nothing to do with his purchase of the Triple Kirks in April 2008 huh? How much would the civic square proposal alter the value of that particular property? Why does the phrase 'Tipping the Wink' come to mind? Mike Wilson of the Epic Group has no vested interest in seeing the civic square go ahead either huh? I mean, just because he owns the Monkey house at one corner of the proposed square, and he also owns the Priory at the diagonally opposite end, well that's just a coincidence. Aye right! Peter Carry of Jamieson & Carry wouldn't stand to gain either? I mean if he had another entrance/s on other level/s and more shop windows/frontages, well that wouldn't help his trade would it? No vested interests there then. If you look at the 413 page document of the online & postcard responses you will find a large number of the comments are TOTALLY AGAINST the civic square yet they were still registered as Yes votes in support of the square. Why? Well - The default button online was already highlighted as a YES in support. There is no reason to check the NO votes, as they had to have been deliberately changed from Yes to No. If you then look at the Yes votes that have no comments at all to show whether they were intended as Yes or No votes, you will find almost 2000 of these. It is fair to assume that a large number of these Yes votes were meant to be NO and should be treated as a dichotomy and split evenly between the YES & NO to counteract the unfair advantage to the CSP of having had the Yes button already highlighted, or even just discounted entirely. The whole public consultation was a complete farce and it is now obvious that they, ACSEF and Ian Wood have no intention of accepting the public vote because it was a definite NO, and even more of a NO than they let on and the whole thing is dubious from start to finish. ACSEF is a QUANGO, a ‘jobs for the boys’ organization, paid for by the public, that does not accept public opinion if we don't agree with them. Quotes from the ACSEF website show how they spin the feedback i.e. “GROUNDSWELL OF SUPPORT FOR CHANGE – PUBLIC WANT GREEN SPACE, SAFE ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL CENTRE” ACSEF translate this as “Following publication of the findings from the public consultation into the City Square project, ACSEF believes there is support for major transformation in Aberdeen city centre – making it safer and greener, with a contemporary arts or cultural hub at its heart.” In actual fact using the same findings the headline could read, GROUNDSWELL OF SUPPORT FOR PEACOCK ART CENTRE IN UNION TERRACE GARDENS, WHICH WILL PROVIDE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL CENTRE WHILE RETAINING THE CITY’S MUCH LOVED GREEN SUNKEN GARDEN – at the same time making the gardens more accessible to everyone.
Jaki Sinclair
Report this comment

Oh, it's misunderstanding that we've all shown is it? how about this? the ACSEF website states that 'Following publication of the findings from the public consultation into the City Square project, ACSEF believes there is support for major transformation in Aberdeen city centre..' 'The public private sector partnership is now urging Aberdeen City Council to take leadership of the project, providing the necessary support and commitment to take it to an international design competition.' oh, so not only is the public unable to understand the CSP for whyat it really is, but they are also incapable of expressing what they really want? If that is the conclusion ACSEF have drawn from the consultation, as flawed and unfair as it has been, and off the independent online pateiton and save the UTG campaign, then is there ANY point taking anything they say with any seriousness?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

I like Willie Young's comment "put their money where their pen is"!!! As usual Cllr Young has "put his mouth where his backside is"
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

This consultation is like saying, right, this is your flat, you have a living room, a kitchen, a bedroom and a view out.. your flat needs a bit of a clean, and maybe some new furniture.. what would you like to see in your flat, a living room, aha, a kitchen, aha, ooh a bedroom, aha a view out maybe, aha.. ok, we;ve got it, YOU NEED A NEW FLAT!!! the evidence clearly shows there is a strong desire for change! C'mon ACSEF, stop embarrasing yourselves aleready, show at least SOME competence!
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Misunderstanding? How about concealing the existence of a fully approved scheme from the public consultation? Pretending that PVA's original, superior and vastly more financially responsible project didn't exist? We all know why Acsef didn't want to acknowledge the PVA scheme, because it achieves what the public want - retention of green space and a cultural centre - at less than a tenth of the cost of Wood's project. Put them head to head and only a fool would imagine public backing for the more expensive, speculative project. Misleading is very much the right word, it's just that Acsef are using it in entirely the wrong context - deliberately so, to fool councillors into supporting the unwanted city square.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Well done to the individuals who signed the letter in support of the plans for the City Square Project. However may I point out one important thing that is missing in all this, the lack of a real plan and vision of what we will be getting. Anyone who has stood on the bridge next to the Triple kirks site and looked towards Union Bridge will plainly see that there will be a net gain in usable space just by covering in the railway and dual carriageway alone. The important point here is Marketing, everything that has been said, produced or printed has not included any real tangible items that an informed decision can be made on. The public is being asked to make a decision on something they know little about and cannot visualise the benefits so inevitably the public will say no. This has been this city's achilles heel for too long a lack of self promotion has let us down for years. I would advocate that the existing floral display sloping area be retained and a semi natural amphitheatre be created by means of a glass fronted terrace on the Union Bridge side of any construction required to cover the railway, road and smaller part of the existing gardens. This would be a great compromise for all concerned. As far as Peacock Visual Arts are concerned surely the best value for the funding they have been promised would be to upgrade and extend the Art Gallery. Anyone who has been in the Art Gallery lately will plainly see that galleries 8 & 9 have not been in use for years and is in need of significant investment and would provide a great home for PVA this would enhance and improve both organisations.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Another ACSEF gem.. 'The qualitative findings and the opinion poll, which is a statistically representative sample of the community, along with the reasons why people voted no, give us confidence that there is sufficient support for a transformational project.' ok, so because th public have explained why they oppose it, this means that, really, they actually support it?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Sandy, whilst I'm sure Sir Ian Wood is grateful for your support, the scheme he will offer to fund excludes the possibilities your advocate. As to the idea that marketing is a solution, perhaps you're right. However, Acsef's approach was to deny the existence of the PVA scheme, to accuse anybody of quoting their own feasibility study of being "misleading", and to contradict the contents of their own feasibility study. This may be because Acsef are inherently disingenous, or more likely it may be because the scheme promoted by Wood has one merit, and one merit alone - the promise of £50m attached. There are simply no other justifications, as witnessed by the Acsef letter re-iterating economic doom, and the laughable claim that Acsef can speak for a silent majority - truly desperate tactics.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Sandy Milne, the one thing this thing DOESN'T lack, is marketing.. it's been marketed and PRed extremely heavily, and at a great cost. As for the public not knowing what they want, C'mon, you're being just as insulting and patronising as ACSEF. The reason there is nothing tangible in what's been printed and said, is because ther is Just nothing tangible in what has been proposed, as for what's actually been envisioned, i don't think even Ian Wood and Acsef are aware of that, it changes so much from extreme to extreme, that i doubt there is a vision there. As for net space gain by covering the rail and dual carriage way, you're right that is pretty obvious, but is it needed? That is probably a different discussion altogether, either way, it has already been put forward by edgaqr gonzalles, and supported by the government funding body, but was adamantly ruled out by Ian Wood, as it's the whole thing or nothing. And finally, i'm glad u've actually made a visit to the PVA, not many have.. However, have a deeper look into their organsation, the state of the building, and how long they've needed a new one. HAve a look at the competition designs of a half a decade ago, back when it was on the castlegate site, which didnt happen, then have a look at the competition entries this time round. They are clearly an organisation that deserve a vibrant centre with adequate exposure.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

