Grand designs leave a city divided
One of the concept designs for the City Garden Project
DESIGNS created by six of the world’s leading architectural firms for the controversial transformation of Union Terrace Gardens in Aberdeen have been unveiled to a bitterly divided public in the city.
The architects’ visions to turn the Victorian gardens into an “iconic” city centre landscape range from a space-age web of three dimensional pathways to a winter gardens that will glow like the “Northern Lights” at night and proposals to transform part of the park into an urban beach.
Malcolm Reading, an architectural expert who acted as adviser to the jury panel, claimed yesterday the residents of Aberdeen would be “awe-struck” by the “inspirational and innovative” designs chosen to create a new heart for the Granite City.
He said: “It is no longer ‘shall we build or shan’t we build?’ These are six visions of the future of exceptional quality in terms of design. It doesn’t get better than this.”
But Andrew MacGregor, secretary of the protest group Friends of Union Terrace Gardens, condemned the shortlisted designs as an “absolute abomination”. He said: “We have already had a public vote, and the public has said that they want the gardens to remain as they are.
“We don’t want the gardens to be turned into a concrete space-age flyover or anything else.”
He added: “We will have rolling protests at the exhibition venue until the public exhibition is finished.”
Members of the public will be given a chance to have their say when the exhibition of the models and design drawings go on show at the Academy in Belmont Street today.
But the jury panel will decide the winning entry when it meets on 8 November, with the winner announced in mid-November.
The illustrious list of architects on the shortlist includes the company run by the acclaimed British architect Lord Norman Foster, the designer behind the landmark Gherkin at London’s Canary Wharf, the architects who designed the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial in London and the Norwegian team responsible for the memorial pavilion honouring the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attack on Manhattan.
Details of the design team behind each scheme are being kept secret as part of the judging process.
Mr Reading said he hoped the shortlisted designs would “raise the level of debate” in the city. He continued: “I hope the public will be amazed and inspired. People I have already taken around the exhibition have been absolutely awestruck that something like this is possible.
“This is a special moment in the competition where, for the first time, we can see how these six remarkable teams envision the City Garden for Aberdeen. The designs are exceptional – all of them memorable in their own way, and visually rich and inspired combinations of landscape, urban design and architecture.”
However, Mike Shepherd, the chairman of Friends of Union Terrace Gardens, said: “The world’s architects are being asked what the centre of Aberdeen should look like. The people of Aberdeen were also asked and were ignored.
“Why should the council spend millions on a modern city garden when we are perfectly happy with the one we have got. This is both inanity and insanity.”
The £140 million project is being championed by oil tycoon Sir Ian Wood, who has pledged £50 million of his personal fortune towards the scheme.
Jennifer Craw, speaking on behalf of the Wood family trust, said: “The ambition for the city garden project hasalways been to act as catalyst in the transformation of the city centre and to create a new and beating heart for the city.”
But Liberal Democrat councillor Martin Greig, a long-standing opponent of the project, claimed: “All around our city there are streets, schools, parks and other public facilities deteriorating seriously due to lack of income into the council’s budget. These should be the priority.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 15 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
Incandescent
Thursday, October 20, 2011 at 05:10 PMWell, well. An "iconic" development proposal that seems deeply unpopular with the citizenry. Who would have thought...
Jacobite
Thursday, October 20, 2011 at 11:04 AMMr Wood leave the park alone as it would be wrong to invest all that money into this folly and Union Street looking like a tip. ----- How about building some nice housing for the homeless people in Aberdeen who seem to always lose out, just like they did with the National Lottery instead we are sending money for the Olympics (London Only), with obscene costs of ticketing. Yes Mr Wood do something for the homeless people in Aberdeen
WJohn
Thursday, October 20, 2011 at 07:52 AMOne looked like a giant Jenga. The one pictured above will make good ski slopes in winter and skateboard facility in summer. Why will a giant bubble cost so much? Why is there no big rusty statue of an iconic fish-wife or a Spanish trawler - symbol of Scotland’s fishing industry? Or even better a giant pair of furry boots made out of rusty barbed wire. Ironic or iconic? Symbol of the town's warm heart and welcoming nature.
