Cloud Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 that's fucking madness! move the health centre to make way for an arts centre?! are you mental?Well, why not? Smaller, more accessible health facilities are a good thing (and gets away from the Labour policy of centralising everything) - I mean, why not have small health centres in the tower blocks for residents? You'd only need one GP, a receptionist and a nurse to work in each one - and then people could receive care on their doorstep rather than having to go to a large, centralised clinic. Those that live in the city centre but not in a towerblock could easily be accomodated in existing buildings - I'm not sure what the current state of play with the old Satrosphere building is, but couldn't that have been refurbished to provide a smaller centre for people not living in tower blocks?I know NHS Grampian has already shifted certain elements from Denburn into clinics spread out throughout town, so why not expand on that policy?Bear in mind that Woolmanhill is also lying somewhat empty at the minute - there's a lot of options for moving Denburn elsewhere and using the site for something else.Then build the arts centre on top of the car park and voila, everyone's happy. Parking is accomodated underneath, the location is good - the only issue is that it doesn't involve doing up the Gardens.this is a great plan, peacock aren't the only organisation to make inroads into this kind of plan in recent time but hopefully they'll actually pull it off. anything that makes it easier to find and promote art in aberdeen is a good thing and something we should all support. we can't really slate it until we've seen the full details either.I'm actually wondering if this isn't somewhat of a cunning plan by Peacock - they're not going to be so stupid as to think that there won't be opposition against the building where they're proposing to build it, but it gives them the potential of securing funding for a development somewhere in Aberdeen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 I'm actually wondering if this isn't somewhat of a cunning plan by Peacock - they're not going to be so stupid as to think that there won't be opposition against the building where they're proposing to build it, but it gives them the potential of securing funding for a development somewhere in Aberdeen.Could be arsed reading the rest of the post.As for the the bit above. Way off target. The amount of time and energy expended over the years trying to realise a new arts centre (somewhere in the city centre) that has been put in by members of the board and in particular the Director of Peacock is tremendous. This, i would assume, will be the last stab at it. Absolutely no conspiracy, involving public money, here for you I'm afraid Cloud, much to your dissapointment I'm sure. This is a genuine and well advanced proposal for a building that will have many positive attributes including being as eco friendly as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 Could be arsed reading the rest of the post.As for the the bit above. Way off target. The amount of time and energy expended over the years trying to realise a new arts centre (somewhere in the city centre) that has been put in by members of the board and in particular the Director of Peacock is tremendous. This, i would assume, will be the last stab at it. Absolutely no conspiracy, involving public money, here for you I'm afraid Cloud, much to your dissapointment I'm sure. This is a genuine and well advanced proposal for a building that will have many positive attributes including being as eco friendly as possible.Hey, I never suggested that there was any conspiracy - more that now they've got the go-ahead to come up with a realistic proposal, they should get something built somewhere, if not on the original site. I do support it - the method of financing appears to be very fair (if the council is only going to contribute 50,000, then I have no problem with it - 25p per resident of the city is hardly going to break the bank).I'm simply concerned about the loss of open space in the city centre, the parking situation and the land being rented at a nominal fee when it's worth a significant amount. I'm sure the answered to these will come out in time, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 Hey, I never suggested that there was any conspiracy - more that now they've got the go-ahead to come up with a realistic proposal, they should get something built somewhere, if not on the original site. I do support it - the method of financing appears to be very fair (if the council is only going to contribute 50,000, then I have no problem with it - 25p per resident of the city is hardly going to break the bank).I'm simply concerned about the loss of open space in the city centre, the parking situation and the land being rented at a nominal fee when it's worth a significant amount. I'm sure the answered to these will come out in time, though.The open space you refer to and where the new building would sit is mostly very steep grass slopes and underused arches and pathways. The plans involve, which you won't see in the white card models, landscaped terracing that are the roofs of each level and, hopefully, the regeneration of the union street end and toilets which is totally underused and rundown. It should infact create more useable and fucntioning open space around the big grass bowl... The first rough model won me over in seconds and being a hardened Aberdonian I have quite an attachment to the gardens. If this falls through, and it is still at feasability study stage, then I doubt Peacock will be pursuing anything near as grand. A dissapointing little shoehorning into an existing buildng more like, as was mentioned elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hog Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 I put my bin out every 6-8 weeks, cos I recycle and compost like the good green leftie poof I am.New buildings instead of old...perhaps it's because they can be made more ecologically efficient and fit for purpose, instead of short term shoehorning services into "grand old buildings" ?I think we should start a collection to buy someone a one way ticket to utopia. (or a large dod of H with added clotting agents).I totally respect your recyling efforts and I know my next comment is somewhat counterproductive. However, do you not think its a bit like pissing in the wind considering China seems to be ruining the earth with new powerstations being built...and they get away with it because they are a "developing country". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted July 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 I totally respect your recyling efforts and I know my next comment is somewhat counterproductive. However, do you not think its a bit like pissing in the wind considering China seems to be ruining the earth with new powerstations being built...and they get away with it because they are a "developing country".I think that's a whole new thread itself, and best kept out of this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.Pel Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 ''It would see part of Union Terrace Gardens leased for a nominal fee to Peacock Visual Arts, and a new arts centre constructed on the site.''ERRRR... no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