As for covering over the rail and road, again, this has really been suggested as a compromise, so that the business sector cronies don't walk away with nothing. But i personally am not convinced by it, although i AM open to the possibility. The only merits in doing that are to hide it from view, as some will argue that it's not pretty to look at, and to increase retail, cafe or public space, none of which are really lacking at the moment. We've got plenty of retail, what was the point of all the shopping centres? and there's plenty of public space in the gardens. As for hiding the road from view, well what's so ugly about it? look out your window right now, in most cases u'l be lookin onto a road, so why is this so unforgiving? there is something Very interesting about how the buildings at a much higer end of belmont street touch the ground at the road below. When viewed from above, i.e. union terrace and union street, they form a stunning and rich backdrop to the gardens, and when ciewed from below, i.e the lowest level of the gardens, they seem to float and hover over the trees and road, and their height is excentuated in this. Is it worth losing this for a few new shops and cafes, when there is plenty of empty units on union street? the only thing that the dual carriedge way mavbe needs is a link between belmont street and the gardens, for those not willing to walk over ht etwo existing brigges. But that can be acheived with simple elegant foot bridges, rather than covering the whole thing.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

The one thing ian wood and acsef have claimed that i Do agree with, is the impace a civic square can bring to a city. Although i think the CSP is all wrong, and unbefiting of the site and the city, i do think aberdeen could use a cracking new city square, so why not look at the castlegate. It is an ideal location, as both the beginning or end of Union street, you can see it from the very top of unon street at holburn junction, and from it you can see right down union street. It's also a wee pocket of space where union and king street meet, it's of an adequate size, it just needs better lighting, paving, possibly relcating the mercat cross to it's original location, and there are endless possibilities of sinking in courtyards etc. There is also the possibility of the space outside Marischall College and Skene House, currently occupied by the Council Tower block. I personally think the tower doesn;t need to get knocked down, but could be stripped right down to the structural core, and a whole new envelope put into place, it could be completely reclad in a very exciting manner, and it would continue it's presence in the aberdeen skyline. However i Do see the merits in knocking it down and turning the whole space into a civic square. And neither of the two options would probably cost more than ian's pledge, but they would both deliver what the CSP claim to do.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

It's flattering that ACSEF have said that the anti-campaign was very strong and well-organised, but that's not really true either. I organised the protest against the plan in the 1980's which saw off the NCP car park scheme for the gardens, but I haven't been doing any organising this time round. Granted there is the small IheartUTG campaign who are running the petition, but it should be appreciated that the protest against the City Square Project has been much more widespread and viral than ACSEF realise. Aberdeen is a small well-connected city and there has been widespread and genuine concern about the fate of the garden. This has not been stoked up by the mythical vocal minority. Your typical Aberdonian is a lot smarter and well-educated than ACSEF clearly give us credit for, and we think for ourselves chaps. We are too educated to take in specious puffery in the place of dispassionate analysis and we don't appreciate dumbfoolery when we see it. ACSEF also seem to see the hidden hand of Peacock behind the opposition, but the reality is that much of the opposition to the plans comes from those in the city who value Aberdeen's heritage and have nothing to do with the arts people. There is no conspiracy ACSEF, just a large number of Aberdonians who want to keep Union Terrace Gardens and who don't want the City Square. Keep off the grass ...
mike shepherd
Report this comment

I'm so fed up with this issue. The people don't want it!!. Our so called "business leaders" have had no interest in the city before, except when there is a blip in the economy, then they can't pay off, sorry "downsize" fast enough to maintain profits. If they are so concerned, why did it take months for one man to come forward to rescue Glencraft, if the BL did more things like this they could count on alot more support from the community. For the record I wish to keep the gardens.
PC Middleton
Report this comment

