Councillor Archives - Page 8 of 10

Open Letter To Cllr. Aileen Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 222011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly has over the past 10 weeks campaigned tirelessly in her efforts to oppose Aberdeen City Council’s proposed cull of roe deer on Tullos Hill, writing letters and liasing with groups and individuals on both sides of the debate. Suzanne wishes to share with Aberdeen Voice readers her latest letter to Cllr. Aileen Malone and the Housing and Environment Committee in the hope that others might be encouraged to add their own voice to this controversial issue.

20 April 2011
Councillor Aileen Malone
Convener, Housing Committee
Aberdeen City Council

Dear Ms Malone

Re: Tullos Hill Roe Deer

I am writing this open letter to you in your role as Convener of the Housing & Environment Committee and leading proponent of the ‘A Tree for Every Citizen’ Scheme.

I am sending this letter to you in this format for two reasons. Firstly, you ‘accidentally’ deleted an email I sent you (with my street address) in which I protested against the Tullos Hill Roe Deer Cull, which is being planned as a result of the tree scheme, and I would hate for you to similarly lose this letter.

Secondly, I want to enlist the help of as many Aberdeen citizens and others opposed to this senseless cull as possible: if anyone reading this letter agrees with it, kindly add your name and address, and send it to Ms Malone.

Your committee came up with the ultimatum to citizens: give us £225,000 before 10 May – or we will kill the deer. ‘Blackmail’ is the word that springs to mind. I would never have believed a City would consider blackmailing its citizens. To do so after what seems like deliberately concealing the planned cull from the ‘Phase 2’ consultation which closed in January is inexcusable.

It has been demonstrated that before this consultation was launched, someone involved in the ‘Tree’ scheme had been briefing Scottish Natural Heritage and deliberately steering them away from the many humane alternatives to a cull that exist. I thought it was very clever to leave out the deer from the consultation but to mention rabbits – it certainly fooled me (and no doubt many others) into thinking that all animals had been duly considered, and that only rabbits were worth mentioning. Some might call that sneaky.

If the public consultation ending in January mentioned a deer cull or the need to raise money for tree protection, there are hundreds of people who would have objected. The opportunity was lost to them because the consultation was so very flawed.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is completely against the cull, as are many other animal welfare organisations, and thousands of Aberdonians as well as concerned people living further away.

I recall how you went to the Press & Journal and said something to the effect that ‘only about one’ local resident had contacted you protesting the cull.

You later made private apologies to me and others who indeed had contacted you – you ‘accidentally’ deleted my email. (I waited and must have missed it, but I never did see an apology in the Press & Journal for your error. It is almost as if you did not want to set the record straight).

There are dozens of ways in which the deer can be saved (tree guards – which someone told the SNH ‘had visual impact’ are being used elsewhere in the city such as Forrit Brae; dozens of types of trees are deer resistant, fencing could be used, trees could be planted elsewhere…). I can only hope that someone with sense within the C ouncil is striving to find a solution other than this cull.

But here, Ms Malone, is my counter-offer to your ‘blackmail’ demand for £225,000.

Call off the cull and plant the trees after suitable alternatives have been found to protect the deer, and make a public announcement to that effect by 3 May 2011, or:-

I will lodge a formal complaint against you with the Standards Commission for Scotland with a view to its censuring you (I do have rather an impressive list of complaints on your handling of this issue it must be said)
I will start a campaign calling for both internal and external auditing and inquiries into the entire ‘Tree for Every Citizen’ campaign focussing on who briefed SNH towards a cull and how the public was treated
I will start a campaign calling for your immediate resignation from the Council
I will call on your political party to censure you
I will call on as many people in and outside of Aberdeen to join me in these aims as possible

I expect your reply by 3 May, after which date if there is no halt to the cull, I will begin to take these actions against you and seek legal advice as well on preventing the cull.

Maybe my one letter won’t carry much weight with you; maybe no one will join me. But even if no one else signs this letter and sends it to you, I will continue to fight you on this very sad state of affairs until I have prevailed.

As a reminder, here are the questions I asked you and others by email on 8 March of this year (my comments in red)

When was the cull first planned? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Can the proposed trees not go elsewhere? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What will be the cost of the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What is the cost of the alternatives? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Are we proposing to create a habitat for squirrels and deer as your email suggests – by first culling deer? – (APPARENTLY YES)
What is the cost of fire damage to the ‘Gramps’? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
When exactly were the voters of Aberdeen asked if they would prefer to have saplings than deer? – (NEVER HAPPENED)
Was a deer struck and killed by a vehicle during the recent ‘capping’ exercise? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
You refer to the area as ‘Urban’ – patently it is not an urban area at all – but is an area in danger of being destroyed by urban sprawl -comment please. – NO ANSWER GIVEN
How many deer precisely are on Tullos Hill? – NO ONE ANSWER GIVEN – RANGES FROM ‘A FEW’ TO ‘ABOUT 30’ HAVE BEEN SENT OR SEEN IN THE PRESS
Are all of the rangers and environmental experts convinced culling is the only way forward? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Which department/arm of the council is charged with preventing further urban sprawl? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What other deer populations are there in the coastal Aberdeenshire area? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Have the local community councils been consulted, and if so, do they agree with the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN

Scottish Natural Heritage in its 26 November letter suggests that the public might not be in favour of a cull and need careful handling. They offer to help you with a robust communication plan. So, Ms Malone: how is that working out for you?

Yours,
Suzanne Kelly

Also signed by ________________________________________________________________________

Name and Address

(if anyone wishes to sign and send Ms Malone this letter as well, please keep me informed and send a copy if possible to sgvk27@aol.com. Thank you)

* Aberdeen voice is grateful to Ian Britton and Mark Aert for photographs.

The World Is Asked What Aberdeen Should Look Like

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 222011

By Mike Shepherd.

The design competition for the City Square Project was launched this week. The brief provided by Malcolm Reading Associates follows Sir Ian Wood’s ‘strict parameters’ with walk-on, walk-off access from four sides.
http://www.malcolmreading.co.uk/architecturalcompetitions/citygarden

Teams of designers will initially be asked to register an interest in the project by 13th June.
A shortlist of 5 – 7 designers will then be picked to produce seven designs, with the city square board and the Council approving the final design in December.

The public will be allowed to ‘scrutinise’ and comment on the designs but not pick them. The Press and Journal reported on Thursday that there has been world-wide interest in the competition.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2233305

But, therein lies the problem. The rest of the world is being asked what the centre of Aberdeen should look like – but not the people in the city.

A year ago, we were consulted on whether we wanted a modern city square. We said no with a majority of 1,270; this was ignored.

