Public asked for verdict on vision

By Calum Ross

Published: 12/01/2010

The public has been given two months to deliver its verdict on radical plans to transform the centre of Aberdeen by giving it a £140million new heart.

An eight-week consultation was launched yesterday on Sir Ian Wood’s vision of creating a new civic square by raising Union Terrace Gardens and the Denburn Valley to street level.

The oil services tycoon has pledged £50million of his personal fortune to turn his dream into a reality – but only if the majority of people in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire want it.

The people’s verdict will be delivered by phone, by post, text message and through cyberspace in what the scheme’s backers have promised will be the “most comprehensive” consultation yet seen in Aberdeen.

Feedback will be sought at a series of public exhibitions across the city and in Aberdeenshire, through an independent opinion poll, focus groups and leaflets sent out to homes, as well as on social networking sites Facebook and Twitter.

Tom Smith, chairman of Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (Acsef), said the project would move forward to the next stage if there was a “groundswell of support”.

“We’re keen to hear from as many people as possible,” he said at the official launch of the consultation at the Caledonian Hotel in Union Terrace.

“The City Square Project is Aberdeen’s last, but probably best, chance to get the plaza it deserves. The creation of the city square is essential to safeguard the future prosperity of Aberdeen.

“I think it would be ludicrous, crazy, to let this opportunity slip through our fingers.”

The project has already won the backing of several of the region’s business figures, including Robert Cook, chief executive of the Malmaison and Hotel du Vin group.

Opposition to the development has also been mobilised, including from local and national architects and a campaign group that laid out “Save Me” banners in the snow-covered gardens yesterday and has gathered 4,227 signatures on a petition.

Katie Guthrie, co-founder of the I Love UTG campaign, said: “We wanted to make a bold statement to really hit home the huge cost of following the City Square scheme, which is not only a massive drain on the public purse but the loss of Aberdeen’s historic and unique city-centre gardens.”

Many opponents support Peacock Visual Arts and its plans for a £13million centre in the gardens.

Peacock issued a statement yesterday expressing “huge disappointment” that the consultation did not include an option to support its centre.

The consultation, organised by public relations firm Weber Shandwick, will run until March 5 and will ask people whether they support the vision, what they would like to see in the square and what represents a civic space to them. An exhibition will be held at the Mall Trinity on Thursday between 9am and 8pm, and on Friday from 9am to 6pm. It will be at the Union Square centre on Friday and Saturday, January 29 and 30, from 9am-6pm and then at Inverurie Town Hall on Monday, February 1, from 9am-5pm.

Aberdeen University Students’ Association will host an exhibition at The Hub on Tuesday, February 2, between 9am and 5pm, before it moves to RGU’s Business School the following day.

The final exhibitions will take place at the Bon Accord Centre on Friday and Saturday, February 12 and 13, and at Peterhead Leisure and Community Centre on Saturday, February 27, between 9am and 5pm.

Feedback can also be given by phoning 0800 111 4881, by text message to 60777, starting messages with the word “square”, or on the website www.thecitysquareproject. com. Twitter users can tweet @thecitysquare, while residents on Facebook can go to www.facebook.com/city squareproject.

Reader's Comments

Both the city and shire councilors/local authorities have more than proven through their immoral and corrupt decision-making neither deserve the respect nor are respectful of the public’s requests so the UTG developments like the Trump and Incinerator developments will go ahead irrespective of what the public want - where is the money comming from considering the state of the NE at the moment
Thomas Owenson
Report this comment

Obviously there will be people out there that will campaign against this. I see this more as systematic failure in society, that many individuals are just hellbent on campaigning. It doesn't really matter if the topic of complaint is valid or not, but the sense of rising up against something, almost makes some people feel involved and 'wanted'. The plans for the bypass and Trump golf course are prime examples where the minority are given precious air time even though their feelings are not matched by the vast majority of the public. I feel the plans to reconstruct Union Terrace Gardens are having a similar effect in that a minority will be pandered to by our local press. Sure, an arts centre is great for those with a love of art, but of little interest to many, many thousands more. And what of UTC? Full of drunk, drugged up, unemployed yobs most of the time and a dark and dingy place. I certainly wouldn't take my kids there. I ask everyone who wants to see a new, dynamic centre of Aberdden City, to make their voices heard, even if it's only by text or signing up to Facebook or Twitter. Do not let the minority NIMBY'S hog the limelight once again!!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Obviously there will be people out there that will campaign against this. I see this more as systematic failure in society, that many individuals are just hellbent on campaigning. It doesn't really matter if the topic of complaint is valid or not, but the sense of rising up against something, almost makes some people feel involved and 'wanted'. The plans for the bypass and Trump golf course are prime examples where the minority are given precious air time even though their feelings are not matched by the vast majority of the public. I feel the plans to reconstruct Union Terrace Gardens are having a similar effect in that a minority will be pandered to by our local press. Sure, an arts centre is great for those with a love of art, but of little interest to many, many thousands more. And what of UTC? Full of drunk, drugged up, unemployed yobs most of the time and a dark and dingy place. I certainly wouldn't take my kids there. I ask everyone who wants to see a new, dynamic centre of Aberdden City, to make their voices heard, even if it's only by text or signing up to Facebook or Twitter. Do not let the minority NIMBY'S hog the limelight once again!!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

My point proven by your comments above Thomas. The vast majority WANT the Trump development to go ahead. You keep burying your head in the sand though.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