Right on PC Middleton. And it does look as if our councillors are probably feeling the same way. Overwhelmed by emails, having to listen to ACSEF treating them like idiots (join the club folks) and a controversy that just isn't going away. That, and there are far more important matters to deal with in the city at the moment. They will know only too well, that a vote to keep the City Square in intensive care on the 19th will keep the squabbling going on for ever (and in a period when the budget cuts will become only too obvious to all of us). Best to give it the old quietus and put the wretched creature out of its misery perhaps.
mike shepherd
Report this comment

Dead City Square Project Sketch (With thanks to Monty Python) The cast: THE WISE PEOPLE OF ABERDEEN - played by us SHOP OWNER - played by Tom Smith The sketch: A customer enters a pet shop. The Wise People of Aberdeen: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint. (The owner does not respond.) The Wise People of Aberdeen: 'Ello, Miss? Owner: What do you mean "miss"? The Wise People of Aberdeen: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint! Owner: We're closin' for lunch. The Wise People of Aberdeen: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this City Square Project what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique. Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it? The Wise People of Aberdeen: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it! Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting. The Wise People of Aberdeen: Look, matey, I know a dead City Square Project when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now. Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage! The Wise People of Aberdeen: The plumage don't enter into it. It's stone dead. Owner: Nononono, no, no! 'E's resting! The Wise People of Aberdeen: All right then, if he's restin', I'll wake him up! (shouting at the cage) 'Ello, Mister Polly City Square Project! I've got a lovely fresh cuttle fish for you if you show... (owner hits the cage) Owner: There, he moved! The Wise People of Aberdeen: No, he didn't, that was you hitting the cage! Owner: I never!! The Wise People of Aberdeen: Yes, you did! Owner: I never, never did anything... The Wise People of Aberdeen: (yelling and hitting the cage repeatedly) 'ELLO POLLY!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your nine o'clock alarm call! (Takes City Square Project out of the cage and thumps its head on the counter. Throws it up in the air and watches it plummet to the floor.) The Wise People of Aberdeen: Now that's what I call a dead City Square Project. Owner: No, no.....No, 'e's stunned! The Wise People of Aberdeen: STUNNED?!? Owner: Yeah! You stunned him, just as he was wakin' up! Norwegian Blues stun easily, major. The Wise People of Aberdeen: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad enough of this. That City Square Project is definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of movement was due to it bein' tired and sh*gged out following a prolonged squawk. Owner: Well, he's...he's, ah...probably pining for the fjords. The Wise People of Aberdeen: PININ' for the FJORDS?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?, look, why did he fall flat on his back the moment I got 'im home? Owner: The Norwegian Blue prefers keepin' on it's back! Remarkable bird, id'nit, squire? Lovely plumage! The Wise People of Aberdeen: Look, I took the liberty of examining that City Square Project when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been sitting on its perch in the first place was that it had been NAILED there. (pause) Owner: Well, o'course it was nailed there! If I hadn't nailed that bird down, it would have nuzzled up to those bars, bent 'em apart with its beak, and VOOM! Feeweeweewee! The Wise People of Aberdeen: "VOOM"?!? Mate, this bird wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'E's bleedin' demised! Owner: No no! 'E's pining! The Wise People of Aberdeen: 'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This City Square Project is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-CITY SQUARE PROJECT!! (pause) Owner: Well, I'd better replace it, then. (he takes a quick peek behind the counter) Sorry squire, I've had a look 'round the back of the shop, and uh, we're right out of City Square Projects. The Wise People of Aberdeen: I see. I see, I get the picture. Owner: I got a slug. (pause) The Wise People of Aberdeen: Pray, does it talk? Owner: Nnnnot really. The Wise People of Aberdeen: WELL IT'S HARDLY A BL**DY REPLACEMENT, IS IT?!!???!!? Owner: N-no, I guess not. (gets ashamed, looks at his feet)
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Ved you seem to be waivering on your position now. I must have given you something to think about then. Why do you not want to breach the subject of PVA and the Art Gallery? By the way I've had a very deep look into the organisation of PVA and it would appear that it is solely funded by us the taxpayer via ACC and the Scottish Arts Council. Would it not make sense that when ACC are having to make £120M of cuts to services this should be looked into as part of that but I agree that is not a avenue to go down if at all possible. Another issue why are we employing the services of a Spanish Architect when we have one of the most revered schools of Architecture in the city and have done for many years. Oh and BTW I suggested your plan for St Nick house some years ago to have rooftop restaurant with the views that are available would be a wonderful asset to the city.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, ACSEF are still proposing an International Design Competition for the City Square Project. Obviously it's not going to get that far, now that it's dead, but it's surely not a bad idea to involve the best architects in the world in the design of an iconic building. As Peacock Visual Arts did.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Sandy, PVA is not solely funded by the taxpayer, which you would realise if you had visited them and understood that they sell prints, framing, art as well as printmaking, digital, photography and other courses. There is, in other words, a strong commercial aspect to PVA - part of the reason for their move is to strengthen this aspect. As to their compatibility with the Art Gallery, the two organisations serve complementary but distinct purposes. Finally, Edgar Gonzalez is Cuban, and he was awarded the contract following an international design competition which was of course open to all. It would appear that your "deep" look into PVA stopped at the surface, as you don't appear to have even visited their current location just off the Castlegate. You may also wish to consider that funding disbursed by organisations such as the SAC is attached to a specific scheme and cannot simply be transferred willy-nilly.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