I have a big problem with a modern city square in the centre of Aberdeen and this concerns the concept of architectural authenticity. This is the idea that a building or feature should harmonise with its location. The concept is easy to explain using our city. The Victorian Union Terrace Gardens is in harmony with the old granite buildings that surround it, whereas the 1960’s St Nicholas House is obviously out of place in the Granite City. The problem is even recognised in the current Aberdeen local plan:

“The standard of design in new development has been raised as a widespread cause for concern during the preparation of this Local Plan. This is one reason why new development can raise so much hostility amongst the public and this situation must change. The City has such a rich and relatively intact heritage of older buildings that shortcomings of newer ones are all the more obvious.”
http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=17124&sID=4209

It is possible to produce modern buildings with architectural authenticity in sensitive locations; Elphinstone Hall built next to Kings College in 1930 is a good example.

A modern city square in the centre of Aberdeen would not be architecturally authentic and would be jarringly out of place with the older buildings.

It would totally change the character of the city centre and would probably accelerate the current trend whereby there has been piecemeal destruction of old granite buildings to be replaced by soulless modern buildings. This could be exacerbated if TIF funding is approved for a £70m loan.

This loan has to be paid back by capturing new or extra business rates and encouraging new city centre developments would be the main mechanism by which this could happen.

I was born and brought up in Aberdeen and I am intensely proud of the city. It is the granite buildings and the distinctive architecture that bring such a strong sense of locality and identity.

Once Aberdeen’s heritage starts to disappear on a large scale, the city will lose its unique character and will start to look like everywhere else. We will be denied our unique sense of belonging as Aberdonians.

We will not be given a public referendum on the city square. As it stands, a modern city square is being imposed on us whether we like it or not. We do not have to react to this in a “whatever will be, will be” mood of resignation. We can make sure that our voice is heard!

Join the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens on www.friendsofutg.org

Old Susannah’s Journal No.31 – Lush Lush My Deer

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Apr 152011

It’s been yet another lively week in the ‘Deen; by the time this is published, Old Susannah will have been on SHMU radio discussing the fate of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer, election leaflets will be pouring through your letterbox, and petrol will reach £2 million a gallon.

At present there are still no answers to relevant, specific questions I sent to the Council’s tree men and Aileen Malone (aka ‘HoMalone’ – when left in charge of something, chaos breaks out and hilarity ensues. Well, that’s one possible origin for this nickname). But I’ll keep trying.
Those environmentally friendly folk at Lush are throwing themselves into the battle with gusto. A team is cycling up from Lush Edinburgh and should arrive around 12:30pm this coming Wednesday at the Lush shop in Aberdeen’s Union Street.

Their slogan against the cull is a good one: “Too Deer a Price.” Their efforts and those of people and organisations from local to international level might make a difference yet.

However, those nice people at the Scottish Information Commission have some concerns over one of my Freedom of Information requests, which – believe it or not – the Council answered late, answered by refusing to answer and offered to do an inquiry which might well have never happened. Another few years and I might have a good story for you. Don’t hold your breath.

Finally, you may recall that Aberdeen’s former head, Sue Bruce, landed up in a job for the City of Edinburgh, much to our great sadness. The capital has since found at least five of its employees were involved in a massive fraud to do with awarding work and projects without proper tenders taking place and paying for work that was never done.

Makes you glad to be in the Granite City where fraud is unheard of, where there is never any City employee helping the police figure find out where £300,000 of taxpayer money went, where work always goes out to tender properly and is never just given to local builders automatically. But, onwards to some defining words for this past week.

Grass:
(Noun 1) – member of herbal family of plants characterised by slender shoots of green leaf, a grazing crop suitable for herbivores such as cows and sheep. Just don’t mention the deer).
(Noun 2) – slang term for cannabis sativa, a substance which can allegedly temporarily impair the consciousness of the person who smokes or otherwise ingests the leaves and or buds of said plant.
(Verb) – to bring another’s wrongdoing to the attention of the public or authorities. All of which bring us nicely to …John Stewart, Council Leader – a man apart.

Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed

His critics allegedly call him names and go to his pub to hit him. But they can’t silence him. If the Church of Scotland deserves an ASBO for not behaving as he wants it to, he’ll say so by grassing them up to the local newspapers.

It is hugely surprising that his Press & Journal claim that the Church of Scotland deserved an ASBO (see last week’s column) didn’t get taken up internationally.

Also, in a really brave move, he’s called our attention to a little-known fact. Brace yourselves: in John’s own words:

“there is not much in Union Terrace Gardens except grass.”

‘How did he work that out?’ I can hear you ask aloud as you read this over your cornflakes.

Stone me. Hundreds of people heard this pearl of wisdom from JS and raced to Union Terrace Gardens with rolling paper, matches and things called bongs, only to be disappointed. It seems that John was complaining that the parking lot to be was full of the kind of grass you walk on, or eat if you are a deer that the Council hasn’t yet shot, (sorry, culled). Either that, or he took all the funny grass for himself and his friends on the Council – that would explain quite a lot. How did our society let this happen?

“Let’s face it, Union Terrace Gardens, apart from a few trees and the floral crest, is just grass”

Our intrepid Council Leader told the Press & Journal:

“This (the design competition) is an excellent opportunity for Aberdeen to show how good it is at creating gardens. We will see what comes through from the design brief, but I am quite looking forward to seeing the designs.”

Well, so far Aberdeen City has shown how good it is at losing arts funding, keeping schools open, caring for the elderly, and ensuring that no fraudsters are operating within the council stealing hundreds of thousands of pounds. Aberdeen has also shown how good it is at propping up the AECC, selling land at millions of pounds less than market value, filling in potholes and closing libraries. A mere £140 million pound project poses little challenge – even if we have no money.

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed

There is no reaction yet from governments in New York, Paris and London – but in light of John’s comments they will be swiftly moving to check their city centre parks for grass and make any necessary corrections. Let’s all hope that after the design contest, which we are all eagerly awaiting as we struggle to pay bills, buy food and petrol etc. will ensure that there is none of this grass-type stuff left over.

I can only hope that John stays away from grass lest his otherwise astute judgement, financial acumen, people skills and fine mind suffer.

Tory councillor Alan Donnelly quite rightly asked:

“What planet do people think we are living on if they think we would support the destruction of Union Terrace Gardens?”

Well, it could be the same planet that saw Aberdeen City’s ACSEF spending some £300k (meant for Peacock Visual Arts) on a consultation showing, er, a big concrete square where the gardens now are. That’s some coincidence.