My point proven by your comments above Thomas. The vast majority WANT the Trump development to go ahead. You keep burying your head in the sand though.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Joe Bloggs, your posts are amusingly reminiscent of another wise man, Donald Rumsfeld. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" he said, with such prescience. Perhpas you're right; perhaps the astounding lack of enthusiasm for the city square project, with its collosal costs and destruction of a beautiful sunken garden in the heart of Aberdeen, perhaps that's proof that everybody wants it to happen. Just as the lack of evidence for WMDs in Iraq didn't mean that there weren't any? I salute your admirable and doughty commitment to such counter-intuitive wisdom, and when it mirrors the words of the former US defence secretary, I think we can all see just how valid your reasoning is.
Ellis Croft
Report this comment

Why dont they just tidy it up, invest in it and get it used. Why do we need to destroy all our heritage?
Henry Stewart
Report this comment

Ellis - you've gone off on one there haven't you. Beautiful? Hmm, debatable. Lack of enthusiasm? Let's just see what the next 8 weeks brings before passing this off as a dead duck. Henry - heritage? Come on now, it's hardly Kew Gardens we're talking about here is it. It's not utilised to it's full potential, so I am firmly behind the plans, so long as they accomodate the greenery that we already have.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Ellis - you've gone off on one there haven't you. Beautiful? Hmm, debatable. Lack of enthusiasm? Let's just see what the next 8 weeks brings before passing this off as a dead duck. Henry - heritage? Come on now, it's hardly Kew Gardens we're talking about here is it. It's not utilised to it's full potential, so I am firmly behind the plans, so long as they accomodate the greenery that we already have.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Joe, you "wouldn't take your kids there" so perhaps you're not best placed to judge whether the gardens are beautiful or not. You're happy to peddle the idea that they're full of drug addicts and somehow dangerous, but then there's really no evidence to back this up either, just like there's no evidence to suggest that there's a silent majority supporting the city square project. Interesting point about Kew Gardens, sounds as if you'd take umbrage if somebody wanted to develop there. So London gardens and parks - of which there are many - deserve preservation, and Aberdeens ONLY garden space (well, only green space without tombstones) doesn't really matter all that much? Fair enough, but I wonder what the silent majority would think of that?
Ellis Croft
Report this comment

I have not read any of the comments as I am in a rush but bbl as all ways, just a passing thought though. Can the Gardens be moved to another location also in need of development? The amount of dead-space that wants to be used in the project compared to the size of the gardens makes me like to concept without knowing the fine-print. As for the History as the Gardens this was the 1st link that came up on Google also. I want to find out more from both sides without bias though, then make my own mind up in due course as I am on the fence just now http://www.aboutaberdeen.com/unionterracegardens.php
Angus Brown
Report this comment

I too would want to see the ideas so I’ll look at the info before jumping to a band wagon. I would say however that those gardens do need something. I would like to see the Aberdeen with a bright classy centre as opposed to the cold dark gardens that are there. But people need grassy areas for the summer and throwing sticks for their dog. I'm sure there is a compromise that everyone can agree to, I hate the history / heritage argument, Times change and peoples needs change, if these people had their own way we'd be travelling on horse back and living in mud huts.
john williamson
Report this comment

I too would want to see the ideas so I’ll look at the info before jumping to a band wagon. I would say however that those gardens do need something. I would like to see the Aberdeen with a bright classy centre as opposed to the cold dark gardens that are there. But people need grassy areas for the summer and throwing sticks for their dog. I'm sure there is a compromise that everyone can agree to, I hate the history / heritage argument, Times change and peoples needs change, if these people had their own way we'd be travelling on horse back and living in mud huts.
john williamson
Report this comment

Well Joe you sa the gardens are full of drunks and drugged up unemployed and not utilies. Well why don't you take those comments to the ACSEF and our local council. After all it was there responsibility to look after the gardens. So why should we now cover it up because of their neglect. Seems that to have an original green space in Aberdeen is not good enough for some people they would rather see a concrete pavement from Union Street to the Theatre. Beautiful _ NO. Typical of the authorities of this city to want to spoil everything they touch. Look around the city and you can see the damage with thier "Forward and Progressive thinking" Ugly isn't.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Mr "Blogs" for someone so vehemently against campaigning, you certainly do a lot of it. In fact you are yourself one of the most vocal campaigners in favour of destroying the Gardens. I'm afraid your comments that you "see this more as systematic failure in society, that many individuals are just hellbent on campaigning" is as valid as your vicious sweeping statements that the only users of the gardens are "drunk, drugged up, unemployed yobs", I for one am not a seasoned campaigner, but feel strongly enough about this issue to stand up and do the best I can to ensure that this blatant disregard for history and heritage is not acted upon and we do not lose yet another piece of this city's unique features to this process of "anytown" planning. And please, the UTG issues, the Trump Development and the AWPR are completely different issues which cannot simply be pigeonholed within "development, good or bad", they each have their own points of controversy and many which support one don't support the other and vice-versa and I think your view that campaigning against this extremely costly and destructive plan means that those campaigners are "anti-development" needs reassessing.
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

