ad at home
April 14th, 2006, 09:54 AM
from Building Design.
News Analysis
Growing pains in Scotland
13 April 2006
A year old this week, Architecture & Design Scotland is coming under fire from critics who say it has not tackled issues such as PFI, the skills shortage and education. Will Hurst looks at how the watchdog is faring
By Will Hurst
Ian Gilzean looks uneasy. "I think I've given you enough," he tells BD through a fixed smile, backing away. The principal architect at the Scottish Executive, he is not keen on talking about whether Architecture & Design Scotland - Cabe north of the borders - is going to tackle the thorny issue of PFI.
For architects in Scotland, it's a hot topic. A&DS is one year old this week but what was heralded by many as a bright new dawn for architecture in Scotland has proved to be more of a damp squib. It has made headlines with its spiky design review reports but, according to critics, failed to tackle the bigger issues of PFI and the skills shortage in the industry.
A&DS was born amid talk of an architectural renaissance in Scottish architecture, with high hopes that this dynamic new organisation, underpinned by a formal policy on architecture, would soon make a real difference to "ordinary" places and buildings such as schools and hospitals.
But many leading Scottish architects privately believe that A&DS is beginning to mirror its discredited predecessor, the tweed-jacketed Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland, with its head in the skies while it fails to tackle the real challenges for Scotland's built environment.
PFI is seen by architects on both sides of the border as one of the main barriers to good design in the public sector. But while Cabe and, especially, the RIBA have grabbed hold of the issue with both hands, for A&DS, it is the "elephant in the corner that no one mentions", claim critics.
The procurement method is almost universal in the Scottish public sector, with buildings increasing contracted out in "bundles", giving the edge to large, commercial practices.
"People are waiting for [A&DS] to do something radical on the issues concerned and one of those is PFI," says leading Glasgow architect Alan Dunlop. "Glasgow City Council is the only council [in Scotland] looking at procuring schools using something other than [this system]."
This criticism is echoed by writer and architect Peter Wilson, of Edinburgh's Napier University, who argues that the problem stems from the unwillingness of A&DS's leadership to embarrass its political master, the Scottish Executive - a worry that will be all too familiar to their colleagues in Cabe.
"PFI is completely embedded because the Scottish Executive is completely evangelical about it," says Wilson. "But [chairman] Raymond Young and [chief executive] Sebastian Tombs are very happy to tug the forelock... unless they pick up the ball on the major things like PFI, then A&DS has no function - it is just part of the establishment."
A&DS should also be taking a lead on tackling the construction industry's skills shortage, its critics say. More than a year ago, councillor Trevor Davies, convenor of the City of Edinburgh's planning committee, called for a Scottish equivalent of the Egan Review on skills but still nothing appears to have happened.
There are also complaints, as there are in England, that architecture students are not being taught technical skills at university. Andrew Pinkerton, director of one of Scotland's largest practices, Keppie Design, has had to pay for special courses for "year-out" students working at the practice to make up for this lack of knowledge and thinks A&DS should be on the case.
"I don't see any evidence of Architecture & Design Scotland engaging with the schools of architecture," he says. "But then there has been no communication coming out of Architecture & Design Scotland, apart from the website and the odd press release."
Even in the arena of design review, generally seen as one of the easiest ways for such a body to have an impact, A&DS has its critics. Many architects saw the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland as conservative yet unpredictable, and expected that A&DS's design reviews would be a marked improvement.
“‘Unless A&DS picks up the ball on the major things like PFI, it has no function — it is just part of the establishment’”
But a year on, there is a growing feeling that design review should be dropped by A&DS altogether, so it can concentrate on advising clients before detailed design is carried out. Pinkerton, who has applied to become an A&DS adviser, believes design review is a source of negative publicity for the organisation and is of far less value than enabling. He admits he "could be persuaded" that it should be abandoned.
Others, including Dunlop, argue that its panel is unrepresentative and that it is wasting its time looking at schemes by signature architects.
"It is a certain kind of architect [who sits on the design review panel]," he says. "They work on small-scale idiosyncratic projects and there is no architect there with in-depth experience of working on large-scale commercial projects.
"The panel should also be focusing on projects that really matter... the large developments on the periphery of the city. It is seductive to get Zaha Hadid in, but what possible contribution could they make?"
Those within A&DS argue that a year is not long in policy terms and agree that the organisation is still developing. However, they argue that behind the scenes, work is going on to make sure that the key challenges are indeed being addressed.
Chairman Raymond Young is unwilling to pre-empt a review of the organisation in two months' time but reveals that design review is gradually being reformed to ensure that A&DS asserts its influence at an earlier stage.
"For six months we have been operating a system of design review which is done earlier on," he says. "These have been very successful but they are not released into the public domain because otherwise we would never get developers to come forward."
A&DS adviser Gareth Hoskins also defends the organisation, arguing that work such as targeting local authorities and NHS Scotland takes place in private.
"It is dead easy to shout about what is wrong, but to have people coming to us asking for advice is great," he says. "It is the first year so we are finding our feet in some ways, but the direction we are taking is right."
A&DS faces many of the problems of its English counterpart, Cabe, but, as a vulnerable one-year-old, it has less status, and more establishment figures are willing to be openly critical.
Perhaps one of its greatest problems is the lack of budget. While it enjoys around double the funding given to the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland, its functions have multiplied to include advocacy, research and enabling, as well as design review.
The organisation must listen to its critics, decide what is really important and focus on that as it enters its critical second year.
