Tyrant Posted October 28, 2011 Report Posted October 28, 2011 People always hate change, but I'm staggered at how many on this occasion. On a slight tangent.... I saw a picture of some building that's going in round the region of The Adelphi. Can't remember the name of it, City Gate or some such pish. If you were standing down market street by the harbour you could see it sticking out over the granite by quite some distance. Sore thumb-esque. In fact it looked a lot like the council one that should have been knocked down the minute it was put up, and still hasn't been. Think it was some sort of office space as well. That said, I'm all for changing the gardens. I don't think it's a hatred of change or indeed a fear of change that's made people come out and vote this way. It's because it's a fucking monumental waste of cash and it's £140m (or £90m once Ian Wood's put in his contrubution) that ACC City Council just doesn't have. It's hard to justify spending this amount of many in this climate. Despite Sir Ian's offer. Quote
Kowalski Posted October 28, 2011 Author Report Posted October 28, 2011 I've just been down to have a look at the plans in the Academy Shopping Centre. There are scale models of each entry, with varying degrees of money spent on each scale model. You get to rank the entrys and submit your choices. Having had a good look, number 2 is now my preferred option. After seeing the scale model, they are keeping much of what is there at the moment, but they are building over the road and adding the glass energy/cultural centre thing, opening access from Belmont Street. It does look good when you see the scale model. I ended up ranking them 2, 4, 3, 6, 1, 5. I think the plans are only on display for a few more days. Quote
dave_min Posted October 28, 2011 Report Posted October 28, 2011 Im all for building some sort of bridge that means you can access the gardens from Belmont Street. The gardens themselves are great as they are, if they just added some lighting and cleaned them up a bit they'd be amazing. Quote
Tyrant Posted October 31, 2011 Report Posted October 31, 2011 Im all for building some sort of bridge that means you can access the gardens from Belmont Street. The gardens themselves are great as they are, if they just added some lighting and cleaned them up a bit they'd be amazing. Agreed. It doesn't fucking need £140m spent on it. Spend the £140m repairing all the roads or on appeals for the by-pass. Something more useful than tarting up some gardens. Spend it on another Don corssing. There are 101 things that that cash could be better spent on. Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted November 3, 2011 Report Posted November 3, 2011 Im all for building some sort of bridge that means you can access the gardens from Belmont Street. The gardens themselves are great as they are, if they just added some lighting and cleaned them up a bit they'd be amazing. Amazing? Really? Or would they just be gardens with lights in them? Agreed. It doesn't fucking need £140m spent on it. Spend the £140m repairing all the roads or on appeals for the by-pass. Something more useful than tarting up some gardens. Spend it on another Don corssing. There are 101 things that that cash could be better spent on. I'd imagine the £140m isn't sitting in the bank burning a hole in someone's pocket. That figure will be for the gardens and gardens alone. If it isn't spent on the garden project then it'll cease to exist. I'm sure Ian Wood said that of his £50m at least. Quote
Andrew Posted November 3, 2011 Report Posted November 3, 2011 Amazing? Really? Or would they just be gardens with lights in them? I'd imagine the £140m isn't sitting in the bank burning a hole in someone's pocket. That figure will be for the gardens and gardens alone. If it isn't spent on the garden project then it'll cease to exist. I'm sure Ian Wood said that of his £50m at least. The money would come from a government loan designed for large projects. Anyway having looked at the designs I am still clueless about how they will improve on what is already there. With better access UTG would be fantastic. If it does go ahead I'm pretty sure it will just be one of these things that people will look back upon and wonder why the council ever thought it was a good idea to get rid of Victorian era gardens in the heart of the city and replace it with a concrete square. Quote
Tyrant Posted November 3, 2011 Report Posted November 3, 2011 Amazing? Really? Or would they just be gardens with lights in them? I'd imagine the £140m isn't sitting in the bank burning a hole in someone's pocket. That figure will be for the gardens and gardens alone. If it isn't spent on the garden project then it'll cease to exist. I'm sure Ian Wood said that of his £50m at least. I realise that but then that's all the more reason just to not fucking bother. Quote
Kowalski Posted November 3, 2011 Author Report Posted November 3, 2011 The argument about the £140m should be better used is nonsense. Rightly or wrongly Ian Wood has put up £50m specifically for UTC. There is no pot of £140m sitting in a biscuit tin that could be used to fix some of the other problems in the area. Quote
tom_widdows Posted November 3, 2011 Report Posted November 3, 2011 The argument about the £140m should be better used is nonsense. Rightly or wrongly Ian Wood has put up £50m specifically for UTC. There is no pot of £140m sitting in a biscuit tin that could be used to fix some of the other problems in the area. The argument is if ian wood is giving 50million for the gardens then 50million is the maximum budget. But then again there is a proposal which has planning permission and would only cost approx 10million (which they had already raised 9.5million.) but fucking megalomaniac and his friends on the council jumped in with dreams and pure greed so the 9.5million for peacock visual arts has gone elsewhere. As per usual in these situations nothing will eventually get done because too many people want a piece of the action Quote
Tyrant Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 The argument about the £140m should be better used is nonsense. Rightly or wrongly Ian Wood has put up £50m specifically for UTC. There is no pot of £140m sitting in a biscuit tin that could be used to fix some of the other problems in the area. Again, I'm aware that there's not £140m (or £90m) sitting in a safe at Marischal College and again this is exactly why we shouldn't spend it. The fact is this £90m will have to come from somehwere and it's going to come at the expense of other more worthwhile (IMO opinion) causes. Unless someone magics the cash out their arse. Just as Tom says if the generous Ian Wood is putting £50m into the project than that should be the maximum budget. Can we not do something nice with the gardens for £50m? Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 If they dumped £50m of notes into the gardens I might actually pay them a visit. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 Again, I'm aware that there's not £140m (or £90m) sitting in a safe at Marischal College and again this is exactly why we shouldn't spend it. The fact is this £90m will have to come from somehwere and it's going to come at the expense of other more worthwhile (IMO opinion) causes. Unless someone magics the cash out their arse. Just as Tom says if the generous Ian Wood is putting £50m into the project than that should be the maximum budget. Can we not do something nice with the gardens for £50m? Is the £90M for the Gardens coming from the same place as the £20M+ for the new stadium? Quote