Mr "Bloggs" for someone so vehemently against campaigning, you certainly do a lot of it. In fact you are yourself one of the most vocal campaigners in favour of destroying the Gardens. I'm afraid your comments that you "see this more as systematic failure in society, that many individuals are just hellbent on campaigning" is as valid as your vicious sweeping statements that the only users of the gardens are "drunk, drugged up, unemployed yobs", I for one am not a seasoned campaigner, but feel strongly enough about this issue to stand up and do the best I can to ensure that this blatant disregard for history and heritage is not acted upon and we do not lose yet another piece of this city's unique features to this process of "anytown" planning. And please, the UTG issues, the Trump Development and the AWPR are completely different issues which cannot simply be pigeonholed within "development, good or bad", they each have their own points of controversy and many which support one don't support the other and vice-versa and I think your view that campaigning against this extremely costly and destructive plan means that those campaigners are "anti-development" needs reassessing.
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

Why doesn't Wood take his £50M and use it for the demolition of the St Nicholas House eyesore and then build his square there. Surely that would be a solution for both his ego and all those who want the gardens to remain as they are.
Dave McGregor
Report this comment

Dave, if Wood did that Aberdeen would benefit from a world class £14m arts centre AND a regeneration project that nobody in their right mind would object to. That would be real vision and ambition. Why Acsef are running a campaign for a project that by definition requires Peacock to hand back the £9.5m funding that they've already raised is a mystery. Their assertions that the square will contain a contemporary arts centre are evasive and equivocal as well; there is no guarantee, merely a hypothetical statement that the square "could" contain an arts centre.
Ellis Croft
Report this comment

Why doesn't wood take his £50m and help make a fully covered, top of the range stadium with aberdeen fc. Aberdeen could be hosting international football and rugby, trying to bring the nfl one off games to scotland and giving a big and impressive venue for music and other acts to the bnorth east. We always miss out up here because our facilities are rubbish. The influx of revinue generated for the area would be a big boost if bands like The Who were selling out to 30,000 people.
john williamson
Report this comment

Woody should donate his dosh to his loyal & trusted workers. Let them decide what to do with it as a mark of respect for his inspirational leadership. To be honest just leave it alone it has its own history & special beauty. Woody should just develop Nigg Tip. It's the first thing you see when you arrive by rail!!! I suggest a big bronze statue? If he’s that concerned that the good citizens of Aberdeen will forget him & suitably placed in the Hazelhead gardens. The triple Kirks should be the priority as this has been & still is the immediate blot on the landscape.
Fiona Cooper
Report this comment

Woody should donate his dosh to his loyal & trusted workers. Let them decide what to do with it as a mark of respect for his inspirational leadership. To be honest just leave it alone it has its own history & special beauty. Woody should just develop Nigg Tip. It's the first thing you see when you arrive by rail!!! I suggest a big bronze statue? If he’s that concerned that the good citizens of Aberdeen will forget him & suitably placed in the Hazelhead gardens. The triple Kirks should be the priority as this has been & still is the immediate blot on the landscape.
Fiona Cooper
Report this comment

£140m new heart? surrounded by dirty granite and closed shops -wow.
daz windturbine
Report this comment

I'm not against the idea of redevelopment of this area, but am I the only one that thinks that ACSEF's "new heart" of Aberdeen is just a big empty space? Okay it might be busy during our 5 days of sunshine in the summer but I cant see many of us enjoying it in a wet October afternoon. Although perhaps they could kill two birds with one stone and build a new stadium for Aberdeen FC underneath it.
Dasbo B
Report this comment

Joe Bloggs, the whole point of supportin the PVA scheme, is not to get a new arts centre and to campain against development, but to actually get a feasible project so close to getting the go-ahead, that really does deliver and deal with all the issues you yourself have flagged up, but without destroying the gardens in the meantime. It would provide a safe and relaxing environment, acess to and through the gardens, a focal point and hub, and would be very sympathetic to the natural contours of the site, which should by all means be kept.. And most importantly, it's done to a realistic and plausable budget, which has just about been secured, and already has planning permission.. This whole civic bunker scheme, even if it gets the support of the majourity, is yet to be designed, put through a rigorous planning process, and yet to be properly budgeted, because the the £140 million, is completely unrealistic, there is NO WAY that amount of work can be done for just that amount, i'd begin to buy into double that amount. So all we'd be left with is nothing, just a bunch of moaning martyrs on both sides as neither project would go ahead..
Ved Mij
Report this comment