And Sandy, If you had looked really, really deeply you would have found that Peacock Visual Arts also derives income from corporate and private sponsorship, from a Friends of Peacocks scheme, from running courses for fee-paying individuals and groups and from sales of some of the wonderful art produced within its creative walls. I'm sure if you contact them they'd be happy to give you a breakdown.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Alasdair you're obviously are a bit blinkered in your outlook. Why on earth would we let public or donated money drain away out of the region paying supposedly the best architects in the world for a design that doesn't suit our climate and needs? Just remember the last Spanish Architect that did a job for the people of Scotland. The Scottish Parliament Building it went from £40M to £440M in a very short time and left us with what can be best described as a maintenance nightmare and a complete carbuncle.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, that last post demonstrates true ignorance. You also appear to be labouring under the impression that Spanish architects are prone to inflating their costs. I believe Gordon Brown might go so far as to call such prejudice "bigoted", and do you know what? He'd be right.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Hey guys bring it on. ACSEF are being accused of duplicity here but obviously PVA and the opposition aren't being entirely open and honest either. Let's see the accounts and balance sheets and if there isn't a reliance on public funds lets cut it out now and help the disabled and neediy in society instead.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Ved - I agree with you. This is not about the money. The Civic Square Plan (whatever that happens to be on the day) should never be approved. Apparently we cant make sense of the technical data. Seemed clear enough to me. This city should not be developed on the whims of new money magnates. The city as it stands is about materialism, mainly due to fawning politicians and planners. And Mike is also right. There is no organised anti-group, but merely a group of very concerned Aberdonians. I have lived in Aberdeen all my life, and it has heartened me at the disparate group of protesters who make their case succinctly,well and from an informed base. Good for you all. The PVA will inject a much-needed bit of culture into our city, and help it distance itself from the consumerist values of corporate America.
dorothy bothwell
Report this comment

Sandy, Have you seen Mr Gonzalez design for the Arts Centre in Union Terrace Gardens? I have and I think it wonderful, beautiful, in perfect harmony with its location and not at all inappropriate to the Scottish climate. Why do you think I am blinkered? And why would the alleged failures of a Spanish architect 10 years ago have any impact on the work of a Cuban architect today?
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Sandy, with support like yours its little wonder that Acsef's credibility is non-existent. Nobody has said that PVA don't receive grants from the public purse, you have simply been corrected in your erroneous assertion that PVA are funded 100% from the public purse. And instead of acknowledging that, you now want to pull their funding. That's cracking logic, Sandy - well done.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Sandy, when has anyone pretended that PVA didn't receive public finding. It does, and quite rightly too. Life without art is like herring without oatmeal.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Ah but.....no but......ah but.....rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb........"Hey Tom, pass the fuzzy felt trees and I'll have another go at the landscaping. Where did ya get these? Toys R'Us? They're just the job. Show the folk that there is a lot of greenery, and they might not notice the car park. Oh.......we not keeping it then? Not sure. Right....! Who says we aren't enlightened business leaders. We'll show 'em."................allegedly overhead at an Acsef meeting.
dorothy bothwell
Report this comment

Richard, ignorant and bigoted? I would call it more stimulating reasoned debate.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Alasdair I'm not saying that the design is not beautiful and wonderful what I am saying if we have all these supposed wonderful artists here in Aberdeen attending PVA and the rest why are they not coming up with a design? I'm backing Aberdonians and people of the North East to lead the world in Art and Design. So you admit a Spanish Architect has produced a failure then.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Ironically Sandy, if the PVA scheme had gone ahead as originally planed, due to the economic issues, costs may well have been LOWER than budgeted……………………………………………………………………………….. PVA do receive some funding from the council, I believe less in the last 12 months than the council allowed to be spent on the ‘consultation’ and there’s a real economic benefit from PVA………………………….. Firstly, PVA work with some of the areas most disadvantaged kids, giving them other interests, sometimes helping divert some kids away from petty crime and anti social behaviour…………………………………………………………………… Secondly, their proposed plan is expected t bring in £6m a year to the area. A strong ROI…………………………………………………………………………………… The running costs of this square (let’s imagine that the capital costs are magically covered) would be unknown, and one more thing for the council to have to try to cover. And looking at all of the concepts, I suspect weekend policing costs would have to increase too……………………………………………………………………… As for a non-local designer. There was a competition, and an internationally acclaimed design has been chosen. Maintenance, well a lot of that can be put down to how well built something is. Do you expect this carbuncle of a square to be a) on budget, and b) maintenance free?
Michael Hodgson
Report this comment

Richard if you care to look at no time did I say PVA was 100% funded from the public purse but I sure would like to know what the percentage is to see if it is a viable operation. Memories of Glencraft come to mind here and look at the devestation that caused to vulnerable individuals lives.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Micheal lower costs, £6m a year, facts I think not. You make reasonable points but nothing hard and fast. What's wrong with pushing for individual excellance from the young people of the NE. Maybe some of the disadvantaged kids tnat you talk about have the talent to produce a world class design that will really change their lives.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

sandy, methinks you are not reading the replies...yes, you appear to be ignorant, as you keep saying that Edgar Gonzales is a Spanish Architect, when he's a Cuban Architect. but, I guess they all sound the same, eh. Doofus. Please also read my point about the arts & funding. I do hope you are not as ignorant as to think that all the artists in the North East of Scotland using "art" to express, explore and question, provide education and community projects are they type of artists the sun and co lambaste and denounce as a waste of space like Damien Hirst or Tracey Emin (not that I think they are). what I think you might benefit from, is reading some books, exploring what you have "up here" that's not directly related to oil & money, you might find it quite interesting and enlightening.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Philip, the Spanish Architect I've been refering to is Enric Miralles who was indeed Spanish from Catalonia. Whether Mr Gonzales is Cuban or any other nationality is irrelevant. I'm argueing that we produce the next Scott Sutherland or Archibald Simpson.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

