Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy

Students unveil alternate Aberdeen Harbour plans

June 15 2015

Students unveil alternate Aberdeen Harbour plans
Final year architectural technology students Scott Crighton and Robert Lucas at Robert Gordon University have published alternative designs for the expansion of Aberdeen Harbour, following publication of a 20 year master plan for the area.

This would entail creation of a new marine operations centre and ferry terminal for the facility, capable of accommodating large cruise liners.

Course leader Jonathan Scott said: “The proposed expansion to Aberdeen Harbour located at Nigg Bay offers a rich array of opportunity for student projects.

“The first of these is a proposal for a Marine Operations Centre, responsible for the safe piloting and direction of ships into and out of the harbour. For technologists this is an opportunity to understand, develop, appraise and communicate ideas for the technically difficult tall, slender structure.

“For the ferry terminal, the students’ designs were required to be contemporary and flexible, with the focus this time on integrating the fabric with a means to power the building and to be as close to zero carbon as possible.”

The work forms part of the Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment End of Year Show, which runs from 18 to 24 June.
A steel diagrid structure is proposed for the control tower, allowing open plan floorplates
A steel diagrid structure is proposed for the control tower, allowing open plan floorplates
The ferry terminal design has been likened to a rib cage protected by a strong outer shell
The ferry terminal design has been likened to a rib cage protected by a strong outer shell


#1 Posted by Anna on 16 Jun 2015 at 09:36 AM
So original, looks nothing like King's Cross or the British Museum.
Matthew Ansell
#2 Posted by Matthew Ansell on 16 Jun 2015 at 13:42 PM
Crap, pointless comment Anna.
Great interior space....regardless.
#3 Posted by Jon on 16 Jun 2015 at 14:07 PM
High quality work and a though provoking set of proposals. Congratulations. One wonders whether Aberdeen Council will take notice of your findings - from past precedent I would be doubtful, which is a shame as Aberdeen would genuinely benefit from this sort of forward thinking.
Bill S
#4 Posted by Bill S on 16 Jun 2015 at 14:18 PM
Interesting proposals. The first visual, taken alone and at face value is pretty excellent at presenting the proposed interior - it looks busy, dynamic and an engaging space. It's hard to criticise the overall scheme without seeing more of the presentation and the context, but it's enough to make me want to see more.
Neil C
#5 Posted by Neil C on 16 Jun 2015 at 19:02 PM
If these students are talented Bill, why are they not doing the architecture course. Seems a complete waste? What on earth is architectural technology, like an HND?
#6 Posted by Pruitt-Igoe on 17 Jun 2015 at 07:35 AM
Dearie me, what kind of a comment is that? Incredibly snobbish. You refer to a waste...but of what? In your case it's definitely oxygen, but if you could elaborate on your incredibly insightful comments that would be great, cheers.
#7 Posted by Jimmy on 17 Jun 2015 at 09:51 AM
@Neil C - Thats a staggeringly narrow minded comment, even for an Urban Realm comments section...

Hard to gauge these schemes from an architectural standpoint, given the lack of context, however at first look they appear a bit alien- as though they are the product of computer coding and scripting rather than a considered response to a brief and site.

"In a world of monotonous horror there could be no salvation in wild dreaming."

Aberdeen is certainly a world of monotonous horror (Or Halliday Fraser Munro as they are more commonly known) so fair play to these students for thinking outside the box a little.

#8 Posted by Jim on 17 Jun 2015 at 09:51 AM
Yes Bill and Jon these are indeed some pretty pictures but are they anything more? Banal building with a "modern" feature?
Have to say I agree with Anna and Neil.
#9 Posted by Jonny on 17 Jun 2015 at 10:15 AM
Having actually seen ALL the work where the Technologists at the School deliver detailed (yes detail) proposals for the brief, including detailed junctions, environmental strategy, etc and that these are the images that were 'chosen' to be publicised, I see some of the negative responses totally close minded. Yes, the student produces more work and No, these images are not his only submission as part of the project.

@Neil C - It's an Honours degree (easy enough to find this information) and No, why would they be Architecture students ? They are producing material totally different from Architecture students. These images are the flashy part that has been chosen to be publicised. Any open-minded person should know that.
Neil C
#10 Posted by Neil C on 17 Jun 2015 at 11:28 AM
Looks like they are trying to produce architecture to me and from recognised projects by McAslan and Foster. There's no need either to be so protective if it's so good let's see the work if it's of a standard comparable to architecture students I'll say so. I have no axe to grind, and if you could tell me what Architectural Technologists do that is different from a technician with an HND I'd also appreciate it. Seems to me HND is just as worthy.
#11 Posted by Jonny on 17 Jun 2015 at 12:02 PM
Someone with a chip on there shoulder?
#12 Posted by Marcus on 17 Jun 2015 at 13:46 PM
@Neil C

Technologists have an Honours degree, whereas a technician has at best a HND. The difference here (similarly to architects) is that a technologist can only be called so by getting the full qualification. A technologist is educated beyond the realms of a technician/draughtsman, where technologists have greater technical knowledge and are encouraged to push into the realm of design and technological advancement. In your honours year of Technology you do a full blown project by yourself (from inception to a full building warrant package). From my understanding of the architecture course, technical experience is lacklustre and basic - forgive me and correct me if i'm wrong on this point.

Perhaps Neil you need to work with a technologist, and get off your elitist high horse?
#13 Posted by Hingwy on 17 Jun 2015 at 13:56 PM
Ignoring the horrid ignorance used by others, #12 i don't think your statement is correct.

Architects can only be called architects due to the protection given to this title by an act of parliment. Very few professions are given this level of protection.

Technologists and Technicians do not have a protected title and the use of this term really just comes down to how an employer wishes to title such AT staff. Traditionally, Technologists would be used by someone who has achieved a recognised level in the CIAT, whereas a Technician had merely completed the HND/Degree without further seeking recognition from the professional body. However, these titles are now used interchangeably.

Also, the AT course used to only be a HND, so many older staff have gone through this method.

The level of technology taught in the Architecture course can be as involved as the AT course, it is taught differently but I've seen the same levels of technical understanding being presented by students of either course, with the same wide difference in technical understanding between skilled and poor students.

Anyway, no more Architect vs Tech discussions as it's utterly rank.
#14 Posted by Marcus on 17 Jun 2015 at 13:58 PM
RE: previous post.

I should additionally note that i'm not in anyway faulting the architecture course, both have their benefits and faults.
Neil C
#15 Posted by Neil C on 17 Jun 2015 at 15:23 PM
Like the difference between a Doctor and a Nurse?
That Guy
#16 Posted by That Guy on 18 Jun 2015 at 13:48 PM
I can see these proposal being outdated within the years to come. Yes its been done before and its new and modern, great!. But will it stand the test of time. Also they will probably get valued engineered if they were to build something like this. If there was some kind of modular system in place, that could cut the cost, also material and so on... just thinking out of the box here.
Great proposals though! Prefer the first one.
m is for mungo
#17 Posted by m is for mungo on 19 Jun 2015 at 06:49 AM
Credit where credit is due guys, the images look good and are a damn sight better than a lot of the drivel that comes from professional offices. Congratulations to the two talented STUDENTS on getting thier work published, it must have been a real boost for their confidence until the soapbox jury got involved. Pointing out substandard work from professional architectural offices is fair game but attacking the work of students or the merits of their course is just pathetic. I wish them all the best on their endeavours in finding employment and that they regard the negative comments as the contemptuous bile that it is.

Post your comments


All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.


Back to June 2015

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.