News Analysis
Growing pains in Scotland
13 April 2006
A year old this week, Architecture & Design Scotland is coming under fire from critics who say it has not tackled issues such as PFI, the skills shortage and education. Will Hurst looks at how the watchdog is faring
By Will Hurst
Ian Gilzean looks uneasy. "I think I've given you enough," he tells BD through a fixed smile, backing away. The principal architect at the Scottish Executive, he is not keen on talking about whether Architecture & Design Scotland - Cabe north of the borders - is going to tackle the thorny issue of PFI.
For architects in Scotland, it's a hot topic. A&DS is one year old this week but what was heralded by many as a bright new dawn for architecture in Scotland has proved to be more of a damp squib. It has made headlines with its spiky design review reports but, according to critics, failed to tackle the bigger issues of PFI and the skills shortage in the industry.
A&DS was born amid talk of an architectural renaissance in Scottish architecture, with high hopes that this dynamic new organisation, underpinned by a formal policy on architecture, would soon make a real difference to "ordinary" places and buildings such as schools and hospitals.
But many leading Scottish architects privately believe that A&DS is beginning to mirror its discredited predecessor, the tweed-jacketed Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland, with its head in the skies while it fails to tackle the real challenges for Scotland's built environment.
PFI is seen by architects on both sides of the border as one of the main barriers to good design in the public sector. But while Cabe and, especially, the RIBA have grabbed hold of the issue with both hands, for A&DS, it is the "elephant in the corner that no one mentions", claim critics.
The procurement method is almost universal in the Scottish public sector, with buildings increasing contracted out in "bundles", giving the edge to large, commercial practices.
"People are waiting for [A&DS] to do something radical on the issues concerned and one of those is PFI," says leading Glasgow architect Alan Dunlop. "Glasgow City Council is the only council [in Scotland] looking at procuring schools using something other than [this system]."
This criticism is echoed by writer and architect Peter Wilson, of Edinburgh's Napier University, who argues that the problem stems from the unwillingness of A&DS's leadership to embarrass its political master, the Scottish Executive - a worry that will be all too familiar to their colleagues in Cabe.
"PFI is completely embedded because the Scottish Executive is completely evangelical about it," says Wilson. "But [chairman] Raymond Young and [chief executive] Sebastian Tombs are very happy to tug the forelock... unless they pick up the ball on the major things like PFI, then A&DS has no function - it is just part of the establishment."
A&DS should also be taking a lead on tackling the construction industry's skills shortage, its critics say. More than a year ago, councillor Trevor Davies, convenor of the City of Edinburgh's planning committee, called for a Scottish equivalent of the Egan Review on skills but still nothing appears to have happened.
There are also complaints, as there are in England, that architecture students are not being taught technical skills at university. Andrew Pinkerton, director of one of Scotland's largest practices, Keppie Design, has had to pay for special courses for "year-out" students working at the practice to make up for this lack of knowledge and thinks A&DS should be on the case.
"I don't see any evidence of Architecture & Design Scotland engaging with the schools of architecture," he says. "But then there has been no communication coming out of Architecture & Design Scotland, apart from the website and the odd press release."
Even in the arena of design review, generally seen as one of the easiest ways for such a body to have an impact, A&DS has its critics. Many architects saw the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland as conservative yet unpredictable, and expected that A&DS's design reviews would be a marked improvement.
“‘Unless A&DS picks up the ball on the major things like PFI, it has no function — it is just part of the establishment’”
But a year on, there is a growing feeling that design review should be dropped by A&DS altogether, so it can concentrate on advising clients before detailed design is carried out. Pinkerton, who has applied to become an A&DS adviser, believes design review is a source of negative publicity for the organisation and is of far less value than enabling. He admits he "could be persuaded" that it should be abandoned.
Others, including Dunlop, argue that its panel is unrepresentative and that it is wasting its time looking at schemes by signature architects.
"It is a certain kind of architect [who sits on the design review panel]," he says. "They work on small-scale idiosyncratic projects and there is no architect there with in-depth experience of working on large-scale commercial projects.
"The panel should also be focusing on projects that really matter... the large developments on the periphery of the city. It is seductive to get Zaha Hadid in, but what possible contribution could they make?"
Those within A&DS argue that a year is not long in policy terms and agree that the organisation is still developing. However, they argue that behind the scenes, work is going on to make sure that the key challenges are indeed being addressed.
Chairman Raymond Young is unwilling to pre-empt a review of the organisation in two months' time but reveals that design review is gradually being reformed to ensure that A&DS asserts its influence at an earlier stage.
"For six months we have been operating a system of design review which is done earlier on," he says. "These have been very successful but they are not released into the public domain because otherwise we would never get developers to come forward."
A&DS adviser Gareth Hoskins also defends the organisation, arguing that work such as targeting local authorities and NHS Scotland takes place in private.
"It is dead easy to shout about what is wrong, but to have people coming to us asking for advice is great," he says. "It is the first year so we are finding our feet in some ways, but the direction we are taking is right."
A&DS faces many of the problems of its English counterpart, Cabe, but, as a vulnerable one-year-old, it has less status, and more establishment figures are willing to be openly critical.
Perhaps one of its greatest problems is the lack of budget. While it enjoys around double the funding given to the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland, its functions have multiplied to include advocacy, research and enabling, as well as design review.
The organisation must listen to its critics, decide what is really important and focus on that as it enters its critical second year.