...and having a think about all of Sandy's posts - are we to assume that Aberdeen is NOT allowed to have an arts scene? (as I am sure the turret / box in the CSP will house an arts organisation that also needs funding). Do we have to wait until the oil and its business runs out - before the council looks to artists and creatives to bring life back to a dead city? (Newcastle, Sheffield, Glasgow...) It's just typical of business minded conservative men that push the idea that art is frivolous and a luxry (as that's how they "consume" art - buying expensive pictures, ask Ian Wood). My skill in life is being creative and applying creativity to any project I encounter - benefiting? hopefully the people I encounter by inspiring them and making them think "I can do anything I put my mind and talent to". But, arguing with a conservative about funding for the arts is like pulling teeth.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Philip, the Spanish Architect I've been refering to is Enric Miralles who was indeed Spanish from Catalonia. Whether Mr Gonzales is Cuban or any other nationality is irrelevant. I'm argueing that we produce the next Scott Sutherland or Archibald Simpson.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy i can see how well you looked at the PVA, Spanish Architect? of course, cuz he has a spanish sounding name, i get it. That's so shallow, sandy. He's actually a UK national, of cuban origin, not spanish. Regardless, he is a representative of UK practice, a very prominent one, fair enough based in london, but still one to be proud of in the way it represents the UK with the architecture it produces. The PVA is also funded by the arts council, and this money is not granted to re paint their existing premises, but is project specific to a world class gallery. And it's not just gallery space, the workshops that peacock have are well used and busy.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

"Just remember the last Spanish Architect that did a job for the people of Scotland." so is there a new Spanish Architect you are referring to here? I knew you were on about Miralles and the Scottish parliament, it's the reference to PVA and a Spannish Architect we're wondering about...
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

http://www.stewartmilne.com/media/Image/Groups/03-HQ-Homes-Head-Office.jpg now there's first class, inspiring architecture, from some home grown talent. "steady on the fancy bits boys, I've got to pay for my new cars and holidays this month!"
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Sandy your arguements are neither reasoned, nors stimulated, but very opinionated, and yes bigoted. You are basing an arguement that the PVA will fail because a spanish architect, who died mid construction, for a completely different project with an ever changing brief went over budget, yet the practice spearheading the PVA is a UK one, whose architect happens to have a spanish sounding name as he is of cuban origin. Aye, ok, i see the reason there. That's sarcasm by the way. And you are insisting that the PVA funds that have already been approved be cut, why, just because you have recently realised they come from the public purse? thay have already been granted fot the project, as well as a full unanimous planning conscent. So what is the hypocracy in that, it's something i have claimed all along.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Do you guys want to discuss this issue or are you just interested in splitting hairs and petty point scoring. It's little wonder "artists" have little credability if this is how low their reasoning goes when faced with hard decisions and issues.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Philip, thanks for that comment, ditto
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Bigots come in all shapes and sizes "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones I'm afraid" I think you both lost the plot altogether.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Oh, ok, so we should sack Brisac Gonzales, who won an international competition, which did include a few scottish pracices, and pull the plug on the peacock budget, just because mr sandy milne here has suddenly reealised that he has a foreign sounding name, and that's just not good enough for aberdeen, oh no.. Should we kick out the polish as well sandy, and all the foreigners while we are at it?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Bigots come in all shapes and sizes "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones I'm afraid" I think you both lost the plot altogether.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Ved are you racist because you certainly come across as one? I know I'm certainly not.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy What exactly is your argument? ……………………………………………………………….. That we should be getting a local designer (unknown or not well-known) to design the PVA building? Why exactly? A competition was held, the opportunity to take part was there, a design was chosen, planning permission given. Perhaps having a prominent well-designed building will inspire the next generation? How many truly iconic buildings have we had in the last 10 years? …………………………………………………………….. There’s a great difference between designing something and actually building it, we need to have world class design, and world class builders. We need to work with the future generations to inspire them to go for this kind of goal. ……………………………………………………. The £6m came from the PVA business plan for the building, and was supported by a range of groups, organisations and bodies, even ACSEF, and is certainly more concrete a ROI than we have seen from the City square
Michael Hodgson
Report this comment

What issue are you trying to discuss sandy? i've told you exactly why your points and false assumptions are irrelevant, ok maybe i was a touch sarky, but that's just how i roll. They really do not carry any merit, for a project that has gone through a competition process and been granted planning, to be dismissed by your bigotry, it just makes you look silly. The only valid point you had was that decking over the dual carriegeway and rail would provide more usable space. Well done, good conclusion. I gave you my views against that, although i AM also open to the idea if done right.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Well you certainly did portray yourself as one sandy, a very ignorant one.. One that actually needs sarcasm explained to them.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

oh dear oh dear. is there where I have to type "nah nah nahh nahhh na"? What I think is happening here Sandy, is we are questioning you, and correcting you when you are wrong. Something "we" are accused of not being able to do, as "we're" the ones supposed to be punting out misinformation. Splitting hairs? you're the one accusing a talented man of being a failure because of a Spanish Architect - and it actually wasn't even his fault, blame the builders and the people whom won the construction contract. If they couldn't build a building to the specs given - on budget. Anyway, back on track - the CSP "value for money, a gift, wonderful for Aberdeen"...err... no.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