Deja Vu
(French expression) literally ‘already seen’. A spooky feeling that you’ve been there before. As Aberdeen Voice historian Alex Mitchell alluded to in one of his excellent articles on the City’s history, the £1.2 million pounds of funding that was lost to the City as ACSEF, the City and (£750 million pound a year taxpayer funded) Scottish Enterprise bravely battled to kill Peacock Visual Arts long-planned expansion was not the first time the City scored such a colossal own goal.

Cast your mind back some 5 or 6 years.

The Citadel had been earmarked for an arts centre. It wasn’t going to be turned into a parking lot or shopping mall and there definitely weren’t going to be any deer or any grass: everyone could have been happy. The plan was written up and many meetings took place – the City, arts leaders, etc. No one knows to this day precisely why we didn’t get a plan to the Arts Council on time (spooky!).

Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that?

Someone in the City Council attended the meetings – yet the head of the Council claimed to have no idea the project existed. If memory serves, the sum was probably £1 million and change. So if you get the feeling that your cash-strapped City had lost Arts Council funding previously – you are correct.

Was it a bit of history eerily repeating itself – or is it possible that the City has not been very well managed and organised for a few years? Something to think about. Ask your local Councillor or get out a Ouija board and try to contact the LibDems. While you’re at it; ask them about the deer, Loirston Loch, services for the elderly and school closures should you make contact.

UKIP
(collective noun) Comedy troupe such as Bremner Bird & Fortune, Monty Python, The Goonies, and the Lib Dems.

Faced with the Kafkaesque deer, Union Terrace Gardens, and Loirston Loch horror stories, we need to keep our spirits up and what organisation is better placed to give everyone a much-needed heartfelt laughing fit than the United Kingdom Independence Party?

He might not be a part of the UKIP posse any more, but the very thought of colourful (literally) TV personality Kilroy-Silk alone should get you chuckling. You might not know it, but the UKIP party has had more infighting than the SNP/Lib Dem coalition.

There apparently was a UKIP candidate in East Kilbride who had a whole laundry list of fascist policies; the UKIP mainstream disowned him. In fact Kilroy Silk wanted to distance himself from the party because he thought they were ridiculous. How bad is that? Their MEP member Nigel Farage has made some errors of judgment including appearing on Have I Got News For You (unaware that he was the biggest laugh of the night) and as well as car crash TV, this UKIP leader has serious slapstick form.

On the day of the General Election in May, Farage’s two-seater plane got entangled in a UKIP banner it was trailing and crashed shortly after take-off from an airfield in Northamptonshire – no one was hurt. Vote for them if you like – can’t be worse than what we’ve got, and they obviously have a sense of humour.

Next week: More of the same

This Generation, This Time, This Place – I Think Not

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 082011

Sixteen year-old Kenneth Watt, born and bred in Aberdeen and a friend of Union Terrace Gardens, tells Aberdeen voice of his sadness at the apparent disrespect for the city’s youth in consultations by Aberdeen City Council and ACSEF, particularly in relation to the City Gardens/Civic Square Project.

It was my intention to make my voice heard. I had invested considerable time in research and preparation of a presentation I hoped to make to the Aberdeen City Council at today’s meeting.

Throughout this sorry saga I have had few replies to e-mails sent to councillors and frequently found my phone calls not returned.

I should not have been surprised that they decided not to allow deputations, including mine, to be made at the meeting.

Councillors instead argued about the politics of the motion put before them. No action was taken, and it just became more and more apparent how out of touch our representatives are with their electorate.. It would appear a distinct lack of financial knowledge was displayed during the session, along with sweeping statements, one example being a claim that Peacock Visual Arts were never fully financially secure. It should be noted that they only needed a further £3.5 million from the Council as the rest was already secured.

Conversely, the cost of the City Gardens Project has not been calculated. The proposed method of funding (T.I.F.) has not been used in the UK to date, and reports of successful use has been confined to areas in the United States of considerable deprivation: a description which does not fit Union Terrace Gardens.

It would appear to me to be significantly disingenuous for ACSEF to invest/ promote Youth Matters when the input of the younger generations have been ignored on so many occasions. This I find unacceptable.

It’s not Council leader John Stewart’s generation that will have to face the brunt of what seems like a modern design for the City Square Project in 2011. It is my generation that in twenty year’s time will have to support the council repaying debts, should the project over run, and address possible service cuts and traffic problems invariably associated with the project – not to mention the loss of unique green space in the city centre because of a naive decision taken today.

Taking the views of only 1% of the city’s future tax payers is disgraceful, and completely dispels any myth that we are the forefront of this project.

Not only have our elected representatives seemingly ignored our offers of dialogue, but I feel that there has been inadequate consultation with Aberdeen’s youth in general, and little or no engagement with Aberdeen’s youth in the decision-making process. The consultation, such as it was, was invalid, too narrow and did not reflect the views of the youth of Aberdeen.

In the City Square Project public consultation amongst Secondary Schools, a total of 113 pupils were consulted out of over ten thousand children studying in Aberdeen City. It is, surely, essential in such a major development like this, that my generation is consulted properly, using a large, valid and representative sample. Taking the views of only 1% of the city’s future tax payers is disgraceful, and completely dispels any myth that we are the forefront of this project.

Aberdeen City Youth Council has released a new consultation named ‘Hear My Voice’ which was launched late last year. By 2015, they aim to distribute this survey around all schools in Aberdeen and get a minimum of 5,000 returns. Respondents have to indicate whether they agree, disagree or are unsure about 64 statements covering a wide range of issues in the city concerning them.

Statement nine in the Transport and Open Space category reads:

“Union Terrace Gardens should be kept and invested in as they are now. Lighting, cleaning and upkeep should be improved to make the gardens more attractive and more events held there to increase usage.”

So far there have been 165 ‘pilot’ responses. 161 of these agreed with the statement.

Another statement is that:

“Young people should be more involved in decisions about how budgets are spent as they are not listened to enough.”

A unanimous 165 agreed with that.

I recently found out that over 60% of cuts planned in the council’s budget will have direct implications on under-25s in Aberdeen.

I struggle to understand how the city Council can afford to commit to such a large project, the funding of which is not yet secure. It would appear that not only will 60% of cuts have such a direct impact on Aberdeen’s youth, but we will now be the generation who may very well have to pick up the bill in the future for something we don’t want.

“This generation, this time, this place.”

ACSEF’s catchy public relations campaign sound bite may appear promising but it is more likely to be nothing more than another hollow gesture.

It’s not your generation. It’s my generation and that of my peers, if not our children, that will have to face the consequences of a decision made today.