framheim Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 ''It would see part of Union Terrace Gardens leased for a nominal fee to Peacock Visual Arts, and a new arts centre constructed on the site.''ERRRR... no.wow, with such a compelling argument i'm sure they'll come around to your way of thinking. i particularly liked the way you addressed the issue comprehensively deconstructing each part of the arts centre plan and providing a viable alternative while you were at it. good work. union terrace gardens is shit, it's fine for a seat in the summer until the neds start harrassing you but other than that it's crap. the only part of the gardens that gets any use is the patch of grass the rest of it only gets used by tramps and junkies. anything to improve that is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 wow, with such a compelling argument i'm sure they'll come around to your way of thinking. i particularly liked the way you addressed the issue comprehensively deconstructing each part of the arts centre plan and providing a viable alternative while you were at it. good work. union terrace gardens is shit, it's fine for a seat in the summer until the neds start harrassing you but other than that it's crap. the only part of the gardens that gets any use is the patch of grass the rest of it only gets used by tramps and junkies. anything to improve that is a good thing.And the big bit of grass will be untouched and could well be used for outdoor gigs, dance events, gladiator battles and sacrificial rituals etc, given the closeness of a new building. One hopes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripey Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alkaline Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 Talking out of your arse there matey. The O2 Arena has quite a lot going on at it so it's hardly useless: The O2 in London - What's On & Tickets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripey Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 The dome is always going to be perceived as a hideous waste of money and is really the posterchild for the awful attitude towards regeneration these days. Have a look at the architects website (brisac gonzalez architects modern and contemporary architecture 7 bermondsey exchange 179-181 bermondsey street london england SE1 3UW.), and the cost of the projects they've done. I wonder how much of the funding is going on this "iconic" building, rather than the arts themselves... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 The open space you refer to and where the new building would sit is mostly very steep grass slopes and underused arches and pathways. The plans involve, which you won't see in the white card models, landscaped terracing that are the roofs of each level and, hopefully, the regeneration of the union street end and toilets which is totally underused and rundown. It should infact create more useable and fucntioning open space around the big grass bowl... The first rough model won me over in seconds and being a hardened Aberdonian I have quite an attachment to the gardens. If this falls through, and it is still at feasability study stage, then I doubt Peacock will be pursuing anything near as grand. A dissapointing little shoehorning into an existing buildng more like, as was mentioned elsewhere.Now, this sounds a hell of a lot better now you put it like that. I had envisioned a building taking up a lot of the open space while contributing little in return - but if it's going to transform the dark and dingy Union Street end, then there's absolutely nothing to argue about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 The dome is always going to be perceived as a hideous waste of money and is really the posterchild for the awful attitude towards regeneration these days. Have a look at the architects website (brisac gonzalez architects modern and contemporary architecture 7 bermondsey exchange 179-181 bermondsey street london england SE1 3UW.), and the cost of the projects they've done. I wonder how much of the funding is going on this "iconic" building, rather than the arts themselves...I believe there is a figure being bantered around of 8 million or so. SAC, SE AND ACC...I don't see how investing in 'a' new home for 3 or 4+ arts facilities/orgs, that should allow them to function more efficiently,raise thier profile and be more accessible and all be able to raise their game, isn't investing in the arts themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Jack Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 The dome is always going to be perceived as a hideous waste of money and is really the posterchild for the awful attitude towards regeneration these days. Have a look at the architects website (brisac gonzalez architects modern and contemporary architecture 7 bermondsey exchange 179-181 bermondsey street london england SE1 3UW.), and the cost of the projects they've done. I wonder how much of the funding is going on this "iconic" building, rather than the arts themselves...You seem a little obsessed with the whole 'Bilbao Effect' thing. I can't really see this being anything like that. This is not a massive Government egofest, it's a mostly private enterprise which is going to have to provide value for money for that very reason. I can so far only see good intent behind this. Maybe, just maybe it might actually improve this 'cultural backwater'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripey Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 The plans involve, which you won't see in the white card models, landscaped terracing that are the roofs of each level and, hopefully, the regeneration of the union street end and toilets which is totally underused and rundown. If this falls through, and it is still at feasability study stage, then I doubt Peacock will be pursuing anything near as grand. A dissapointing little shoehorning into an existing buildng more like, as was mentioned elsewhere.This is my gripe you