civic square proposal

Treat gardens plan with respect

Published: 14/01/2010

THE proposal to convert Aberdeen’s Union Terrace Gardens into a civic square by raising it to Union Street level has provoked some passionate arguments for and against. This can only be good and demonstrates a fierce pride in the city by those who live in it.

Robust debate and strong opinions will be invaluable in determining the way forward once the formal consultation period, which began on Monday, ends. What is not acceptable is the conduct of those people who have stooped to personal abuse of those behind the scheme, principally Sir Ian Wood and Tom Smith, the chairman of Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (Acsef).

Whatever people think of the proposal, there should be no question but that the motives of the two men are entirely genuine. Sir Ian, remember, is promising to commit £50million of his own money if the project goes ahead, while Mr Smith devotes a large proportion of his own time to promoting the region at home and abroad. That, however, is not good enough for a few people who lack the ability to express themselves without resorting to insults.

This proposal, whether it proceeds or not, deserves to be treated with far more respect than some have so far shown.

Reader's Comments

I can only agree though, will wait till I see the drawings till I know how i feel with all due respect. And I am still on the fence on this just as a personal comment as some bloke on a PC, with a interest as I live close to the Gardens. Adding some ppl find it easy to post personal attacks from behind a monitor or over the phone etc, who are probably bullies if u ask me? Sorry for any offence not intended.
Angus Brown
Report this comment

Mt Brown - Did you not read the above article. bullies? But then you did say sorry for any offence not intended. That makes it okay eh...
Jim Ewen
Report this comment

BOTH proposals should be treated with respect and given equal standing an coverage, to fairly allow the public decide which scheme they want for Union Terrace Gardens. This is something that is NOT happening at the moment, between the Journals one sided coverage and ACSEF's "consultation" not entertaining any other scheme other than what they have set forward, this is hardly democracy at work and is disrespectful towards the people of this city!
Graeme Smith
Report this comment

BOTH proposals should be treated with respect and given equal standing an coverage, to fairly allow the public decide which scheme they want for Union Terrace Gardens. This is something that is NOT happening at the moment, between the Journals one sided coverage and ACSEF's "consultation" not entertaining any other scheme other than what they have set forward, this is hardly democracy at work and is disrespectful towards the people of this city!
Graeme Smith
Report this comment

So according to the P&J, one cannot question the motives of Sir Ian Wood or Tom Smith - they should be shown respect. Is this the same P&J that opined on the 2nd December that "it would be nothing short of criminal" if opposition to the city square project resulted in the failure of this project? So debate is healthy, so long as we agree that Sir Ian Wood is pure of motive and anybody opposing him is as good as a criminal. To label opponents of the city square project - several thousand people - as such, and in a far more public fashion than "tweeting" strikes me as being, in the words of the above ediorial, "not acceptable".
Richard Fraser
Report this comment

So much for democracy. Certainly not with the P & J Definately one sided. The paper is full of Sir Wood, Tom Smith and how great this project will be. What about the other side. Does not say much for the type of reporting. Biased is a good word but not strong enough. Over the last couple of monthes in the EE we have seen great photos of the gardens, in the time before it was left to rot. Not by the people but by the council. Why did the P & J not do some reporting then?? There are many people who do remember the good times there. I notice that we now have students stating what a great idea to concrete it over. Pity they did not have to chance to see what it was like before the neglect.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Here again. Forgot to mention that the respect seems to be going in one direction only. Wonder why???
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

"This proposal, whether it proceeds or not, deserves to be treated with far more respect than some have so far shown." Totally agree. "We Condemn the Peacock Personal Attack" - Iain Corbett, Press Officer, Aberdeen City Youth Council 13/1/10
jaco skinny
Report this comment

"This proposal, whether it proceeds or not, deserves to be treated with far more respect than some have so far shown." Totally agree. "We Condemn the Peacock Personal Attack" - Iain Corbett, Press Officer, Aberdeen City Youth Council 13/1/10
jaco skinny
Report this comment

