Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
scott.wright

Union Terrace Gardens

Recommended Posts

Guest calumunderkills
Those were the kind of numbers that got Obama elected, aren't they? I'd be interested to see a breakdown of the poll, giving details of how many were in favour of building the Peacock building and those who wish to maintain the status quo.

Tom's suggestion of park patrols is a good one, but it'll never happen, if Bigsby's description of the bureaucratic lunacy of the council's budgetary arrangements is accurate. They'd rather build an arts centre, or a "civic square" rather than spend money on educating and protecting the citizens of Aberdeen.

That wasn't really my point though - I was just saying the way it was written made it sound like the entire North East population was behind it, rather than 53% of 735 people!

Yes, if there was a vote taken and a decision made on a majority vote, this would be enough, but it is not the "north east throwing their weight behind the proposal".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They'd rather build an arts centre, or a "civic square" rather than spend money on educating and protecting the citizens of Aberdeen.

not sure if i've understood you here but..

education and opportunity is the central ethos of the arts centre, as with most arts centres

protect the citizens from the roaming gangs raping + pillaging in the gardens? is this NYC in the 80s??

the gardens are underused because there's nothing there and the weather is pish most of the year, no? seems to me PVA's plan solves one of those problems

but if Sir Ian wants to build a giant weather bubble encapsulating the city then I won't stop him, as long as my herb keeps growing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why cant Aberdeen retain some of its history. There are plenty of areas in the city centre that would be more suitable for such a project that wouldnt destroy an Aberdeen landmark, st nicholas house for example. The gardens are popular, ive been there during the "warmer" months and enjoyed relaxing in the shade of a beautiful mature tree with a good book, or just enjoying time out from the bustle of the city. The gardens are unique, they have character and should be protected I dont understand this at all....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

protect the citizens from the roaming gangs raping + pillaging in the gardens? is this NYC in the 80s??

Of course not. However, you can't deny that there is an agenda in certain quarters that seems determined to paint a picture of parts of Aberdeen as not far off of it. Even when the realities clearly indicate otherwise & the folk making the claims often turn out to have had little to do with the city for ages.

Yup, I can remember when there was a regular series of activities in UTG, for much of the year & I've even played at a good number myself.

1055711811_60dde21a80_b.jpg

This is the last one I was at & I'll agree there were a few problems with access for the numbers, the gardens were pretty full that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those were the kind of numbers that got Obama elected, aren't they? I'd be interested to see a breakdown of the poll, giving details of how many were in favour of building the Peacock building and those who wish to maintain the status quo.

Tom's suggestion of park patrols is a good one, but it'll never happen, if Bigsby's description of the bureaucratic lunacy of the council's budgetary arrangements is accurate. They'd rather build an arts centre, or a "civic square" rather than spend money on educating and protecting the citizens of Aberdeen.

something got up your nose!

yes, only 735 people in the USA voted, 53% of those for Obama..............................

go have a tug and come back refreshed min. sounds like you need a rest.

"(An independent survey commissioned by the Evening Express showed more than half of you supported the idea to raise Union Terrace Gardens but only just.

Out of 735 people, 392 (53%) said creating a new civic square above Union Terrace Gardens would benefit Aberdeen.)"

"House building supremo Stewart Milne said: Sir Ians vision for Union Terrace Gardens is bold and ambitious and I fully support it. " ("giz a job")

(by the way, they were quotes from the EE...you can see where their allegiances lie, when it comes to money Vs community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course not. However, you can't deny that there is an agenda in certain quarters that seems determined to paint a picture of parts of Aberdeen as not far off of it. Even when the realities clearly indicate otherwise & the folk making the claims often turn out to have had little to do with the city for ages.

Yup, I can remember when there was a regular series of activities in UTG, for much of the year & I've even played at a good number myself.

1055711811_60dde21a80_b.jpg

This is the last one I was at & I'll agree there were a few problems with access for the numbers, the gardens were pretty full that day.

Doesn't really scream vibrant city centre, does it? Looks a bit 'country bumpkin' to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fast starting to loathe a great many parts of this city and I use the term city loosely. Oh the outcry over a few trees when PVA made its announcements but hey lets rip the gardens out all together and probably stick another concrete shit hole!!!!

Fuck off!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a big difference between 53% of 700 and 53% of 125 million.

<devil's advocate>

You can hardly expect them to ask all 200,000 odd people in Aberdeen their thoughts on this though, can you? Even the professionally carried out polls in the US during the run-up to the election only had sample sizes in the low thousands I seem to recall. You've got to so some extrapolation.

</devil's advocate>

That said - I wouldn't trust anything the EE prints. Although I don't know why people are still surprised about it having bias and hidden agendas - pretty much all newspapers do. Especially rubbish local tabloids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This whole situation has a hidden, or blatant, agenda. :swearing:

And what is this agenda?

It's a serious question by the way. As an outsider looking in I'd be interested to learn why a number of people on here think Mr Wood's proposal is almost an act of sabotage against the plans for the new arts centre. Why do people think that? Does anyone actually know why or is this just some kind of unsubstantiated rumour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what is this agenda?