Tyrant Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 Is the £90M for the Gardens coming from the same place as the £20M+ for the new stadium? I've nae idea where they're going to produce any of this money from. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 I've nae idea where they're going to produce any of this money from. Quote
Tyrant Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 Well that's the thing. We haven't got the cash to spend. Which is why we shouldn't even be discussing doing soemthing so expensive which is entirely uneccessary. Quote
octavion Posted November 4, 2011 Report Posted November 4, 2011 Well that's the thing. We haven't got the cash to spend. Which is why we shouldn't even be discussing doing soemthing so expensive which is entirely uneccessary. +1 Quote
Kowalski Posted November 5, 2011 Author Report Posted November 5, 2011 Decision to be taken on vote over Aberdeen city centre Councillors to discuss Union Terrace Gardens referendum By David Ewen chief reporter Published: 05/11/2011 A DECISION on whether to give the public a vote on plans to transform Aberdeen city centre is set to be taken. A report on holding a referendum to decide the fate of Union Terrace Gardens will go before councillors on November 15. New figures have revealed the vote would cost around £250,000 to conduct. Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted November 7, 2011 Report Posted November 7, 2011 In the same way as the new stadium is a stitch up to open up the green belt - this is a stitch up too. The aberdeen illuminati want the garden raised so they can have a multi-storey car park built beneath. The denburn car park will then be demolished and turned into, yep you've guessed it, Stewart Milne flats! YAY! Don't believe the smoke screens of design competitions and the public gets what the public (doesn't) want - and yer all backward luddites and all that propaganda bullshit - it's a carve up for the rich of Aberdeen... again I'll give you the stadium issue but I'm struggling to see the investment potential of your second point. You saying if 'the rich' Ian Wood spends £50m that he'll profit by Milne building a few hundred flats across the road? Even with an underground carpark they're going to have to charge some amount to park there to claw back the £140m. Had it been more retail or business orientated then I'd agree but it is, as far as I can tell, it's still going to be a park or garden. I'm sure someone will profit but I don't necessarily think those investing, this illuminati of yours, are the ones looking to merely cash in. Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted November 7, 2011 Report Posted November 7, 2011 Beneath ground level is planned retail units and the car parking. You obviously don't park yer car in Aberdeen alot if you don't realise a car park would make you a mint. Especially if spaces go on long term lease to companies. However, you do make a good point - it will be difficult for the council to make back their money, that's why it's such a gamble. Milne getting to build flats is no gamble - and his pal Ian Wood is (i'm guessing) heavily involved in his business plan for that. Milne is now an expert is playing the people of Aberdeen - he plays on the fact that so many Aberdonians are super conscious of not wanting to seem to the outside world to be a luddite (people don't want to seem to be backward at any cost). If Ian Wood is such a philanthropist why has Wood Group stopped paying NI contributions by paying his employees from an offshore account? Because it makes good business sense? Doesn't mean he can't also go chucking £50m at something for the sheer hell of it. Maybe he can go chucking £50m at it because of the NI being paid from an offshore account? Who knows. Like I said, you hit the nail on the head with the Pittodrie/greenbelt point but you're going to have to go one better to convince me that £140m on a garden is all in the name of building a few flats and a car park. Couldn't they just knock down a few of the existing 3 or 4 storey car parks around town and make them multi-multi-storey for a snip of the price? I honestly believe Wood is doing it for what he thinks is the good of the city. Whether it is or isn't good for the city is down to personal opinion. Quote
Kowalski Posted November 14, 2011 Author Report Posted November 14, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-15716845 A huge glass house is one of two designs to be shortlisted in a contest to transform Aberdeen's Union Terrace Gardens, BBC Scotland has learned. A jury met last week to review the original six designs for the high-profile £140m City Garden Project, put forward by leading architects. It is understood that the jury has requested more details on the cost and viability of two designs. A final decision is to be made next month. About 15,000 people visited an exhibition of the designs. Each design was given a number so the public would not be swayed by which architect was involved. The model of the huge glass house stretching through the gardens impressed the public. Councillors are to meet on Tuesday to discuss the possibility of a referendum on the controversial project. It was the glass one I voted for at the public display. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted November 14, 2011 Report Posted November 14, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-15716845 It was the glass one I voted for at the public display. So it'll be all your fault then Quote
glasgow sheep Posted November 15, 2011 Report Posted November 15, 2011 Council meeting to decide whether to have a referendum on this. Can watch Live on STV if you have absolutely no life http://local.stv.tv/aberdeen/news/279309-live-coverage-union-terrace-gardens-referendum/ Quote
tom_widdows Posted November 23, 2011 Report Posted November 23, 2011 Council decided to go for Designs 1 & 2 That would be the publics 3rd and 4th/5th choices Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted November 23, 2011 Report Posted November 23, 2011 So they've spent £250,000 to conduct a public vote and they're not picking the most popular choices from that vote. Ace. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted November 23, 2011 Report Posted November 23, 2011 So they've spent £250,000 to conduct a public vote and they're not picking the most popular choices from that vote. Ace. I thought that price tag was for a referendum not for whatever public opinion they got from the displays. Are they now having giving the public a vote on two designs they didn't want for a project they never asked for? Quote
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.