see, there are countless examples of regenerationist projects like this around the country involving flashy, expensive architects and "iconic" buildings, none of which have delivered any of the earth-shattering socio-economic change promised in their hyperbolic sales pitches. The fact you say that you were "taken with the design as soon as you saw the model" says a lot to me. Is this about a building, is this about a facade? There is no information atall available yet about the actual tangible things that this space is going to be used for and how it will benefit the public that are going to be partly paying for it's creation. Clearly though the benefits it will have for it's investors have been studied in detail and made available to the people with the money. Not the mention the benefits to the architects soon to have another "iconic" design under their belt. Anyway, remember to "Smile, you're in Aberdeen!". My feelings about the city have changed so much since I've been reading this slogan every day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaki Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 Anyway, remember to "Smile, you're in Aberdeen!". My feelings about the city have changed so much since I've been reading this slogan every day!I actually smile when I see that. Wryly. Especially if there's a homeless person nearby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 This is my gripe you see, there are countless examples of regenerationist projects like this around the country involving flashy, expensive architects and "iconic" buildings, none of which have delivered any of the earth-shattering socio-economic change promised in their hyperbolic sales pitches. The fact you say that you were "taken with the design as soon as you saw the model" says a lot to me. Is this about a building, is this about a facade? There is no information atall available yet about the actual tangible things that this space is going to be used for and how it will benefit the public that are going to be partly paying for it's creation. Clearly though the benefits it will have for it's investors have been studied in detail and made available to the people with the money. Not the mention the benefits to the architects soon to have another "iconic" design under their belt. Anyway, remember to "Smile, you're in Aberdeen!". My feelings about the city have changed so much since I've been reading this slogan every day!Two options were proposed:Triple Kirks and this one. The Triple Kirks one didn't do much for me and many others and in many ways would have been more of what you refer too. This option has probably got the Architects a little perplexed due to it being mostly hidden from direct view. Which alters the way in which this building may be "iconic". My hope is that a great deal more thought is given to the use of the interior space than the exterior. The nature of the design suggest that this is mostly out of their hands due to geography and that energies will be aimed at making it 'work' inside. I'm hoping that new pictures and plans will be available for us all to see very soon. The public will be demanding this soon anyhoo. I agree that a big fancy looking building that just doesn't function as planned, CCA in Glasgow as an example, would be a terrible mistake and could put the whole slow progress in the arts in Aberdeen under threat. The reason that this may just work is that our beloved Council have had little to do with it and this, I hope, will stay this same... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lepeep Posted July 2, 2007 Report Share Posted July 2, 2007 I totally respect your recyling efforts and I know my next comment is somewhat counterproductive. However, do you not think its a bit like pissing in the wind considering China seems to be ruining the earth with new powerstations being built...and they get away with it because they are a "developing country".yip, it's all a waste of time, so no one should bother....ah, you see where that could go...I don't give a hoot if no one else does it, at least I know in my own mind, I am.and besides, I get great veg from the compost, and when the charging (hopefully) comes in, I'll save money (and that's an incentive for everyone!)any green's motto should be, look after your own back garden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trippinoneastereggs Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 I agree that a big fancy looking building that just doesn't function as planned, CCA in Glasgow as an example, would be a terrible mistake and could put the whole slow progress in the arts in Aberdeen under threat. The reason that this may just work is that our beloved Council have had little to do with it and this, I hope, will stay this same...Look at the DCA, how much it has improved Dundee's profile in the Arts in the last few years, and Aberdeen is long overdue a proper Contemporary Art Centre, I know that over the years a number of collectives have tried to make something happen up here, i've been involved with a few of them, and it is just so hard to get anything happening.Hopefully this will be the start of a proper Art infrastructire for Aberdeen, my only problem is that I think that there should be Peacocks AND the Art Centre, not just a relocation and expansion. But I get the feeling we're on our way. Too long has the artist in Aberdeen been ignored and forced to take themselves elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Too long has the artist in Aberdeen been ignoredI saw him on the street just the other day. He looked a little bored Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Cynic Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 You should've told him to get stuck in and do some 'seagull art'. It's the way forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trippinoneastereggs Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 I saw him on the street just the other day. He looked a little boredProbably because he was being ignored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stax Posted August 3, 2007 Report Share Posted August 3, 2007 The application for planning permission has been submitted and the public consultation is due to end on the 9th of august. If anyone would like to show there support for the idea then pm me with your email adddresss and I will forward you an email I received from PVA detailing how to show support. More the better!!! Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripey Posted August 3, 2007 Report Share Posted August 3, 2007 What's happening to the existing aberdeen art's centre, is that building being utilised atall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.