It's a serious question by the way. As an outsider looking in I'd be interested to learn why a number of people on here think this Mr Wood's proposal is almost an act of sabotage against the plans for the new arts centre. Why do people think that? Does anyone actually know why or is this just some kind of unsubstantiated rumour?

I'm perplexed at the timing given the deadlines and how crucial timing is to the arts centre and how no one would have known about this potentially massive investment that could all but scupper the plans or at least change and push them back several years. It may not be agenda based but it is an incredible fuck up and waste of money. The amount of cash spent so far on the research for the art centre is probably into the tens of thousands and potentially down the drain. Utter shambles and unsurprisingly it has council backing.

I'm off to batter drums for a few hours and likely feel better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what is this agenda?

It's a serious question by the way. As an outsider looking in I'd be interested to learn why a number of people on here think Mr Wood's proposal is almost an act of sabotage against the plans for the new arts centre. Why do people think that? Does anyone actually know why or is this just some kind of unsubstantiated rumour?

the evidence points towards the shadowing recession in my opinion... the big boys covering their asses but it is possible this is purely a $1 bet a la Trading Places between the m*s*ns (wood + michie) somewhere down deep in the vaults (below the Howff)

evidence*

- the timing immediately after the PVA go-ahead

- the vagueness of his proposal

- retailers who were opposed to the PVA plan

- only this location and none other

- disregard for public sevices' assistance

- his holding the city to essentially blackmail

- his teary pish about restoring past glories (it's always been shit no?)

- Wood looks suspiciously like Ernst Stavro Blofeld (S.P.E.C.T.R.E)

red herring*

First Minister attends feasibility launch instead of remembrance duties - nice try lads but seen past that one (but an A for effort anyway)

impending*

- stuart milne + co's massive sigh of relief as a 6 acre building contract is awarded to Aberdeen firms (insert modern war machinery contractors into this bracket)

also it maybe cos the old cunts think art is gay and can't stand being called poofs by their pals in Huston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That said - I wouldn't trust anything the EE prints. Although I don't know why people are still surprised about it having bias and hidden agendas - pretty much all newspapers do. Especially rubbish local tabloids.

mmmmm wonder if any of the businesses owned by wood, milne + co advertise in said papers??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn't really scream vibrant city centre, does it? Looks a bit 'country bumpkin' to me.

Either way, it was the gardens stapp-full (to the very top) of all sorts of folk enjoying a public event - Something that happens there all too rarely these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, hang on.

Unless I'm dreadfully mistaken, there's been a plan in the pipeline for a few years to cover up the railway line and the Denburn dual carriageway. I distinctly recall reading somewhere about connecting Belmont Street to Union Terrace Gardens a couple of years ago - I'm not sure where, but there was definitely something mentioned.

Now...the EE article says:

Sir Ians vision would see Union Terrace Gardens covered over as well as the adjacent railway line and Denburn dual carriageway.

And...

But today business leaders pledged their support for the square, which would stretch as far as Belmont Street.

Hmm...is this actually a new plan?

One question for the Peacock backers - is there any reason why Peacock can't accept the facilities that they would get as part of this plan? I see the arguments about the lease expiring, but they could go elsewhere in the meantime, no? Prefab, short term lifespan buildings are quite cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So 53% (actually 52.7% in Obama's case) of the vote is enough for a clear and decisive victory, so long as you agree with the victor's policies? Sounds like gross hypocrisy and wooly thinking to me.

If you can't argue your point without resorting to digs at those who disagree with you, maybe you should pick your battles more carefully. You're on shaky ground already, as you must realise the Peacock project is deeply unpopular with the people of Aberdeen who will be expected to fund it, and deal with the inconvenience its construction will cause.

You mean, the community that just gave their approval to the project? Looks like they've found a way to do both. They're not going to put their circulation in jeopardy, are they?

can we have the real dave back please?

this one has a round bed.

what shakey ground I am on, is the sad fact that paying for large budgets in a local organ apparently gives you "the voice of the people".

I thought you of all people would think about the details rather than believing what you read in one paper. (that is technically sponsored by the people that can afford to)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The people in charge of the public purse should get their priorities straight and arrange their budgets accordingly, so that the security and development of the public as a whole is adequately funded before they start even considering giving money to projects such as this.

where is bigsby to explain the use of public finding (AGAIN...for the THIRD TIME).

he does it so elloquently and well...

dave...are you doing freelance for the EE or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question for the Peacock backers - is there any reason why Peacock can't accept the facilities that they would get as part of this plan? I see the arguments about the lease expiring, but they could go elsewhere in the meantime, no? Prefab, short term lifespan buildings are quite cheap.

no because the SAC money is specifically tied to the union gardens project - you can't just take X million, then "suddenly" say "oh, by the way, I want to build it here now...is that OK?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question for the Peacock backers - is there any reason why Peacock can't accept the facilities that they would get as part of this plan? I see the arguments about the lease expiring, but they could go elsewhere in the meantime, no? Prefab, short term lifespan buildings are quite cheap.