The Journals talk of "respect" and lack of it given to Sir Wood and Mr Smith. I teach my children that respect is a two way street. That you should not expect it unless you give it. So were was Sir Wood's and Mr Smith's respect for due process and the people of Aberdeen since the Peacock Center was given full planning permission, (due process) and passed public consultation, (the people accepted it). Yet Wood and ACSEF have trampled all over this. The fact that £1 000 000 has already been spent from the public purse on Peacock's proposal is not just a lack of respect but a slap in the face to the people of Aberdeen. You talk of respect....but show none by this biased editorial stance.
John Rutherford
Report this comment

"Sir Ian, remember, is promising to commit £50million of his own money if the project goes ahead...That, however, is not good enough for a few people who lack the ability to express themselves without resorting to insults." It's actually also not good enough for quite a lot of people (over 4,000) who do have the ability to express themselves without resorting to insults.
Mark McPherson
Report this comment

I am delighted that th P&J is now converted to dealing with important issues without personal attacks. I look forward to a belated condemnation of Stewart Spence calling me a traitor, (and for the Evening Express turning this into a headline) Donald Trump calling me a national disgrace, George Sorial calling me a scoundrel, ... and I forget which of that crew called me an extemist. Or does this new policy only apply to those the P&J agrees with? Or should those in public life simply expect a certain amount of name-calling and take it lightly as I have done by renaming my blog at www.debrastorr.org to reflect these views of me? Cllr Debra Storr
Debra Storr
Report this comment

Jim Ewan...I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about? I will try and explain what i was saying...I do not know if I had offended anyone and if I had was apologising though not knowing, means I can address any offence though I actually think and feel I have not offended anyone. If I have please contact the P&J and get them to contact me with your complaint and I will address anything that I am unaware of. With regards mentioning the word Bullies, this was in response to another article in today's P&J about a threat of someone being Hung, Drawn and Quartered over the phone. Meaning it is easy to scare ppl over the phone or behind a PC and try not to take it personally though, if someone phoned me with such a threat I would report it to the Police and not the Press. With all due respect.
Angus Brown
Report this comment

taken lightly enough to to leave a " i need a bosey, poor me,please look at my blog" post,eh debs?
cllr unot popu lar quine
Report this comment

I'm sure there are many people like me who are opposed to the destruction of Union Terrace Gardens (and anything being built in it), but enthusiastically support the Menie golf-course development and the Western Peripheral road. So I was dismayed to see the comment from Debra Storr, still licking her wounds after being "trounced by Trump". Her support, by reason of her highly illogical and public ant-Trump stance, is not going to be of any help at all in trying to save the Gardens. Is young Iain Corbett "Joe Bloggs"?
Stuart West
Report this comment

Then Stuart you have the same opinions as I. However I think Cllr Storr's point still stands. Aberdeen Journals stance seems to be that its OK to verbally attack anyone, just as long as its not any of our friends. Double standards at Aberdeen Journals. Cllr Storr should be treated with respect by her opponents just as everyone else should respect others. Pity our local newspaper cant see that.
John Rutherford
Report this comment

"This proposal, whether it proceeds or not, deserves to be treated with far more respect than some have so far shown." Totally agree. "We Condemn the Peacock Personal Attack" - Iain Corbett, Press Officer, Aberdeen City Youth Council 13/1/10
jaco skinny
Report this comment

Jim Ewen...just in case yer at work or something I am of the mind-set of the post of jaco about the issue of respect. I think u have not understood my motive in my 1st post or what I meant (appologsing for doing nothing wrong was my point, if that makes sense?...or out of respect???) and not even going to explain in detail. As for Bullies I know more than I would care to admit about them being at the recieving end with some nasty consequences for me. If I am right to think u kinda misunderstood my post that's cool with me...but if you think I am a bully...are u the same guy that called me a right wing thinker...if not doesn't matter...but yh...show some respect as Jaco points though we have no connections, just like his point and do not like bullies to clear that mess up.
Angus Brown
Report this comment

"This proposal, whether it proceeds or not, deserves to be treated with far more respect than some have so far shown." Totally agree. "We Condemn the Peacock Personal Attack" - Iain Corbett, Press Officer, Aberdeen City Youth Council 13/1/10
jaco skinny
Report this comment