At this public consultation and exhibitions, i'm expecting to see physical models, proper drawings, actual studies done of the site, something that shows that they really have done the work they claim they have, and something that will convince me that it's even to some extent feasible. If all they've produced to convince the public that they are capable of seeing this through is four renders or 'artists impressions' that show absolutely nothing of any significance, how are you meant to believe any of it.. And at the end of the day, even if it were all resolved right down to the nuts and bolts, it's still an absolutely shocking idea, and an absolutely irreversible damaging scheme that would forever destroy an area of town that is currently not that far off from being amazing. So if you think this is just about some artists wanting a wee centre for themselves with ho regard to the thousands of others, think again.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Haha... you guys crack me up. Come on now, out with it - who's camp are you fighting for here? Peacock, Hug-a-Tree, anti-John Wood? It's of no surprise to me that this City has lacked the invention and belief to develop since the money started trickling in back when Oil was first discovered. It's moaning indidviduals who have kept this City back. Yes, a Council of numpties can be held accountable, but the citizens are best placed to drive things forward. No one is suggesting that the artist's impression of the proposed square is the final cut. It can include many items that people feel strongly about (notably trees, grass, shrubs etc. But there has to be some middle ground and to discount it out of hand as it messes with the 'history' and 'heritage' of Aberdeen is folly. And Fraser, I never said that the ONLY users of the gardens are drunks or druggies, but they do make up a percentage and perhaps drive others away as they see it as unsafe. They go they as it's secluded and out of the way. A raised platform can help in hiding the ugly railway/dual carriageway, create new jobs by selling off more retail space and yes, the Triple Kirks will undoubtedly be devloped at the same time, I'm sure. What was it Obama Ellis? YES WE CAN!!!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Haha... you guys crack me up. Come on now, out with it - who's camp are you fighting for here? Peacock, Hug-a-Tree, anti-John Wood? It's of no surprise to me that this City has lacked the invention and belief to develop since the money started trickling in back when Oil was first discovered. It's moaning indidviduals who have kept this City back. Yes, a Council of numpties can be held accountable, but the citizens are best placed to drive things forward. No one is suggesting that the artist's impression of the proposed square is the final cut. It can include many items that people feel strongly about (notably trees, grass, shrubs etc. But there has to be some middle ground and to discount it out of hand as it messes with the 'history' and 'heritage' of Aberdeen is folly. And Fraser, I never said that the ONLY users of the gardens are drunks or druggies, but they do make up a percentage and perhaps drive others away as they see it as unsafe. They go they as it's secluded and out of the way. A raised platform can help in hiding the ugly railway/dual carriageway, create new jobs by selling off more retail space and yes, the Triple Kirks will undoubtedly be devloped at the same time, I'm sure. What was it Obama Ellis? YES WE CAN!!!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Leave the Gardens alone, they're very attractive and an integral part of the city.
Susie Main
Report this comment

As an ex employee of one of Wood's companies I know how and why he has £50M to waste on this nonsense. The stadium idea seems a decent one as well as St Nicholas House though.
Dave McGregor
Report this comment

A self made millionaire plans on donating - not lending - donating, £50m of his own cash in an attempt to try and generate something uplifiting (if you pardon the pun) in our City and all he gets is ridicule? You bunch deserve nothing more than a slap round the face with a wet fish. Awa doon tae Dundee and live yer lives there. Seriously, backward thinking is this region's hallmark. While we're at it, let's bulldoze the airport - fit de wi need wee een o' those? Folk kin tak a bus and stuff.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

A self made millionaire plans on donating - not lending - donating, £50m of his own cash in an attempt to try and generate something uplifiting (if you pardon the pun) in our City and all he gets is ridicule? You bunch deserve nothing more than a slap round the face with a wet fish. Awa doon tae Dundee and live yer lives there. Seriously, backward thinking is this region's hallmark. While we're at it, let's bulldoze the airport - fit de wi need wee een o' those? Folk kin tak a bus and stuff.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Be careful on the feedback website for the City Square as there are only boxes asking what you want to see in the square. I would like a box that says LEAVE THE GARDENS ALONE - I DO NOT WANT THE SQUARE, not in Union Terrace Gardens. The Civic Square should go where St Nicholas House stands and if Sir Ian Wood genuinely wanted to give Aberdeen some civic pride, then use the £50million to demolish the eyesore that is Nich House. Please note also that the boxes that ask if you support the square Yes or No - Well the YES is already highlighted, so it is very important that you highlight the NO box, if you object to the destruction of UTG. Why were letters not sent to the residents of the city centre to ask for their opinion before this costly consultation was underway? Joe Bloggs, who are you? Do you work for Ian Wood or ACSEF? Why do you not have the courage of your convictions and give us all your real name eh? Yes this consultation will go on until March, and sometime in March Peacock will have lost £4million of their funding, no to mention the £1million of public money wasted because they were sold down the river by Aberdeen City Council. Re: the gardens being unused and not wanting to take your kids down there - I remember the Instant Neighbour charity putting on an event and there were lots for the kids to do, including a bouncy castle and face painting. There was a stage and bands playing, also there was food sold and I remember particularly enjoying the strawberries and champagne. The public toilets were open then of course. The Evening Express itself recently showed a wonderful photograph of 20,000 revellers in Union Terrace Gardens on Hogmanay not too long ago. While I am at it, has anyone noticed in the Bon Accord Centre the notice on the door of the 'Skyline Restaurant'? It says closed until further notice - April 2000. Attached to this is an indoor bowling facilitiy - Is this also closed? Talk about a waste of space, and a huge space at that!!! 66 Whitehouse Street Aberdeen
Jaki Sinclair
Report this comment

Donating £50m for the self glory & the fool citizens of Aberdeen will have to contribute the rest to match the usuall shortfall. I want my house tax spent elsewere, not on a short cut from Schoolhill to Union Street
Fiona Cooper
Report this comment

A fitting legacy for an important business giant like Sir Ian to leave the city would be something truly philantrhopic. Why does he not join with PSN to save and expand Glencraft? Surely there are many other areas where Sir Ian could demonstrate that he is just as much a social entrepreneur as an engineering entrepreneur.
Ludvig von Mises
Report this comment

"Joe" you know fine well that this donation must be matched pound for pound at least from the public purse, whether from the city or nationally. Sir Ian will ONLY donate his money to a full covering of the area, and if the people don't want it he takes it away. If this was really such a generous "donation" then why wouldnt he donate it to the city for something other to the square. Considering that this "generous donation" is conditional on twice the amount being found from other sources and can only be used on one very specific venture, I dont think it is really as generous as you make out
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