ReprievedSoul
Thursday, October 20, 2011 at 07:27 AMRemember always that these 'competition responses' are not reimbursed (except to any eventual winner) so they tend to be stock, out of the drawer, ready made. Rarely will the concept address the hidden difficulties (soil mechanics etc). Learn from The Parliament and the upturned boats. So until Bold Sir Ian puts some of his tax-deductable profits into developing a viable scheme (which can't be credibly done below a million gbp) this is just skygazing. Best conducted from a seat in the delectable existing gardens. Plenty development improvement opportunities exist in north-central Aiberdeen. Perhaps the Denburn Carpark could be consigned to overdue oblivioon, and the Denburn motorway overbuilt,to complement the Gardens?
Platosoup
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 03:17 PMGet your facts right, Scotsman! With regard to Foster and Partners "landmark Gherkin at London's Canary Wharf! Last time I looked, "The Gherkin" at 30 St. Mary Axe, was a good three to four miles from Canary Wharf.
C Steven
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 03:00 PMMike Shepherd, #5; just to clarify, I was referring to the assertion made by some that the scheme was not a in fact a garden but instead a large car park with a retail area, i.e. a concrete development with no green space. As everyone else expected, the designs include more green space than there currently is, even if commercial aspects are included (If these reduce the overall costs and offer useful facilities, then they should be welcomed).
Alasdair1943
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 08:27 AMWhen I speak to fellow citizens of Aberdeen, I am hard pressed to find anyone in favour of the redevelopment of Union Terrace Gardens. Most people agree that there are aspects of the gardens that do need improvement - but they remain a valuable legacy from Victorian times and a much need breathing space within the City. (Would Edinburgh want to cover over Princes Sreet Gardens?) This folly of redeveloping Union Terrace Gardens has taken on a life of its own. It seems as though the ordinary people of Aberdeen are being ignored and that common sense is flying out of the window. Unfortunately, the whole matter is also becoming too connected with various people's egos.
Ian Aberdon
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 07:09 AMWell, if it must be changed, I don't want a humungous great cube at the corner of Union StTerr, as one Team shows. Talk about a giant shelter for the beggars, alkies & junkies of Aberdeen! Mind you, it seems bickering is what the people of Aiberdein are particularly good at!!!
Aberdeen lad
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 06:45 AMThe people of Aberdeen voted against the destruction of the gardens, but corrupt Aberdeen City Council does what it likes.
Mike Shepherd
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 04:16 AMMr Steven - "at least the car park nonsense hasn't been brought up". Mr Steven, I think it might be an idea to go along to the design competition and ask about car parking (like our friends group did). Here is what they reported back (I couldn't go). Two of the designs feature substantial car parking. One features office block development. I notice that one design mentions a conference centre and maybe they all do. A public park is being developed with a significant commercial element present.
Mike Shepherd
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 03:12 AMAArgh.... The designs show Vogon landing strips, tellytubbie buildings, chinese paddy fields, giant glass slugs and reject stage sets from the movie Spinal Tap on top of Union Bridge. Add in the planned office block next door with a brick spire sticking out of it and you will have the ultimate acid trip gone wrong without having to imbibe any illegal substances.
Tartancult
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 12:59 AMnot to mention, desired
Tartancult
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 12:59 AM"Grand designs leave a city divided"..............and the grand(?) re-design of this site leaves a lot to be derired.
footdee
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 12:57 AMThe whole beauty of the site is the depth and the view that gives to the back of Belmont st -------------.Why not a plan that keeps the depth but covers up the roadrail .why not an extension of the art gallery across schoolhill to the ground beneath the church spire with hugh glass walls giving people in the park and on union terrace views of Paintings.
C Steven
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 12:39 AMSome impressive and interesting designs in there. Leaning towards no. 1 or 2 personally, but any of them would be a much needed improvement on the current gardens. “We don’t want the gardens to be turned into a concrete space-age flyover or anything else.” Sad to see the FOUTG secretary still clinging to the "concrete jungle" notion while all but one of the designs are shown to contain more green space than there currently is (as far as I can tell, could be all 6). At least the car park nonsense hasn't been brought up.
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.