I think Lepeep posted the six points which were included as notes to editors from the peacock press release. Basically none of the peacocks development will be allowed to go ahead until after the feasibility study and if the date for Peacocks slides any further they loose the design team, staff, all key funding and the project is a no go.

There is nothing mentioned in Ian Wood's plan concerning Peacocks, who have been planning this for ages, spent a lot of time and money to get this thing going. Essentially the tone of the notes at the end of the release suggests that if this building doesnt get the go ahead then Peacocks will be no more, which is a stark frightening possibility to face. Love it or hate it, Peacocks (I'm going to avoid saying PVA as that is also a glue) is the biggest hitter in the already miniscule art infrastructure. Basically if this doesnt go ahead that is it for any art in Aberdeen. I agree wholeheartedly with Jim, there is only so long the artistic community can bang its head against a brick wall before realising that our efforts will actually be appreciated elsewhere.

Its not only Peacocks that will lose out, as will Whitespace, Arts Development, Creative Cultures, Cultural Enterprise and every other organisation which will be housed in the Centre.

All this idea of the square uniting the city centre is absolutelly laughable, and I am sick of the complaints about empty shop fronts and lack of a centre when the Council continues to allow the building and development of massive shopping centres. If you look at the monstrosity emerging above the station, then its obviously going to have hundreds of retail units, there are only so many shops to take these spaces and this town is full enough of identical shops with a handful of anything different.

Plus, to look back on all the naysayers for the centre who were upset at the loss of historic trees, if this development goes ahead then it sounds as though those trees wont be around for much longer.

All in all this is just a stupid, stupid plan that is just going to be another waste of money. If Wood really wants to help the city then why not develop areas that are already there, the aforementioned Green, the Castlegate, St Nicolas Square.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, a dangerous question this I suspect, but to help further the discussion...

Which plan is going to benefit people in Aberdeen the most and will represent the best value for money for all concered? (Arts Centre Vs Wood's plan)

I ask this question without an opinion myself - I know sod all about Ian Wood's plan for a start. I'm just wondering what other people think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's what it says in the "mission statements" and other bumf these places spew out. In reality, they're only interested in offering an creative outlet to a tiny section of the community, usually at expense to the populace at large disproportionate to their actual artistic value. Meanwhile, the centres of education and opportunity for the masses (ie the schools and colleges of the area) are laying off staff and closing institutions due to lack of funding.

The people in charge of the public purse should get their priorities straight and arrange their budgets accordingly, so that the security and development of the public as a whole is adequately funded before they start even considering giving money to projects such as this.

cynical, negative tripe as to be expected and the repeated misunderstanding of GB council finances... so peacock, whitespace, dancebase and co have offered nothing to the community in the last 34yrs eh?? Get your facts researched before your brainwashed, geriatric nonsense spouts out please Dave. Immensely dull, it really is

I don't read books from the library so i better go and demand it's closure and a refund for all that wasted paper and knowledge i haven't bothered my arse to find out about - those minority of readers should be culled and disbanded before everyone wants a book

all you ever suggest is that progression comes to a halt because of mis-management in the council.. i'm sorry but as a citizen i don't think that's acceptable.. i believe Pol Pot did believe in that system and funnily enough I'm traveling to Cambodia this weekend so i'll be sure to ask for a twinning of Phnom Penh with Aberdeen.. let's have the year zero.. we'll get Prince to pen a song about it

do something positive and ask Sir Ian Wood why he isn't putting his "resources" towards the schools and services that have been culled instead of feeding the old boy network with massive building contracts

meanwhile lets inject some fucking positivity into the creative industries that can undoubtedly add a lot more confidence (= finance) + image to the city than shopping centre hell

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which plan is going to benefit people in Aberdeen the most and will represent the best value for money for all concered? (Arts Centre Vs Wood's plan)

.

For a start, the Art Centre has only required 3 million of Aberdeen council funding, Wood may be offering 50 million, but the development will more than likelly cost more than the same again to complete, and is the city going to have to cover this? I see 3 million to an art centre, to a group of people who are scandalously underrepresented in this town as a better investment than a hundred million quid development that in the long run will only benefit Mssrs Wood, Milne etc who will profit from the venture.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which plan is going to benefit people in Aberdeen the most and will represent the best value for money for all concered? (Arts Centre Vs Wood's plan)

well it's not a plan since there's been absolutely nothing said about the contents of Wood's "vision" but if it had an arms factory and we all got lucrative jobs making missiles we'd be happy i'm sure.. as long as we have short-term success and some dough in our pocket eh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wrote an eloquent (if I do say so myself) point by point counter argument to somebody on that EE page but it was deleted when I clicked to post it. I find it almost remarkable that when I take the time to rouse myself from slumber, it goes tits up almost instantly. Thank you, Internet. Bollocks, Ian Wood's Legacy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...