Jaki - my real name will appear in the ASCEF questionnaire which was completed earlier. I do not want people who I may work with, to see that I have been wasting my time arguing with NIMBY'S on here. I neither work for the Council, ASCEF or Wood Group. Believe it or not, I am one of many citizens of the North East that is actually prepared to stand up against activists like yourself who declare war on any development of any kind!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Jaki - my real name will appear in the ASCEF questionnaire which was completed earlier. I do not want people who I may work with, to see that I have been wasting my time arguing with NIMBY'S on here. I neither work for the Council, ASCEF or Wood Group. Believe it or not, I am one of many citizens of the North East that is actually prepared to stand up against activists like yourself who declare war on any development of any kind!
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Fraser - a donation is a donation is a donation. What would you prefer, that SIW donate the entire amount himself? Much of this cash will come from the public purse, of course it will. You'd be a fool to think otherwise. But much of it will come from private sector as well. Everyone has a part to play in the investment. No such thing as a free lunch my friend.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Fraser - a donation is a donation is a donation. What would you prefer, that SIW donate the entire amount himself? Much of this cash will come from the public purse, of course it will. You'd be a fool to think otherwise. But much of it will come from private sector as well. Everyone has a part to play in the investment. No such thing as a free lunch my friend.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

If the £50 Million is not used and all this fall's apart (and it is not like the World depends on this picturing people with Sandwich-Boards with THE END IS NIGH! sprayed all over them), can 'SIR' Ian Wood use his generosity and good intent in other ways in Aberdeen. Because after reading some of the ramblings above I would be inclined to put promised pledge where the sun don't shine. Either way I guess he will get his wish for being remembered in the History Books but just hope it is with good intent and not as aomw Evil-Villain!
Angus Brown
Report this comment

I hate to mention this to you all, the problem is there is no public money for Sir Ian Wood's plan neither from Aberdeen City Council nor Scottish Government, this plan will not go ahead, I am also rather upset that public money has been used for the so called 'consultation' Trotwood
Betty Lyon
Report this comment

Actually, I think I've made it clear what I would prefer. I would prefer for Sir Ian, if he really wanted to make a grand philanthropic gesture, to spend his 50 million on worthy causes across the city. As a lot have people have asked, why can't he spend his money investing in communities who need help, to the vulnerable or to tidy up parts of the city in despirite need of help: Bridge Street, the Castlegate, the green. These areas will only degenerate further if all emphasis and hundreds of millions of public funds is diverted into this unnecessary square project that will only exacerbate issues which ACSEF claim it will solve.
Fraser Denholm
Report this comment

Joe Bloggs - whoever you are hiding behind your alias. I am no activist, wherever did you get that idea. I am a woman who brought up 3 children in the city centre, eldest is 30 and youngest 15. Union Terrace Gardens is the only garden I have as I live in a flat with signs saying No Ball Games by order ACC all around the area where I live. Union Terrace Gardens are dear to my heart and I think they deserve to be preserved. When Peacock first applied for planning permission to build in the gardens, I objected, but if it was a choice between the Peacock art centre or the square, I would choose the Peacock plan as it ticks all the boxes to make the gardens a better place while retaining its character and original features. It also means that it would make the gardens easily accessible for disabled people and we would not lose the unique sunken nature of the gardens. Joe Bloggs - I know there is no such thing as a free lunch, but I like to choose what I want to eat and do not want something abhorrent rammed down my throat.
Jaki Sinclair
Report this comment

Most cities would be glad if part of the city was given a make over but not some of what appear to be the older population of moaning Aberdioans who don't like change. Union Square was and still is complained about yet every time I have been it is really busy and most people agree they are glad it is here. I think it is a shame to lose Union Terrace Gardens as I spent my teenage years drinking and smoking down their which is mainly what the teenagers who go use it for. However the majority of people in Aberdeen do not walk through the park or admire any scenery so the space is not used and the council (ie our taxes pay to maintain it). I say they should go ahead and reconstruct Union Terrace Gardens as it will hopefully encourage better retailers to Aberdeen and increase jobs. If you look at what they did to Manchester they created an open space feature which looks really impressive and is much better than the previous long stretch of grass. Aberdeen does seem a soulless city especially Union Street as it is just one long street with no real center in it. Quiet a few cities have large screens in open air centers for watching events outdoor like tennis or football which creates a more community spirit and have shops/cafes/bars surrounding it. A few proposals should be put forward with architect drawings so the public will see how it could potentially look. If it is built hopefully it will improve the whole area and people will take more pride in Aberdeen. Presently cheap tatty shops and mobiles phone shops are in abundance in Aberdeen and many homeless people are on Union Street begging, hopefully it will improve the area. It is the same type of situation with the Donald Trump golf course a good thing comes to Aberdeen and a minority of people complain and get media coverage, we need as a city to move with the times and embrace change for the better. The oil will not last forever and when it does run out we do not want the place to be a ghost town as people will move out. Aberdeen has a lot of money floating around due to the oil although in the town centre it’s not really obvious that Aberdeen is actually an affluent area. I have lived in eight cities due to my job you might not think it is but I do. However a lot of drugs, fights and dodgers do seem to mull around Union Street probably the same as in every other city. Was the public consulted about Aberdeen City Council's move to Marischal College, which was a listed building and parts of it have been taken down and refurbished at a huge cost of between £100-150 million? No real song and dance was made about that and if there was it must have been fairly quiet. I have no time for the council they have proved on more than one occasion they don't listen to the public and can't be trusted to run effectively. Hopefully the feedback will be for it and the (Acsef) will press on. Comments regarding Ian Wood are obviously bitter and jealous. Ian has achieved something in his life and has a mast a vast amount of money, while employing many local people. Ian is doing a good thing here by trying to give something back to Aberdeen. It's his money and he can offer it to what cause he likes, he should be praised
Johnny Smith
Report this comment