At the end of the day sandy, you did try and bring genuine points to the discussion, and i do appreciate that. it's a shame you went off on a tangent about ethicisity, and you got it quite wronge, hence all the remarks accusing you of ignorance and biggotry, you have to accept that they are not out of place, as personally aimed as they may seem, they are not unmerited. As for your other points, well i've certainly given you my take on them, and have put both my time and thoguhts into them.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Ved you haven't told me or anyone else for that matter anything of any merit (sorry a bit of sarcasm there as you have educated me on oh there it goes again me being ignorant I just found out about that today also). Who judged the competition that everyone is talking about? I know one thing for sure it wasn't the people of Aberdeen that's for sure. My argument Micheal is we should have as you say inspiration for future generations in the NE of Scotland drawing on the inspiration of the eclectic mix of existing architecture of this great city that we live in. Too often we think that just because someone comes from Spain, Cuba, Bradford, Moscow or where ever that they can do something better than ourselves. I'm arguing for excellance and inspiration from our own students and youngsters be they from anywhere in world and take forward what we have to offer as a world class seat of education.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, there is really no point going further before you learn how a competition works, how it's conducted, judged, who has the authority to grant planning and allocate funding. Your're about two years too late anyway. I'm open for discussion, but i'm not goung to waste my time explaining the basics to you, all the information is easiloy accesible.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Ah, Sandy, if only you spoke to PVA to find out this "information". you'll know about all the entrants, and why BG's won... So you are offering "protectionism" as a solution to taking Aberdeen into the 21st centenary Architecturally? perhaps the Architect students would draw inspiration and experience from watching a WORLD CLASS ARCHITECT working here? perhaps inspiring them to go on and produce more amazing buildings for Aberdeen (if they can get past the bureaucratic, conservative "safe" building restrictions we have in Aberdeen) or even perhaps go on an prosper, designing buildings for other cities around the world? (oh, that's right, you wouldn't allow that, well, other people like you living in other cities). Your logic sir, is flawed.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Sandy, I appreciate that you may feel slightly vindicated by the "personal" comments made towards you but I can completely understand why some Aberdonians are quite angry about the sham that is this supposed "democratic" process and I hope you can to. Those in opposition to the CSP have been labelled backwards tree hugging hippies, and have even been banded together via the "free press" as an organised group of people determined to spoil any chance of Aberdeen progressing in the future. However, in reality, we are a collection of individuals united by the strong factual belief that what has been proposed as Sir Ian's vision is wrong. Both for the cities future and its citizens. In response to your query regarding the competition format for Peacocks, as far as I remember the competition was organised by RIAS (Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland) who shortlistd 5 architects, Richard Murphy (Edinburgh), Brisac Gonzalez (London), 3XN (Copenhagen), Reaich and Hall (Edinburgh) and Nicoll Russell Studios (Dundee). From that short list it was decided that the Brisac Gonzalez scheme was the most suitable one for such a sensitive site. This would have been no easy decision and would not have been made lightly without any course for thinking about the impact of such a contemporary piece of architecture in so mature landscaping. With regards to Ved Mij's and others various points above, maybe we should read into them a bit closer as there are some extremely merit-able points made with some careful thought behind them. Also, in direct response to your point "Too often we think that just because someone comes from Spain, Cuba, Bradford, Moscow or where ever that they can do something better than ourselves" judging by the amount of ill conceived (I would love to use a stronger tone here) buildings that have been constructed here over the past 20 years I think you are wrong.
Bill Simpson
Report this comment

vindicated or victimised? ah, the critical artist strikes again, curse my need for clarity. he he.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Sandy, you inferred that the failure of the Scottish Parliament building could be blamed on the Spanish architect. The further inference was that the Spanish element of that was somehow important to you. This is so clearly ignorant it should require no further explanation; I have no desire to trade insults with strangers, but on the other hand such baseless assertions need challenging. You have also been making a vague point about PVA's public funding, to make what point I am unsure; the only certainty is that the "deep" research you claim to have conducted is no such thing. If you want a reasonable discussion about the issues, why not state your position with some supporting evidence, like most folk do? Have a try at that, surely you'll find out people enjoy it. You might even enjoy it.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Rather like a competent magician, ASCEF has distracted our attention from what it considers to be the *real* prize, which is the re-development of the site of the Denburn Health Centre and Woolmanhill Hospital. The City Square Project is necessary to provide the car-parking space which would be lost when the Denburn Health Centre carpark is removed in favour of housing/retail/new iconic towerblock/lord knows.
Ludvig von Mises
Report this comment

Oh, and this Sandy fella. What can I say? He is typical of the type of local who seriously makes me think of abandoning this city to him and his kind.
Ludvig von Mises
Report this comment

On this occasion, do you really think this rump of business people will be allowed to get away with this VANDALISM to out city centre?
mike tyers
Report this comment

Seems we lost the plot with Sandy Milnes comments. I thougth this was about UTG and ACSEF. Fair point to Willie Young even if not the right answer. None of these 50 illustious businessmen have even mentioned forking out some cash, but we don't want them to. We want to have the Gardnes. ACSEF and its cronies and members look as if they are having a fit because they might lose Woods millions. Not a bad idea though. It is easy to check ACSEF web site and see the lies they tell, so just what is so vital that these 50 or so need to have the square. There must be profits there or they would not be interested. Stewart Milne we know has a vested interest. Stewart Spence manybe and the other Holtelier. They might be in with a bid for the hotel that is sketched in. It also looks like they know that Union Square is in the wrong place, so if they can connect a new road through, what was that??? escalators and moving pavements. Just how easy to get round all the malls. With a few cafes to obtain some refreshment. Just how stupid do they think the people of Aberdeen is.??? There is more here that just the PVA, which is brillant with an already "International design". Now they want another competition. Why there is one already. Yes our council has a hard choice to make. As far as I know we did not elect the members of ACSEF nor for any business men but we did elect our councilors who are supposed to look after the city, its heritage and it citizens. Let us see them do that. These 50 men and ASCEF/Wood are making the city a laughing stock at their behaviour. If this is how business is conducted, I fear for the future of the city in their hands. What is ACSEF supposed to be Oh yes the Future good. What a joke!!!. WE hae become the Oil capital of Europe, and a city that has a garden in the centre of town. Which is more than many places can say. And I wish they would stop coming up with the Americans. Must be the oil has gone to their heads. Any more of Stewart Milne the city will be called Stewarville and the gardens Woods Folly. Long live democracy. Just hope ACSEF does not get their hands on the election papers tonight.
minnie mo
Report this comment