It’s not this time. It is in ten or twenty years’ time that the city will really suffer from problems caused by decisions made in 2011. Look at the Bon Accord and St Nicholas Centres – they’ve caused countless traffic problems and have isolated George Street, which was once a prosperous and vital artery into the city centre.

It is now largely abandoned and crime has reportedly increased since the development. The council’s decision in 1985 to support the plan was one pushed through by business interests in the face of a significant level of opposition. The voice of the people was ignored. That is clearly echoed by the council’s actions today. Just because Sir Ian Wood has pledged £50m funding does not mean that the City Square Project is viable and worthwhile.

It’s not this place. It’s a commercialised business venture that will see countless years of history and heritage destroyed, and very likely, at a vast expense to the taxpayer.

If the council wish to represent the views of the people, then they need to conduct a fair consultation, involving Aberdeen’s citizens in the decision-making process.

My main proposal to the council is as follows: Leave Union Terrace Gardens alone.

It is reasonable to assume that the council will have vacated St Nicholas House by the end of this year, and it’s quite apparent that it would cost them vast sums of money to demolish it. Why not hand the area of land that St Nicholas House covers over to Sir Ian Wood, allow him to demolish it and create a fantastic green space around Provost Skene’s House and opposite the beautiful building that is the Marischal College.

Not only will it attract more visitors to the area, it will get rid of the eyesore tower block at no cost to the public and preserve hundreds of years of history and heritage that exists in Union Terrace Gardens today.

Diageo Deer Cull – Lessons To Learn?

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 082011

Chris Gough, of Kennoway in Fife was moved to comment on the recent Aberdeen Voice article about the proposed deer cull on Tullos Hill and the revelation that the cull had been planned in advance of the public consultation regarding Phase 2 of the ‘Tree for every citizen scheme’.

What an excellently presented article by Suzanne Kelly. She has hit the nail on the head so many times and it has sad echoes of our fight to save the deer at the Diageo plant in Fife a year ago.

These deer had been part of the local wildlife scene for more than twenty years and were loved equally by the general public and the staff at the Diageo plant.

Indeed they were fed by members of the staff of DCL (an earlier occupier of the site) for many years and the company had a vet carry out visual checks on the condition of the deer. Photographs of the deer were even displayed on the boardroom wall.

All this came to nothing when the present company, Diageo, decided to extend their plant. The Deer Commission for Scotland ( DCS) was consulted and came up with the “only humane solution” of a cull to remove the deer that had now become an embarrassment.

Untruths about the health and condition of the deer were published through the local media to justify the decision for a cull on “animal welfare” grounds. Advice and assertions that there were alternatives to a cull were rejected, so sadly our beloved Diageo deer were not saved in spite of valiant efforts by so many agencies.

At least the Tullos deer are still with us and so they should remain. The SNH hide their true colours behind their name- Scottish Natural Heritage – which implies to the general public that they CARE for all things natural when in truth they are in league (indeed they are now merged under one flag) with the Deer Commission for Scotland.

They in turn are in league with the land owners who want their land “managed” to suit their own purposes e.g. grouse moors, deer forests etc.

The SNH seem obsessed with the idea that there are far too many deer in Scotland and that for their own good they must be culled. As someone who has holidayed in rural Highland Scotland for the past 35 years I ask one question – Where are all the deer?

the deer should be left to come and go and the trees protected with biodegradable tubing as happens in many places around us in Fife

I regard myself as lucky and privileged if I see more than half a dozen wild deer – Red or Roe in a summer.

The SNH would have us believe that every rural community is over run by deer and heaven forbid they are now invading city centre parks as well.

The very fact that they use behind closed door meetings to discuss their strategies is an indication of how aware they must be that their actions are at odds with the public’s perception of what should be happening. Aberdeen City Council clearly must also be aware of this in their complicity. ACC are now going to take the line that they have taken advice from the ‘experts’ and have made their decisions on the basis of this information.

The easiest, although not an ecologically sound solution, is without doubt a deer cull but this will not be a “one off”, but a repeated exercise over the next three to five years to allow the trees to become established. I also concede that deer are determined creatures of habit and will not be easily kept out of what has become a customary feeding ground. Roe deer are particularly good at lifting fences to gain access, so fencing the area is probably not a viable option. Unless the cull could then be justified on the grounds that the deer are causing damage to the fencing as well as eating the trees!

The truth of the matter is that the deer should be left to come and go and the trees protected with biodegradable tubing as happens in many places around us in Fife.

Biodegradable means no litter problem. The tubes just disintegrate and disappear. As for the damage by vandalism I think this is a very large red herring.

In my experience vandals have much more entertaining targets than some trees planted on a hillside in Aberdeenshire.

As long as the Tullos Deer are alive there is hope. The one point which ACC would take well to note is the irreparable damage the destruction of these deer will cause to their (apparently) already tarnished reputation.

The public will not easily forget – just ask Diageo!
The world is watching.

Behind Closed Doors: The Secretive City Square Project

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 082011

By Mike Shepherd.

A proposal was made to discuss Thursday’s special council meeting on Union Terrace Gardens in private.
The reason put forward by the council lawyer was that the motion questioned the ‘validity and veracity’ of a report which led to the council’s approval to progress the City Square Project last May.

See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205463

The public have every right to be concerned about this move. Too many details about the City Square Project are being withheld. Councillors are being briefed by council officials on the scheme’s progress, yet these briefings are not being made public.

These contain details such as timetables for the project and how the city square design is to be picked (the city square board selects the final design and the council will be asked to approve their choice).

Union Terrace Gardens is on Common Good land and belongs to the people of Aberdeen. It is our park and we have a right to be informed on any proposals for it.

Although the Council will probably retain ‘ownership’ of the land on which the Gardens are located, the building above it and the city square is likely to be owned by a private company in partnership with the council. The building will be about 5/6ths the size of Union Square. What will go into this enormous three-storey concourse given that the remit is that it will be a ‘civic and cultural’ space?

The latest idea is to put a conference centre in there, although this brings into question the fate of the Exhibition Centre at the Bridge of Don with which it would compete. Failure is not an option for the Exhibition Centre as it has been loaned £28m by the council. If the centre closes, then this debt will be transferred to the council budget with immediate and potentially calamitous consequences for the city’s finances.
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1877056

An interesting perspective on the city square building was provided by an online comment made last week to the Press and Journal’s letters column:

“The design process for Union Terrace Gardens will be unlike most design processes. Most conventional designs tend to start with a use, before proceeding to a site and then a brief, and finally designs to enable a scheme to be built. For UTG this will effectively be reversed. This is partly because the scheme is opportunity led, but mostly because of the scale and significance of the expected design. This scheme will be, by its very nature, more akin to designing a new street in the city, than designing a new building.”
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205094#ixzz1IiidEav9

A limited company has appeared centre stage in the controversy and has been given control of the design competition. This is the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust, about which very little is known. Last week it was revealed that they have approached the council to invite them to be partners in the trust. The council have deferred the decision as they want to know more about the trust, what they are letting themselves in for and the implications of this.
See article: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2205463

It is not only the council that needs to find out more about the trust, the public need to be informed about everything to do with this company. Who are they?