It's fairly laughable that anyone who is opposed to the City Square project is being immediately labelled as crazy activists by a person who is too cowardly to reveal his own name. The flaws and ulterior motives of the City Square plan are plain to see, and I'm happy to discuss my objections openly with anyone who cares to listen: Firstly, it would result in the destruction of the last green space in Aberdeen, and replace it with a concrete mess consisting of shops and car park spaces we simply don't need. We'll have to put up with a building site for at least 2 years, and after that, what are we left with? From what can only be described at best as a vague collection of shoddy CGI renders, we'll have a handful of trees and a bit of glass. Not pictured is, I'm sure, at least 5 branches of starbucks. Secondly, it calls for a significant amount of public funds that Aberdeen council simply doesn't have, and if it can magically produce extra funds, should be going into all the vital public services such as schools, Glencraft, leisure facilities etc that have been lost over the last few years. Thirdly, the fact that the Peacock proposal is not part of the consultation exposes the biased nature of the campaign. If the ASCEF had any respect for the people of Aberdeen or any confidence that they had a superior plan to an idea that already had planning permission and funding (!) they would happily advise the community of all the options. Clearly they have neither. Fourth, If Ian Woods really cared about the city and future of Aberdeen he wouldn't be attaching conditions to how his money is spent. Instead he continues to persue his vanity project to the detriment of the city. He isn't doing this out of the kindness of his heart. He wants profit share and probably a nice little plaque somewhere too.
Iain Kay
Report this comment

Well Joe it seems that you write all your vitriolic garbage dureing working hours. Funny that thought you might work for the council but you say no. You are definagely one of those people who think that tearing up something and replacing it with concrete is good. Plenty of letters have said what a sad pathetic street Union Street is. With is shoddy shops eith closed or nothing worth while in them Do you really think that putting a concrete square will enhance this??? It will still be shoddy. Why is it that a lot of Aberdonians hear of money being handed out go on hands and knees and worship the donator. Sir Woods is not interested in any other project because of his own vanity. For the council in Aberdeen to jump on the Wood bandwagon at the expense of the Peacock project is nothing short of underhanded. Our council has never built anything that is worthwhile, beutiful or sometimes even necessary. Do you think they would start now. No WAY
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

I'm sorry to everyone who is desperate to know my real name or where I work. This is not a pre-requisite of debating. It matters not one bit who I am. The fact that you are all getting so hot under the collar about it makes me believe that it is a cheap shot as you cannot really argue the points I make. Let it be known now, all you folk out there that are dead against this project - that this is NOT the only piece of green area left in Aberdeen. Open your eyes - Westburn Gardens, Duthie Park, Hazelhead Park. If you are really that desperate for green and pleasant lands, then take a No19 bus (or whatever it is - Pink Line) and take a walk around one of those places. UTG is not currenly used for folk going for a jog, walking their dogs, playing football, having a picnic with the family. It is largely dirty, plain and situated next to a railway line where every now and again, a dirty stinking diesel locamotive will chug past. Loads of noise from vehicles zooming up and down the underpass road... yes, UTG is a wonderful place to sit and eat your lunch. If you're lucky, you might find some foul mouthed, drugged up neds sitting next to you, sipping on their cans of McEwans, pleasantly exchanging their thoughts between each other. And the toilets, what a lovely place to spend a penny. But all this can be cured by constructing and arts centre that 99% of the Aberdeen public will never set foot in. Come on, wakey wakey folks. Johnny Smith, I'm glad someone on here is in agreement - I was starting to think the World had can loopy. And anyone who tries to back up their argument with tales of how Sir Ian Wood should do this and that with his money, there's far better things to spend it on in Aberdeen, the Council can't afford it, blah blah blah... I read the same tripe from those nutters that were campaigning against the bypass and equally, the numpties who marched down Balmedie beach, seeking to protect a piece of seaweed or kelp or whatever it was. Life moves on people. Get busy living or get busy dying. Aberdeen is, believe it or not, a pretty grey and skanky city centre. We are crying out for a bit of class and this is everyone's opportunity to suggest what we would like to see from a revamped UTG and a Civic Square. I'm sure there'll be something else along next year that you can all campaign about. Windfarms or something like that, spoiling your precious view of the horizon.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