Nice talking to you all. Here's hoping the best solution is found for all concerned. A proud Aberdonian signing off.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy Milne, at lunchtime today you said "and it would appear that it is solely funded by us the taxpayer via ACC and the Scottish Arts Council", then sometime later you said "Richard if you care to look at no time did I say PVA was 100% funded from the public purse". I know you'll think I'm splitting hairs pointing out your wee inaccuracies but I do think facts are quite important in making and sustaining arguments. If you keep it up you;ll get honorary lifetime membership of ACSEF. Anyway, nice talking to you too, all the best.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Sandy Milne, at lunchtime today you said "and it would appear that it is solely funded by us the taxpayer via ACC and the Scottish Arts Council", then sometime later you said "Richard if you care to look at no time did I say PVA was 100% funded from the public purse". I know you'll think I'm splitting hairs pointing out your wee inaccuracies but I do think facts are quite important in making and sustaining arguments. If you keep it up you;ll get honorary lifetime membership of ACSEF. Anyway, nice talking to you too, all the best.
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Have just visited the Architects website. Looks like they do a lovely line in concrete boxes as these seem to be the only completed projects at this time. Some great concepts and nice pictures but nothing of great stature that is a match for anything Archibald Simpson has done for the city in the past
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Have just visited the Architects website. Looks like they do a lovely line in concrete boxes as these seem to be the only completed projects at this time. Some great concepts and nice pictures but nothing of great stature that is a match for anything Archibald Simpson has done for the city in the past
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Hello again sandy! That was quick, flight delayed due to ash?anyway I thought I'd let you know that pva is a registered charity so you can access their accounts (obviously you are testing us, as you did 'in depth' research into them) charity number 14840 but you already know that
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

PVA are a registered charity but they are also supported by Aberdeen City Council and the Scottish Arts Council which was the first thing I noticed when I looked at their website for a whole 2 seconds to see what all this was about. As for the architect argument, I can see exactly where Sandy is coming from. Aberdeen has spawned famous architects over the years including Archibald Simpson and Alexander Marshall MacKenzie who hailed from Elgin originally but played a big part in the architecture in around Aberdeen including Mar Lodge at Braemar, Ardoe House, the arch at Robert Gordon's and, possibly the most relevant to this discussion, Union Terrace Gardens. Scott Sutherland School trains hundreds of young architects each year, why not keep the pattern going and host the competition for Aberdonian architects? As it is a project based in Aberdeen and the presence of art in the city, why not give artists and architects the opportunity to contribute to the project in the city where they live and will be able to appreciate it?
Random Hazard
Report this comment

Philip the state of PVA's finances are of little or no relevance in the bigger scheme of things. I've obviously touched on a contentious point here by highlighting this issue as I sense a degree of nervousness and hostility here. The point I'm trying very hard to make here is we should have a high degree of local content in any design from CSP or PVA. That isn't bigoted, ignorant, or any other slur you want to cast up but a plea for educational excellence in Architechtural design (a form of Art btw).
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Philip the state of PVA's finances are of little or no relevance in the bigger scheme of things. I've obviously touched on a contentious point here by highlighting this issue as I sense a degree of nervousness and hostility here. The point I'm trying very hard to make here is we should have a high degree of local content in any design from CSP or PVA. That isn't bigoted, ignorant, or any other slur you want to cast up but a plea for educational excellence in Architechtural design (a form of Art btw).
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Sandy, the whole argument about Peacock's proposal is irrelevant now as it has full planning permission and can go ahead as soon as funding is in place and a lease agreed. I agree it would have been wonderful if a talented local architect had designed the building but that hasn't happened and isn't going to now. Why not support Peacock's visionary proposal and we will soon be the proud owners of a wonderful facility where creative talent can grow and develop in a beautiful setting?
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

Sandy, good to see that your position has shifted from slating foreign architects for being, er, foreign, and that you're putting forward a case for local talent. Shame that the CSP is predicated, like the approved PVA scheme, on an international competition, which means that it might not be a local winner. Your point about "touching a contentious point" is odd. You made an incorrect assertion, you were corrected, and now you think you've touched a raw nerve? How does that work?
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Richard, I suspect Sandy is a plant from the vocal minority of orchestrated tree hugging pro Union Terrace Gardens arty farty liberal sandal wearing farternity. His inputs today have been tinged with a deliciously satirical element that beautifully mirrors the mendacious doublespeak of Sir Tom Smith and his ACSEF crew. He must be taking the mickey!
Alasdair Johnston
Report this comment

"please do not feed the troll" - a basic rule we have broken today... still, tomorrow is a new day.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

It's just we rarely get a chance to communicate with the silent majority! Especially when they are talking such guff about nationality and spurious points! Hoho.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