Much to do with the way that the proposed development of Union Terrace Gardens has been driven through is highly questionable.

The public were consulted and ignored when they voted no to the scheme. The council meeting last May was informed that the results of the consultation “clearly indicated a wish for change”, when they didn’t. Local businessmen urged the council to ignore the consultation, Acsef minutes for the 20th April meeting state:

“There is a mandate from the business community to proceed to the next stage”.
See : http://www.acsef.co.uk/uploads/reports/21/13%20April%2010.doc

From then on, the project became ‘opportunity led’ and the public have been progressively ignored as it has progressed. Consultation has become two-way traffic between the project management board and the council; opponents of the scheme have been left scrabbling to find out what is going on. A modern city square for the centre of Aberdeen is being imposed on us whether we like it or not.

From now on, the possibility of keeping Union Terrace Gardens is not on offer unless the Council votes against the city square, and so far they have not. Even the selection of a final design for the city square is being taken out of our hands. The businessmen and council officials on the project management board will take that choice.

If like me you think this state of affairs is appalling, join the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens through our website www.friendsofutg.org

We are campaigning to keep our city-centre park.

Old Susannah’s Journal No. 30 – Six Month Review

Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Apr 072011

Voice’s Old Susannah casts her eye over the events of the last 6 months and the stories, and terms and phrases familiar as well as freshly ‘spun’, which will be forever etched in the consciousness of the people of Aberdeen and the Northeast.

As there are so few interesting local, national or international developments in the news lately, (earthquakes, wars, radiation, armed robberies, Aberdeen Council wheeling and dealing notwithstanding), this looks like a good time to look back at some of the terms and issues covered in Old Susannah’s Dictionary Corner over the last six months.
The column looked at Change Managers, Continuous Improvement, Climate Change and Dangerous dog owners and dogfights. What has happened to the heroes, villains, good, bad and the ugly? Well, let’s see…

Animal Crackers

Let’s Go Clubbing:
Cast your mind back – do you remember Donald Forbes, golfer and fox batterer extraordinaire? What’s become of him? First he told us he had clubbed the fox (which was later found in such a horrible state it had to be put down, to the disgust of 99.95% of the members of Forbes’ golf club).

Then Forbes said he was in ‘mortal danger’ from the fox and therefore swung his club near the fox, but did not hit it. How this tame, well-known fox was going to harm Forbes other than stealing a sandwich from him remains unclear. How the fox was injured fatally also remains a mystery, as Forbes says he did not do it.

Sources tell me Forbes will soon have his day in Court – keep your eyes on the Aberdeen court circular during the month of April. Truth will out. Maybe.

Licensed to maim:
Like-minded animal lover, top oilman, and gunslinger Mr Mervyn New, you will remember, took his gun to work and quite rightly shot some horrid gull chicks that had the nerve to be in a nest near him. One bird was dead outright, the other suffered in agony until the SSPCA could have it put down.

Maybe we should all bring guns to work? On the plus side I bet Mr New looks quite macho with a gun. It would be cruel to suggest he might have a complex against his parents for naming him ‘Mervin’ so I shall say nothing on that subject. My emails to his local and head office have gone unanswered or have been returned marked ‘delivery failure’. It is almost as if Marine Subsea UK do not want to set the record straight or answer any questions on their guns-at-work policy. Maybe some of you readers can get an answer out of them. I will try again when I have made progress on…

…The Tullos Hill Roe Deer:
In a style that would make Highwayman robber Dick Turpin blush, the City have told animal lovers to pay up £225k by 10 May, or the deer get shot. It was all most democratic; they voted on it, except they did not bother to mention the cull to the citizens. Scottish Natural Heritage point out unwillingly (see articles elsewhere in the Voice) that alternatives to gunning the deer down do exist. During this ongoing saga

It is heartbreaking to see these dumb animals going about their usual routines, visiting their favourite drinking holes, unaware of the doom awaiting them

Cllr Aileen Malone proved she could not count; she announced that ‘about one’ person in Aberdeen wrote to her against the cull. She later apologised for this understandable mathematical error – but I do not believe her apology was as public as her P&J statement about there only being ‘about one’ objector. I can however say that at least 500 people have signed various petitions and that is a conservative figure (like me).

It is heartbreaking to see these dumb animals going about their usual routines, visiting their favourite drinking holes, unaware of the doom awaiting them. Nevertheless, at the next possible election, there will most definitely be a cull of Councillors.

The Council had handled the proposed tree planting in its time-honoured way; it held a consultation.

Democracy Inaction

Consultation:
That’s right – the City asked us mere citizen taxpayers what we thought of the tree planting on its lovely website, and gave us until the end of this past January to comment. Just because the City forgot to mention the cull is no reason for the consultation not to be valid, after all, without consultation we would not have our design competition coming up for…

…Union Terrace Gardens:
Back at the time how exciting it was – ACSEF were visiting shopping malls and businesses, giving presentations on a wonderful new way of re-imaging the gardens – turning them into a concrete slab with underground parking. Despite producing a brochure (costing about £300k of our money), which showed exactly that type of outcome – large squares of concrete, one or two tiny trees in planters, and happy people walking around in nice weather, the public vote was against it.

Who would have guessed that the public simply did not understand how important this was to Ian Wood’s future, sorry – to our economic prosperity. So, we will get a design competition instead. Someone already got money earmarked for the rival, earlier, clearer, subtler Peacock plan – money which was intended to be used by Peacock.

I was concerned just last week about the coalition as they are fighting at the National level. However, Councillor Irene Cormack wrote to me to say that this is perfectly normal at elections

No one knows anything about how the money was approved for expenditure; no one knows what goes on inside ACSEF (the online minutes do not give any history or details on this saga worth having). And the worst part is, people have actually organised to protest against having shops and parking.

How else will Stewart Milne’s lovely plans for Triple Kirks work? Answers on a postcard please.

The Press & Journal on 6th April continued a welcome new trend – they are questioning the handling of the UTG situation in an excellent editorial well worth reading.