I'm sorry to everyone who is desperate to know my real name or where I work. This is not a pre-requisite of debating. It matters not one bit who I am. The fact that you are all getting so hot under the collar about it makes me believe that it is a cheap shot as you cannot really argue the points I make. Let it be known now, all you folk out there that are dead against this project - that this is NOT the only piece of green area left in Aberdeen. Open your eyes - Westburn Gardens, Duthie Park, Hazelhead Park. If you are really that desperate for green and pleasant lands, then take a No19 bus (or whatever it is - Pink Line) and take a walk around one of those places. UTG is not currenly used for folk going for a jog, walking their dogs, playing football, having a picnic with the family. It is largely dirty, plain and situated next to a railway line where every now and again, a dirty stinking diesel locamotive will chug past. Loads of noise from vehicles zooming up and down the underpass road... yes, UTG is a wonderful place to sit and eat your lunch. If you're lucky, you might find some foul mouthed, drugged up neds sitting next to you, sipping on their cans of McEwans, pleasantly exchanging their thoughts between each other. And the toilets, what a lovely place to spend a penny. But all this can be cured by constructing and arts centre that 99% of the Aberdeen public will never set foot in. Come on, wakey wakey folks. Johnny Smith, I'm glad someone on here is in agreement - I was starting to think the World had can loopy. And anyone who tries to back up their argument with tales of how Sir Ian Wood should do this and that with his money, there's far better things to spend it on in Aberdeen, the Council can't afford it, blah blah blah... I read the same tripe from those nutters that were campaigning against the bypass and equally, the numpties who marched down Balmedie beach, seeking to protect a piece of seaweed or kelp or whatever it was. Life moves on people. Get busy living or get busy dying. Aberdeen is, believe it or not, a pretty grey and skanky city centre. We are crying out for a bit of class and this is everyone's opportunity to suggest what we would like to see from a revamped UTG and a Civic Square. I'm sure there'll be something else along next year that you can all campaign about. Windfarms or something like that, spoiling your precious view of the horizon.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

"Johnny Smith, I'm glad someone on here is in agreement - I was starting to think the World had can loopy." I think everyone who disagrees with you mr Mich....Blogs are sticking to facts, you sadly seem to drop into rant mode and wander off into terrible diatribes using horribly simplistic and tabloid argumentative - it's tired to have to write the same thing over and over again, i am sure you know! but - the people "against" the ACSEF plans are not "against" development, "against" progress... we just want it done sympathetically and elegantly. The idea that giving people who think "thinking BIG" means slapping as much concrete on a garden that needs looking after and "reclaimed" (I walked through the gardens a lot in december (before the snow - just to see for myself what it is like outside of the summer "high season" - and I didn't come across one junkie, one drunk or one "foul mouthed, drugged up ned". It's you sir that needs to calm down, you sir need to address tangible facts that ACSEF purport to fix everything. If I am to take on any of your "criticisms" of the gardens as they stand - how will you ensure this existing demographic won't re-populate the "inclusive" square? - perhaps a wonderful arts centre that caters for bored and disadvantaged youth might be able to get them in screen printing or expressing themselves so as not to loiter and get inebriated in the space? you are too random with too many conflicting statements to actually register as anything but a lone voice. I'd say you are doing a dis-service to the serious backers of ACSEF's plans (not that there are many on-line discussing and debating on an adult level). (wakey wakey? - are you serious?)
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

I am not going to read any more as there is too much to read in the tiny font for me 2 understand but I am getting the flow of it all...how can anyone comment on something that even the proposed drawings have not been released yet...glad I have my own imagination to live with......"An exhibition will be held at the Mall Trinity on Thursday between 9am and 8pm, and on Friday from 9am to 6pm. It will be at the Union Square centre on Friday and Saturday, January 29 and 30, from 9am-6pm and then at Inverurie Town Hall on Monday, February 1, from 9am-5pm."...if i got that correct?
Angus Brown
Report this comment

OK, taking the fact that it is Union Terrace Gardens out of the equation for a second and after looking at the plans here are my thoughts... I have been to the parks in Chicago that these plans have been based on, in fact when I was walking through the park in Chicago I remember turning to my other half and saying "Aberdeen would never have anything like this" but now it has the opportunity. People are saying that taking away UTG it taking away our heritage but I cant see why that is the case. If people in Aberdeen see a run down park with toilets that are never open and drunks lying around on the grass as our heritage then PLEASE take it away!!! The next argument is to do things simply and elegantly so they fit in with the surroundings... Has anyone actually looked at HMT lately? The big glass bit stuck to the side doesnt quite look right at the moment but a few additions, like this type of park will help bring the old and new together. If some people get there way then Aberdeen will be a dead city within 30 years. No golf development, no regeneration, no new parks, no changes.... the city is no longer in decline, the city is on its knees at the moment, it will soon be past the point where regeneration is financially possible due to the mess ACC has made of things over the last 20 years but still people complain… The bigger picture without these types of schemes looks extremely bleak IMO, extremely bleak!
Brian Henderson
Report this comment

Philip Thompson - You have hit the nail on the head. Governments all over the World take note. To solve the problems of social misfits, crime and deprivation, simply open up an arts centre and invite said ASBO wannabees in for a spot of screen printing. Simples. If only it were that easy Mr Thompson. At least you clearly emphasise whose corner your fighting for. As with most eco-warriors who campaign til the death about such matters, us 'simpletons' get labled as fools. I love art, I love beaches, I love nature and wildlife. But I also see massive positives in raising the square and having a civic centre that is fit for the 21st Century. Most of us haven't got that long left before we kick the bucket, so stop thinking about your own self interests for one minute and think of our grandchildren and their grandchildren.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

"Joe", I don't think anyone can disagree that UTG, in its current state, is a wonderful place to be. However, there is, in fact, a middle ground between leaving it to decline further and turning it into a concrete mess, and that is sympathetic transformation. If you disagree that an Arts centre helps young people find a way in life, please explain how a car park and shops helps instead? I'd also like to know exactly the civic square (which is, remember, essentially an underground carpark and shopping centre) would secure the future of Aberdeen. We already have more retail space than we know what to do with for a relatively small population, why do we need yet another branch of Boots?
Iain Kay
Report this comment