An extremely sad day today to see that collective zealotism is alive and kicking in Aberdeen.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

How rdidculous can you get sandy? there is no collective zealotis, just a large number of people who dont know each other but do know a lot about the projects, telling one person, i.e. you, that they are wrong, correcting them, but then that person, i.e, still you just refusing to accept that, and turning it into a some collective stance or attack. Stop shifting your stance to avoid admitting it was wrong, the PVA funding has been clearly explaned all along, as well as their business plan. As for local architecture and competitions, well it's an interesting discussion, and your point (which shifted from a low ignorant remark based on a false assumption, to an enthusiastic thrive for local talent) isn't entirely misplaced, but it's two years too late. If this is the first time u've visited the Brisac Gonzales website, where on earth was all that criricism coming from yesterday? It sounds like you've just recently spoken to somebody about this, perhaps a current architecture student, and have taken their views and without doing any background research into this hace tried to pass them on and apparently resolve a very polarised issue that's been going on for months overnight. It's unfortunate that no practice from aberdeen entered the shortlist, i don't know if any entered the competition. But that's how high profile work tends to be won, and aberdeen is not alone in this. The exact same discussions have been had over the transport museum in glasgow, and over the new arts school in glasgow, and that city has much more of a competative talent to put up against the high profile names. As for aberdeen, well u can hardly expect Archie Simpson to enter the competition can you? And althgough the scott sutherland does produce talented architects, well students are hardly competent to take on a project like the PVA on their own are they?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

You've not touched any raw nerves sandy, you've just made yourself looked silly. A lot of us here have contrasting opinions that get discussed, but none are as misinformed as yhours.If you were a little less defensive, and if you pointed the finger a bit less, you might have actually learned something, and maybe developed a more informed opinion.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

And at the end of the day Just where do you think Martha Schwartz is from? that is the name attached to the CSP, and marketed as a world class designer behind the scheme, with HFM producing the feasibility report. And that wasnt even awarded through a competition! oh, time to look at another website sandy!
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Now we're getting somewhere, "A lot of us here"? Where is here? Are you all going to show your connections here then? I tell you mine, born and brought up in this city for the best part of 50 years and extremely proud of the legacy left to the city by our forefathers. I'm not in the slightest connected with ACSEF or anyone else for that matter just a concerned citizen without self interest.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Now we're getting somewhere, "A lot of us here"? Where is here? Are you all going to show your connections here then? I tell you mine, born and brought up in this city for the best part of 50 years and extremely proud of the legacy left to the city by our forefathers. I'm not in the slightest connected with ACSEF or anyone else for that matter just a concerned citizen without self interest.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Now we're getting somewhere, "A lot of us here"? Where is here? Are you all going to show your connections here then? I tell you mine, born and brought up in this city for the best part of 50 years and extremely proud of the legacy left to the city by our forefathers. I'm not in the slightest connected with ACSEF or anyone else for that matter just a concerned citizen without self interest.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Now we're getting somewhere, "A lot of us here"? Where is here? Are you all going to show your connections here then? I tell you mine, born and brought up in this city for the best part of 50 years and extremely proud of the legacy left to the city by our forefathers. I'm not in the slightest connected with ACSEF or anyone else for that matter just a concerned citizen without self interest.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

"Now we're getting somewhere" who's this 'we' you represent sandy? ... Hoho. Ps don't refresh the page, asyousee u end up with multiple posts.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

Sandy, please continue to embarass yourself, it is so endlessly amusing. Again, not a single point made, just petty misplaced conclusions. I dont know whose comment ur refering to with 'lot of us here' but here refers to aberdeen silly. Just what micconstruded conclusion have you conjured up just now?
Ved Mij
Report this comment

http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/archive/260/upcoming-exhbibition-jacques-coetzer-weekend-cathedral new exhibition (free to all) opening tonight. See you there? (It's up two smelly lanes, out of sight, out of mind, but don't be scared... perhaps they should get a swanky new celebratory and inviting building for more people to experience for themselves what "discourse" is all about, instead of being told PVA are exclusive and elitist). EVERYONE welcome.
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

I'll just add pedantic, dogmatic and really quite ignorant to zealotism.
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Oh and by the way a collection of experts as you claim. I've counted about 6 supercillious zealots that's all
Sandy Milne
Report this comment

Yeah ok, that's me told then sandy.. whatever helps you sleep at night buddy.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

I think by “a lot of us here”, Sandy, Ved meant, a lot of the people commenting on this site. We don’t share much in common but a love of this city. Between us, in past exchanges I think we have differing views in some areas………………………….. My connection to both PVA and ACSEF is generally known, but I see no need to continue to bring it up. I don’t comment in any ‘official’ capacity, but as someone who has chosen to make this city my home. (Despite the apparent lack of a civic square.) ………………………………………………………………………………………….. Do I care about this city? Yes, Am I a supercillious zealot? Perhaps in your eyes. I can’t claim to have £50m to spare, but if I did, I would be putting up a rival bid so that we could look at the proposals based on their benefits to the city, and the legacy they’ll leave. ………………………………………………………………………………………….. PVA will rejuvenate the park, bring in visitors to the city, create a strong ROI and not burden us with debt. The city square may bring in some visitors, perhaps, but there’s no evidence it will be as valuable as PVA, never mind above and beyond, despite costing ten times as much. ………………………………………………………………………………………….. If we’re going to splash that kind of cash we should be doing something that will be worth it.
Michael Hodgson
Report this comment

"supercillious zealots" - what country are they from? they sound pretty amazing like. Do you think they wear their pants over their tights?
Philip Thompson
Report this comment