Public Image:
In a past Old Susannah Dictionary Corner, I was heartened to hear that Kate was going to get an image and publicity makeover by the LibDem team who gave the world Nick Clegg. Here we are about three months later, and I think the results speak for themselves. What do you think of the new Kate? I think the results of Nick’s influence speak for themselves.

Kate’s complaint at the time was that people always complain when things are going bad, but they never compliment the City Council when things are going well. I asked readers for examples of things that went well, but have received not so much as a line.

Coalition:
You might remember some months back when I was worried about our local LibDem / SNP Coalition arguing about how many Council jobs to cut. Nine hundred with no consultation? Six Hundred? Ask for ideas? Cut nothing and then keep quiet? Those must have been exciting times for the staff at St Nick’s. I was concerned just last week about the coalition as they are fighting at the National level. However, Councillor Irene Cormack wrote to me to say that this is perfectly normal at elections. I hope nothing will interfere with how things are working here. In fact, soon all will be perfect, once everyone moves into…

…Marischal College:

In fact, she is known to have sent out e-mails claiming victory, because no one has complained/objected to the stadium lately (hint hint!) But it is not over yet, watch this space

Charities are short of funding, schools are closing, and elderly and vulnerable people are at risk from a host of problems. No matter: we saved Marischal College. The Council told us that they will not disclose what the alternatives were or what they would have cost – it is copyrighted so they claim. We saved Marischal by gutting it entirely, throwing Victorian books into a skip (I have a source who confirms this), and we’re putting in brand new furniture. £60 to 80 million well spent I say.

Loirston Loch – a nice place for a game of football:
Despite lack of consultation with the relevant local Councils, little support from Football fans, and opposition from local residents, follically-challenged Stewart Milne (of ACSEF and AFC fame) got the green light to build a red-light stadium in the Greenbelt land of Loirston.

Scottish Natural Heritage weren’t bothered (despite SAC land status, protected species and RSPB objection); Brian Adam MSP was ecstatic, and Richard Baker MSP was ignored.

Kate Dean was the impartial convener of a marathon hearing on the matter, which was always going to end favourably. In fact, she is known to have sent out e-mails claiming victory, because no one has complained/objected to the stadium lately (hint hint!) But it is not over yet, watch this space. If there has not been too much dialogue at present, it is because of the massive legal points being researched prior to the battle royale.

Conclusion – A Brighter Outlook:
The most important thing to remember when considering the recent past is that we now all have A Brighter Outlook. I know this, because the City Council put it in their literature. It is an ACSEF slogan, it is how the City does business, it is all brighter. After all, how much darker can things possibly get?

Next week:
Since ACSEF benefited so much from its new logo and ‘A Brighter Outlook’ slogan, Old Susannah is getting a makeover. I do not know exactly what to expect and what the Voice editors have in mind, I just hope I will come out looking as cool, modern and with it as ACSEF does.

Thanks for reading, and thanks for the very nice/interesting/excellent e-mails and comments.

Shhh! – Don’t Mention The Pre-planned Deer Cull

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 052011

Planting trees, creating habitats, using trees to clean the air: no one could be against such a plan, particularly if it would be ‘cost neutral’ and the citizens of Aberdeen would wind up with forests to enjoy down the road. However, in light of new information, Voice’s Suzanne Kelly takes a different view.

What probably started out as a good idea is now a contentious web of extremely poor advance planning, politics, blackmail, vandalism and international outcry at a secret, but long-planned deer cull.

It is time to examine what should have happened, what went wrong, and what should and could be done.

The initial scheme

An Aberdeen City news release of 29 October 2010 explains that 210,000 trees will be planted in several stages, that this programme had funding for the first phase, and was winning awards. The news release goes on to explain how important trees are – they will such up pollutants and CO2; they will provide habitat for animals (presumably there should be a tree planting near Loirston Loch, but a stadium is to be planted there instead). This news release, stored on the Council’s website, also explains that funding is being sought for Phase 2.

It is a bit more difficult to find any record on the Council’s website of the deliberate vandalism which destroyed trees planned in Torry and elsewhere. There is no report on how vandals will be prevented from destroying further plantings. But within a month or so of this news release appearing, certain people in the Council involved with the tree scheme were already scheming some destruction of their own – and they certainly didn’t want either you or me to find out about it until it was too late for us to do anything about it. I refer to the plan to keep us in the dark about how Phase 2 of the scheme was being deliberately led: people behind the scheme were actively steering deliberately towards the cull of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer.

Scottish Natural Heritage: A view to a cull

On 25 November 2010 (while citizens were being ‘consulted’ on Phase 2’), Scottish Natural Heritage wrote a letter to a member of the arboreal staff at the Council. (See letter in full below this article). This letter raises a number of serious questions as to how the scheme was handled. The letter certainly seems to be replying to a briefing of some sort. The writer – James Scott of Scottish Natural Heritage’s Wildlife Operations Unit – is addressing issues which should have been made known in the consultation.

At the time of writing, Mr Scott has been informed that someone in Aberdeen Council has already taken several decisions.

an advantage of using contracted deer shooters is that it might distance the Council from the act

Fencing – It has somehow been decided by someone that fencing would be impossible, as there is a public footpath. The UK is covered with such paths and suitable gates are used. Fencing might not have been perfect – but oddly that is part of the blackmail offer the council now proposes.

Deer population – If the fencing controversy is not confusing enough, the letter admits that the number of deer is unknown. How many would be culled is apparently to be decided after SNH personnel visit the site under cover of darkness and make counts. It is not known if such a count has taken place yet, or what the results are. SNH say that tranquilising deer to move them doesn’t work (50% success) and then inexplicably says this would probably be illegal to do. If the law says that killing creatures is better than moving them, then it is time to change the law.

Humane options – the SNH suggest ‘frustrating’ deer – remove gorse, implement other measures, yet our officials rejected these proposals. Again, no recourse to the citizens here.

‘Visual Impact’ of tree protectors they are ruled out – The City told SNH that it would not be using tree protectors on the grounds that they might blow over, creating litter – and because they ‘have visual impact’. The visual impact of something is a personal, not a scientific, issue. It is not sufficient grounds to condemn a population of deer to death.

“there is the issue of reducing available habitat for deer and the fact that we would consequently expect a reduction cull. You have also decided not to use tree guards due to the visual impact and the likelyhood of these being blown away, possibly damaging trees they are meant to protect and creating a littering issue.” – James Scott , SNH

The word ‘deer’ does not get so much as a single use – yet it is now clear that a cull was in the cards

Without any regard to consultation, someone at the City has given this and other reasons leading SNH to conclude the deer should be culled. No one wanted to ask the citizens if we’d rather look at tree protectors (which cost money), or have the trees elsewhere in order to save deer. But the City and SNH were interested in keeping us in the dark….