Apologies, that should read isn't a wonderful place to be.
Iain Kay
Report this comment

Iain - why does everyone keep harping on about car parks and retail outlets? These would be hidden away from sight, as they are in cities such as Edmonton (largest underground shpping complex in the World if I remember right). The fact that we could develop more shops and office space within the site, for me, is a double bonus. The main attraction is what would be on the surface - the civic square itself. And why do people speak of a concrete mess? The design is not even been thought of... merely artistic impressions. This is the whole purpose of a public consultation - to gauge opinion on what we would like to see. But it fits the criteria of the eco-warriors and art lover types to ramble on about a concrete mess doesn't it, before a design brief has even touched someone's desk.
Joe Bloggs
Report this comment

Joe Bloggs does not speak for me, any more than the rest of folk posting here do. I don't much care for art, but to my mind this situation is simple. One party has been gazumped - prevented from completing, as it were, by a new party with more money. Beyond that there is not much to say - Sir Ian Wood clearly believes that he has the right to do as he pleases because he is wealthy. This is self evidently wrong, and anybody supporting Sir Ian Wood's scheme would do well to reflect on this.
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

Joe, people keep harping on about shopping centres and car parks because, if you look beneath the content-less citysquareproject.com website, this is exactly what the proposal consists of. I am not an eco-warrior by any means, frankly I'd be happy to see 50 wind turbines on the site if that was offered as an alternative. My issue is that we already have amble shopping/parking facilities in the city, and if you want a civic square we already have such a place in the Castlegate which Woods could help regenerate, or he could spend his money on the area around St Nicolas House. This would leave Peacock to continue their transformation of UTG, which already has planning permission in place, and would satisfy the proponents of the city square project. Win/win, surely? If we look at Dundee as an example, the excellent DCA has transformed the Nethergate area and brings in an estimated £5million a year. The Peacock/Whitespace centre has a wider remit than the DCA, (which is primarily an exhibition space), so the potential for Aberdeen to grow as a centre for the arts is huge.
Iain Kay
Report this comment

Johnny Smith, i actually respect your comments as you've gone to the effort of saying what you genuinely think as opposed to just labelling and slandering what has wrongly become known as 'the arts clique'.. I do entirely disagree with them, and i'm sure u'l take just as much time to look at both projects and really assess what they are dealing with. I am all for change, and very much in favour of development, but i Hate seeing it go wrong. The donald trump development, i think is a good thing for the region, however the Union Square shopping centre, although it is finished reasonably well, is an Appaling piece of city masterplanning, and the fact that people use it is no indication whatsoever of its success.. likewise, i really do think something needs to be done to Union Terrace, but if you read the report on ian wood's proposals, it is pretty clear what is driving them. And that is why the ONLY thing the public are being asked their thoughts on is that scheme, and everything else has been ruled out. And it is certainly not mostly an elderly population complaining, there are a fair few recent graduates. I have the enthusiasm to promote change, but aberdeen is currently being bullied by the few powerful, who will in the long run ruin any chance of change, by trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes and manipulate public response. A perfect example of this was the scherade held at tiger tiger, where a select few students were invited for a free lunch and presentation, so that the next day the headlines could read 'the young support ian wood's scheme' that's just blatant nonsense. I am really glad though that you are taking the time to compare aberdeen to other cities, and projects that have succeeded, and a mature discussion likke that is exactly what's needed, where as responding to Joe Bloggs and all his comments is just a waste of time, and so is reading all the nonsense he or she comes out with.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Yeah Phil Thompson... think of our children and grandchildren who can now aspire to a job cleaning up the detritus left on CitySquare after the usual Aberdeen weekend activities, or putting the fluffy bit on Cappucinos. Shame on you - remember, only 20% of people in Aberdeen are interested in culture. So you think on that while I slink off to the Tunnels to see a live band.
Jo Butler
Report this comment

I literally can not wait for my grandchildrens' thoughts on the proposed 5-storey "cultural transformation" of Aberdeen's civic heart ("potentially 515 car-park spaces per level" - Sir Ian Wood, Tiger Tiger, 2009): their breaths will literally be taken away, I'm sure. It is, of course, up to the people to decide on the content of the City Square Project, so please make sure your voice is heard. And even if that means those uncouth web-ranters out there brand you a Swampy of the North-east.
jaco skinny
Report this comment

I literally can not wait for my grandchildrens' thoughts on the proposed 5-storey "cultural transformation" of Aberdeen's civic heart ("potentially 515 car-park spaces per level" - Sir Ian Wood, Tiger Tiger, 2009): their breaths will literally be taken away, I'm sure. It is, of course, up to the people to decide on the content of the City Square Project, so please make sure your voice is heard. And even if that means those uncouth web-ranters out there brand you a Swampy of the North-east.
jaco skinny
Report this comment

The Press and Journal is happy to encourage discussion and debate on the topics featured within our newspaper and on our website.

However, we would urge people to respect the opinions of others even if they do not agree with them. We will not tolerate abusive comments of any type and such posts will be removed with the people responsible facing a ban from this website.

Only registered users can supply comments, and your registered name and location will automatically be appended to any comment that you upload.

We reserve the right to remove comments from anyone using a false name or pseudonym.

To post a comment, please login using the form at the top of the page, or click to register.