Jaco, I know that you are showing Iain Corbett as a hypocrite. i.e. attacking Peacock for a comment it had nothing to do with, which in turn attacked Sir Wood and Mr Smith. But why do you keep posting it? Am I missing something?
John Rutherford
Report this comment

Lets face it this whole thing is practically sewn up. The consultation paper is a fix when you really look at it and where there is money mentioned= nobody has a say in it at the end of the day. This desecration of UTG will just be another ugly statement to be made in Aberdend along with all the other "Progressive" Beautiful??? things that have been erected over the years. Sir Wood would do better with his millions to knock down 1 unsightly building namely St Nicholas House and build his Civic Square there, Then it could be a Civic square right across the road from the ACC and Town House Lord Skene house. Much better setting for his vanity than UTG. Don't know why these people think that concreting over the gardens will improve Union Street. Just make it look even grubbier. Never mind some more malls and shops just like the ones already there. Shoddy
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

"Whatever people think of the proposal, there should be no question but that the motives of the two men are entirely genuine." If this is truly the belief of the editors, does that not make you propagandists. You should be thoroughly ashamed.
Kevin Mulhern
Report this comment

john, it seems to be a blip in the system. I think if the page is refreshed while you are still logged in your last message is repeated.. or at least it's common for other users too. I may just stand on Union St with a sandwich board in future.
jaco skinny
Report this comment

phew, I thought I was being stupid or something, yeah the delay in posting and duplicates are worrying. Hey if you do the sandwich board, I'll get the megaphone...now all we need as a few guys to habd out leaflets.
John Rutherford
Report this comment

This guy might be up for it in the link...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYfTu9Wc5no
Angus Brown
Report this comment

From the city square consultation document; "The vision is for a more attractive Aberdeen City Centre. Greener, better connected, safer. A City Centre that is inspiring and vibrant, a place that everyone can access, meet and enjoy. The proposal is to redevelop Union Terrace Gardens and the Denburn Valley to create a new civic space. We believe that doing so is the key to creating jobs, investment and improving quality of life for the future. If Aberdeen City and Shire is to be recognised as a world leader in the energy sector, we need a City Centre that reflects that ambition. We need to return our City Centre to its former glory by creating a focal point that we can all be proud of." From the Oxford dictionary; consult |k?n's?lt| verb [ trans. ] seek information or advice from (someone with expertise in a particular area) : you should consult a financial advisor. • have discussions or confer with (someone), typically before undertaking a course of action : patients are entitled to be consulted about their treatment | [ intrans. ] they've got to consult with their board of directors. • refer for information to (a book, watch, etc.) in order to ascertain something : consult the index at the back of the brochure. DERIVATIVES consultative |-'s?lt?tiv| adjective ORIGIN early 16th cent. (in the sense [deliberate together, confer] ): from French consulter, from Latin consultare, frequentative of consulere ‘take counsel.’" "marketing |'märkiti ng | noun the action or business of promoting and selling products or services, including market research and advertising." Public consultation or marketing exercise by ACSEF? Seems clear to me which of the above definitions this 'cosultation' fits. You make your own minds up.
Concerned Citizen
Report this comment

the multiple post problem is caused by submitting a comment, then constantly pressing "refresh" - as it appears to re-send the data each time. If you comment, simply close the browser window - and open a new one to keep reading. HTH
Philip Thompson
Report this comment

the biggest disappointment to me in all this has been the P&J, and their lack of professiolan attitude, or any journalist morals whatsoever. Why is it that other papers like Urban Realm, Building Design, Architects Journal, and even the BBC News can write up a very detailed neutral article that covers all the bases but doesn't turn against anyone that has any objections to the scheme, yet aberdeen's own local paper will brown nose those pursuing the scheme or pursue their own agenda. It's sad that this is the one genuinely decent chance that aberdeen has had in ages to get an amazing landmark building like the peacock, and it's gettin thrown out the window by some very unfair propaganda and power play.
Ved Mij
Report this comment

Ved Mij...I think that is because many are on the in side looking out, where the magazines or web-sites etc you read are on the out side looking in, so to speak. I have not read C.Citizen's comment but the tail end caught my eye and sums it all up...'You make your own minds up'. I think is good advice to follow...
Angus Brown
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.