Keep them in the dark – SNH actually says that an advantage of using contracted deer shooters is that it might distance the Council from the act:

“it may be preferrable to be seen to be doing it in house and have greater control rather than using contractors, or it may be preferable to utilise the distance between instruction and deed that comes from using contractors” – James Scott , SNH

The Aberdeen citizens should also be managed with care – with a ‘robust communication plan:-

“Having visited the site I am content that appropriate deer management can occur in a safe manner. Communicating this to access takers and the wider public may be more of a task which will require a robust communication plan. I would suggest that a suitable deer management plan will help in this regard and I am more than happy to offer assistance in this” – James Scott , SNH

It seems as if the ‘robust communication plan’ is an indication that some people might not like deer shot to save money. If a cull were needed for welfare reasons, a reasonable person might not like the idea, but they would understand. It seems that as no logical reason except cost savings exist for this cull – otherwise there would be no need to keep it out of the consultation or to have a ‘robust communication plan’.

Phase 2 Consultation: No options given

The Consultation which resides on the Aberdeen City Home page gives the reader no idea whatsoever that any of the above plans and processes were in place.
See: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/Consultations/ArchiveConsultations/cst_tree_every_citizen.asp

There is no mention of the vandalism – only of the success of Phase 1. The word ‘deer’ does not get so much as a single use – yet it is now clear that a cull was in the cards. The trees are meant to start ‘making money’ in three years’ time – if there is a plan to turn Tullos into a timber yard, we haven’t been told.

A mix of private and public money is paying for this. Public money is your money and mine – this makes it doubly scandalous that the City chose to deliberately hide mention of the deer cull. We missed our chance to object to the consultation because of this omission – and as the petitions circulating attest – there are thousands of people who would have liked to have had the choice.

Questions for the Council

It is up to the Council – In particular, Aileen Malone, The Housing and Environment Committee, and whoever else was involved in the details of the Tree Planting scheme – to supply answers to a few questions arising:-

Who made the decision to leave any deer cull out of the public consultation?
Who took the decision that non-lethal measures would be discounted and then communicated to SNH?
Who precisely decided to plant the trees on Tullos Hill, and why wasn’t the deer population immediately identified as a reason to find another location?
Who decided tree guards’ visual impact was preferable to a deer cull?
Whose aesthetic judgment decided the tree guards were unattractive?
How many trees were vandalised in Phase 1?
How much public money was spent in Phase 1, and how much is planned to be spent in Phase 2?
Was a consultation with Torry Community Council taken, and if so, were the deer discussed?
How many deer were counted by SNH, and how many are to be culled?

Rays of hope

Thankfully animal activists, citizens of Aberdeen and people around the globe have become involved in campaigns and petition creating to stop this senseless slaughter. Concerned people should contact their local Community Council members, the Housing and Environment Committee, Committee convener Aileen Malone, and other elected representatives to ask for answers to these questions, and to demand an inquiry into the consultation’s management, and to request a new, honest one.

A civilised government would want to put any cull on indefinite hold until this affair is cleared up. Deer should not be slaughtered because people in government don’t want to spend money – and given the involved Councillors’ amazing ultimatum: raise funds for fencing, or we shoot animals – is it time for some changes in their number?

– Letter from James Scott ( SNH ) to Richard Nicholson ( ACC ).

– Further reading: Critical Society quarterly e-journal.

Old Susannah’s Journal No. 29 – Spring Loaded

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Information, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Apr 032011

Spring is on its way; the granite is shiny at Marischal College and new life is beginning (where it can either make it through the concrete or where the Councillors don’t want it culled for being in the way). But Old Susannah has a heavy heart, and suspects many of you do as well.

The approaching spring seems to mock a love affair that has died. There were warning signs along the way. The arguments became more frequent, increasingly bitter, and all-too public. It seemed that the honeymoon was over, and any common dreams and goals were going or gone. Then there came the day the penny dropped: there was the piece of evidence proving that all was not well, and denial was no longer an option. The writing was on the wall.

Actually, the writing was on a full-colour ‘Residents Survey’ from Lib Dems John Sleigh and Nicol Stephen in which they ask Aberdonians:

‘SNP BROKEN PROMISES – The SNP government was elected on a promise to improve transport networks in the North East. Do you feel the SNP have let our area down?’

The SNP here in Aberdeen are (or maybe ‘were’ is the better word) in the exciting local coalition government with the Lib Dems, responsible for all the benefits we enjoy. The SNP councillors must be reading this survey in heartbroken shock. They must be wondering why the Lib Dems are attacking them on the national level, while still pretending to be in an Aberdeen coalition – and must also be wondering why they didn’t think of getting in there first.

Just as well our local Lib Dems haven’t let anyone down – otherwise they could be accused of astonishing hypocrisy. After all, the Lib Dems have promised to wipe out the Tullos roe deer, and they are sticking to it. I eagerly await a SNP survey – sooner the better.

Consequently, the Coalition error (sorry ‘era’) in Aberdeen must surely be finished, for how can you work with someone locally who’s trying to damage your status nationally? The party is over. I haven’t been so upset since Peter Andre and Jordan broke up. But I know the Lib Dems will remain in power. How do I know this?

Simple – Their survey included a Poll.

…. And to follow on from that bombshell, let us now unravel some tricky locally topical terms –

Poll(verb)

A scientific information-gathering procedure measuring opinion with great accuracy and impartiality. Helpfully the Lib Dem mailing I received shows how the Lib Dems are well poised to win in Aberdeen . This poll result coincidentally follows the 2007 introduction of new voting area boundaries, an exercise which was undertaken with no thought of influencing election outcomes, which goes without saying.

For some strange reason The Scotsman newspaper is saying something completely different – that the Green party will knock the Lib Dems into 5th place. I’ll give you that the Scotsman is no Evening Standard, and clearly The Scotsman is a much more biased organisation than the Lib Dems are.

Picture the scene – you are, struggling to get by for yourself and your family on a meagre few hundred million, when all of a sudden the Government announces a staggering tax on your industry

It’s not as if the Lib Dems have done anything to make themselves unpopular or seem indecisive; quite the contrary. Nick Clegg’s steadfastness; Danny Alexander’s bragging that the Oil tax was his idea, the unshakeable will to plant trees in Aberdeen even if they have to wipe out all the wildlife to do it, etc. etc. all these have won admiration. But on with this week’s definitions – it will keep my mind off the tragic SNP/Lib Dem situation.

