TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 Just wondering, is it really that short of being feasible to build something worthwhile for just the 50 million Wood is "donating"? Not necessarily in the gardens themselves, maybe in an out of town location with seating for, say, 21 thousand to enjoy a manicured lawn? Quote
dave_min Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 Just wondering, is it really that short of being feasible to build something worthwhile for just the 50 million Wood is "donating"? Not necessarily in the gardens themselves, maybe in an out of town location with seating for, say, 21 thousand to enjoy a manicured lawn? Wood don't do compromises. Quote
Kowalski Posted August 14, 2012 Author Report Posted August 14, 2012 Wood don't do compromises. It's his money. He wants to invest it in the city centre, the public voted in favour of it (rightly or wrongly). But it's now getting very messy and it might be best to pull the plug otherwise a bunch of hypocrites who never use the park will ensure the saga will drag on for many, many years. Quote
tom_widdows Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 It's his money. He wants to invest it in the city centre, the public voted in favour of it (rightly or wrongly). But it's now getting very messy and it might be best to pull the plug otherwise a bunch of hypocrites who never use the park will ensure the saga will drag on for many, many years. Again 50million would build the original art centre/ cafe design and leave 35million in change for some decent landscaping, lighting, perhaps a new bridge or 2 to Belmont street, and maybe even chuck whats left over at the Castlegate Quote
Tyrant Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 This project is fundamentally flawed IMO in my opinion. Project costs a reported £140m Mannie Wood agrees to give £50m oot his own pocket. Skint council/government/Joe Public have to fund £90m and for fucking what? A giant waste of money which won't be used more than UTG already gets used. The world's economy is on it's arse. There's no money for frivolous pish. The gardens look bonnie and despite the pish you hear about "no one ever using them" I regularly see heaps of folk there - especially on a fine, sunny day. To spunk £90m is ridiculous. If Mannie Wood wants to either cough up the rest or downscale the plans so that his kind offer of £50m is enough to cover the whole thing then be my guest. Do what you like to UTG (within reason) but I cannot see how we can justify spending £90m on essentially fuck all. Quote
dave_min Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 It's his money. He wants to invest it in the city centre, the public voted in favour of it (rightly or wrongly). But it's now getting very messy and it might be best to pull the plug otherwise a bunch of hypocrites who never use the park will ensure the saga will drag on for many, many years. Can't really disagree with any of that. Quote
Andrew Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 Can't really disagree with any of that. You can when the council has to contribute £90m and maybe more if it runs over the estimated cost. If Wood was paying for it all there would be a mandate to do it however with the £90m cost to the council it should really be up the council if it is a viable project and not the people. Quote
dave_min Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 You can when the council has to contribute £90m and maybe more if it runs over the estimated cost. If Wood was paying for it all there would be a mandate to do it however with the £90m cost to the council it should really be up the council if it is a viable project and not the people. What part are you arguing with? That it's his money? That he wants to invest it in the city? That the vote was for it? That it's getting messy? That it's gonna drag on and on? Quote
Andrew Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 What part are you arguing with? That it's his money? That he wants to invest it in the city? That the vote was for it? That it's getting messy? That it's gonna drag on and on? I think I got muddled up in who was quoting what about whom. Ignore my post please. Quote
bloo_toon_red Posted August 14, 2012 Report Posted August 14, 2012 The whole process has been shambolically managed from start to finish. There is no brief or business case, the project is not financially viable without private finance & whilst wood is entitled to do what he likes with his money, this is the classic case of a vanity project & a negative outcome will reflect very badly on him. In my opinion, the process has been too democratic. Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted August 15, 2012 Report Posted August 15, 2012 This project is fundamentally flawed IMO in my opinion. Project costs a reported £140m Mannie Wood agrees to give £50m oot his own pocket. Skint council/government/Joe Public have to fund £90m and for fucking what? A giant waste of money which won't be used more than UTG already gets used. The world's economy is on it's arse. There's no money for frivolous pish. The gardens look bonnie and despite the pish you hear about "no one ever using them" I regularly see heaps of folk there - especially on a fine, sunny day. To spunk £90m is ridiculous. If Mannie Wood wants to either cough up the rest or downscale the plans so that his kind offer of £50m is enough to cover the whole thing then be my guest. Do what you like to UTG (within reason) but I cannot see how we can justify spending £90m on essentially fuck all. How many of those have you had in Aberdeen this year? Serious question. Quote
Tyrant Posted August 15, 2012 Report Posted August 15, 2012 More than the rest of the UK I'll bet. But does a poor(ish) summer justify a massive financial black hole? Serious question. Quote
Kowalski Posted August 15, 2012 Author Report Posted August 15, 2012 How many of those have you had in Aberdeen this year? Serious question. I walk past the gardens every day, there is never anyone in them. Quote
Superstar Tradesman Posted August 15, 2012 Report Posted August 15, 2012 More than the rest of the UK I'll bet. But does a poor(ish) summer justify a massive financial black hole? Serious question. Not interested in the rest of the UK since Wood's only offering up £50m to spunk in UTG. Aberdeen's being ran into the ground. To Let signs up the main street, the 'silver' grey buildings are turning green or black with dirt and foost. Every other major city in the UK has had various states or rejuvenation, yet we can't lay a strip of tarmac on the outskirts, turf some sand dunes or raise a dark jakey garden out into the 21st century. Absolute shambles. This 'financial blackhole' thing won't wash with me I'm afraid. Remind me, how many cities have done a Sevco because they tarted the place up a bit? Wonder how many of those moaning about spending money also wishes Stewart Milne would do the same down Pittodrie? Quote
glasgow sheep Posted August 15, 2012 Report Posted August 15, 2012 Not interested in the rest of the UK since Wood's only offering up £50m to spunk in UTG. Aberdeen's being ran into the ground. To Let signs up the main street, the 'silver' grey buildings are turning green or black with dirt and foost. Every other major city in the UK has had various states or rejuvenation, yet we can't lay a strip of tarmac on the outskirts, turf some sand dunes or raise a dark jakey garden out into the 21st century. Absolute shambles. This 'financial blackhole' thing won't wash with me I'm afraid. Remind me, how many cities have done a Sevco because they tarted the place up a bit? Wonder how many of those moaning about spending money also wishes Stewart Milne would do the same down Pittodrie? So why spend millions on UTG and not on doing up Union St and knocking down the shopping centres that have sucked the life out of what should be the sparkling centre of Aberdeen? And just because the weather isn't great all the time is hardly a reason to start destroying parks and green spaces, esp on the few anywhere near the city centre Quote
tom_widdows Posted August 15, 2012 Report Posted August 15, 2012 RE Union street id say priority 1 should be to knock on the doors of all the landlords/ commercial managers etc with empty shops and say 'Right, either lower your rental rates and activelly seek out a tenant be they local or national business, or sell the unit to the council (or some community trust) for a knock down price.' Seems to me there are too many of these landlords with deals that see them get an income whether their unit is occupied or empty. Union street is fast becoming the next George Street Quote
Kowalski Posted August 20, 2012 Author Report Posted August 20, 2012 http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2896455 Top businessmen put gardens cash on table By david mckay Published: 20/08/2012 SEVEN leading north-east businessmen have pledged to dip into their own pockets to ensure Aberdeen’s City Garden Project goes ahead – if councillors back the scheme this week. The entrepreneurs said they would donate cash to the redevelopment plan for Union Terrace Gardens, while working to raise the final £15million towards the capital cost. The group – Douglas Craig, Tommy Dreelan, Martin Gilbert, Mark Patterson, Stewart Milne, Stewart Spence and Tom Smith – also hope a further £15million can be secured in endowments. Sir Ian Wood has committed £50million of his personal fortune to the revamp plan, with a further £35million available if the project goes above budget. Quote
bloo_toon_red Posted August 20, 2012 Report Posted August 20, 2012 So why spend millions on UTG and not on doing up Union St It's not only UTG. There are a plethora of other, as yet unpublicised, regeneration projects, to be carried our around the city, in line with the proposed CoC bid. It's been kept quiet within professional circles. Why? I don't know, perhaps to retain the power of the Aberdeen business clique that exists. Hence my summation of how poorly managed this process has been. If the public was made aware of how else the money was to be spent, there would be much, much more support. Quote
maverick sheep Posted August 20, 2012 Report Posted August 20, 2012 How in christ's name is Stewartie finding the cash to 'donate' to this, when he can't donate a write off of a portion of our debt, thereby reducing the interest accrued...? Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted August 20, 2012 Report Posted August 20, 2012 How in christ's name is Stewartie finding the cash to 'donate' to this, when he can't donate a write off of a portion of our debt, thereby reducing the interest accrued...? There you go using sense again ya tit. Quote
tom_widdows Posted August 20, 2012 Report Posted August 20, 2012 My guess is he will be putting forward money from 'The Stewart Milne Group' ie his company so when questioned by tax man etc he can say it was an investment in the local area in an atempt to boost the local economy Money tied up in Aberdeen FC is from Stewart Milne, private citizen. Could be wrong but I seriously doubt hes stupid enough to do a David Murray and use his companies money to fund a football club Quote
dave_min Posted August 20, 2012 Report Posted August 20, 2012 My guess is he will be putting forward money from 'The Stewart Milne Group' ie his company so when questioned by tax man etc he can say it was an investment in the local area in an atempt to boost the local economy Money tied up in Aberdeen FC is from Stewart Milne, private citizen. Could be wrong but I seriously doubt hes stupid enough to do a David Murray and use his companies money to fund a football club You sure about that? I'm pretty sure all Wiggys shares are in the name of the SM Group. Quote
Kowalski Posted August 22, 2012 Author Report Posted August 22, 2012 Binned: http://local.stv.tv/aberdeen/news/local-democracy/186596-aberdeens-divisive-city-garden-project-rejected-by-councillors/ Aberdeen councillors have voted against controversial plans to transform a city centre park. The business case for the £140m City Garden Project was rejected at a full council meeting on Wednesday. Businessman Sir Ian Wood had committed £50m towards the scheme to redevelop Union Terrace Gardens, while an anonymous £5m pledge had also been made. A group of seven north-east businessman, including Stewart Milne and Aberdeen Asset Management chief executive Martin Gilbert, had vowed to raise another £15m towards the project. The remaining cost was to be covered by a £92m Tax Incremental Financing loan from the Scottish Futures Trust. The money would also have been used to fund the redevelopment of St Nicholas House, Aberdeen Art Gallery and the North Denburn Valley as well as creating the City Circle pedestrian route project. The business report said the TIF business case had the potential to unlock 6560 full-time jobs and an average of £115.1m per annum of economic growth over 25 years. More than 85,000 people voted in a public referendum on the contentious project in March with 52% voting in favour of the project. However the project faced an uncertain future when Labour, who had campaigned against the proposal, won the most seats at the council elections in May. Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted August 22, 2012 Report Posted August 22, 2012 So, Labour have voted this out and are set upon binning the stadium too. 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.