Tax Haven (noun)

A country or Principality (such as Monaco) with lenient banking regulations, used to shelter money which would be liable to taxation elsewhere in the world. If you are good, then you will go to heaven (some say) when you are dead. If you are good with money, you will go to a tax haven when you are alive. Picture the scene – you are, struggling to get by for yourself and your family on a meagre few hundred million, when all of a sudden the Government announces a staggering tax on your industry.

Suddenly someone is going to make a change like this that will have a great impact on your life – and they didn’t even bother to consult with you first. But no matter. You are probably famous as well as rich, and local politicians will rightly continue to fawn over you – even if you are about to take a few million pounds of tax money out of the country.

Perhaps if you give the locals a wonderful gift of some sort – but what? Maybe a few more shops, concrete and parking spaces – all of course with your name on a big plaque (even maybe a statue of you – that would be a good touch). In addition, the same clever accounting acumen you’ve used to take tax money out of the country may be able to find some way to get you further tax breaks. Hmmm. Perhaps your family can get in on the act somehow. Maybe they could have a Trust fund to keep your gift going for the grateful locals.

When is the next flight to the Channel Islands, or should we just charter a jet.

Design Consultants (collective noun)

Do remember that it was an award-winning architect who got the job of designing the beautiful concrete homes that grace Torry

A form of demi-gods that mankind looks to for guidance. The Romans, Egyptians and other great, long-lasting civilisations followed codes of design based on use of natural materials, harmony of form and function, aesthetics, and proportions built on logic. Thankfully this is the modern world and we don’t’ have to deal with that kind of nonsense any more.

How outrageous can design get? How massively oversized should buildings get? Is there anything better than big sheets of glass curtain wall on high rising buildings which dwarf and clash with their neighbours? The Design Consultant thinks not.

Neither you nor I are in any position to question or criticise a Design Consultant (well, I do have a BA in Fine Art, and did a Master of Fine Art at Edinburgh College of Art). A Design Consultant can use words like ‘juxtaposition’, ‘deconstruction’, ‘iconic’ and post-post Modern’ – all in the same sentence.

Do remember that it was an award-winning architect who got the job of designing the beautiful concrete homes that grace Torry, known locally as ‘pig pens’ or ‘chicken coops’ (because we hapless residents are ignorant of their spatial concepts, defiance of the laws of compression and tension and adherence to socio-economic regional identity or something). However, we are all agreed these are incredibly beautiful structures.

Design costs and Union Terrace Gardens is where you start paying.

From the little sense I can currently get from the Council, we are going to have the same Design Consultants, Read, who gave grateful Londoners a design for the old fashioned Victoria And Albert Museum. The predictable lawn is going, grass being replaced by glass and giant structures, which we are too thick to appreciate.

If this is now predicted to cost double the original estimate, we’re just going to have to dig down into our reserves (those of us still paying tax) and stump up. Remember, the Scottish Parliament would not be the building it is without Design Consultants (or the woman who was appointed to work on the project who had NO prior experience – her genius is evident). So what if the Parliament cost few hundred million more than was budgeted? We’re worth it.

Fear not: the coalition government in London will handle this competition with the same expertise as it’s handled everything else.

Garden Wars: The Latest In The City Square Debacle

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Mar 302011

By Mike Shepherd.

The controversy over Union Terrace Gardens shows no sign of abating. The proposed scheme to replace the Victorian city-centre park with a three-storey building and a modern roof garden is still causing outrage in Aberdeen. The plans have reached the stage where an architectural competition is to be launched at some time in the next two months.

The city square bosses are currently working on the design brief for the competition, a document which they hope to get out by mid May.

I understand that a key issue is to try and find a use for the three-storey building that could potentially fill in the site of Union Terrace Gardens. Given that the Gardens extend over 2 ½ acres, the floor space provided over three levels will be significant. According to the technical feasibility study this is estimated to be about 56,000 square metres.

By comparison Union Square, according to Wikipedia, has a total retail space of 65,000 square metres. Although I’m told there will be some commercial activity in the building, this will not apparently be on the scale envisaged in the technical feasibility study for the project. For instance, although it is possible that there will be a car park, this may not be the two-storey 490-bay car park as detailed in the study. I’ve been told that the main use of the building is to provide a civic and cultural centre including potentially a public meeting place, a heritage museum, art space, a concert hall, along with entertainment and sports facilities.

Although superficially this may sound attractive, one can already anticipate some major problems. One big headache for the city square bosses is that the design brief will have to give a reasonably detailed idea of what the building is to be used for. And that’s a lot of space to fill given the civic and cultural remit.

Councillors opposed to the City Square have forced an emergency debate on the gardens controversy

The problem is that Aberdeen already has many of the facilities that the City Garden Centre is supposed to house. It is difficult to see the City Square getting a major conference or concert facility as this would compete with the Exhibition Centre, a building that the Council would be most reluctant to close as this would land £28M of debt onto the massively-strained revenue budget.
See: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1594201?UserKey=

Providing an art space is not without problems either. The Aberdeen Art Gallery is almost next door and there are already plans to build an extension to the gallery to provide extra room. Peacock Visual Arts have so far refused to be part of the city square project and it is difficult to think of who else could get involved at this stage. His Majesty’s Theatre is immediately adjacent and an additional major drama venue also looks to be superfluous at this location.

Would the Council encourage the rehousing of institutions such as the Music Hall, the Lemon Tree, the Aberdeen Arts Centre and the Belmont Cinema just in order to find something suitable to fill the large space available? Then another question is as to whether the Council would be prepared to fund any new cultural activity in the City Garden Centre? Given the current calamitous state of the revenue budget, it is difficult to see this happening in the short to medium term.

Yet another problem is anticipated for the City square bosses later in the year. Once the designs come back from the competition, one of them will have to be picked. Councillors have been told what is likely to happen. Initial submissions will be shortlisted to around 25 entries. A jury comprising technical experts and community representatives will pick five of the designs.

These will then go on public display and the public feedback will be considered by the jury when ordering the preference for each of the five designs. The recommendations of the jury will then go to the City Square bosses who will in turn recommend a preferred option to the Council.

The Council will then vote on ratifying the final design at a meeting in December. If by this stage the public consider that their views on how the centre of Aberdeen will look are not being taken very seriously, they would be right. And not for the first time either.

Meanwhile, Councillors opposed to the City Square have forced an emergency debate on the gardens controversy.

They want the problems over the Peacock grant to be investigated. They are also asking for the City Square to be rejected on the grounds that it damages the city’s heritage and that it would have serious financial implications and risk for the Council in the years to come. No date has been fixed for the debate as of writing but it should be held by the 8th April.
See: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2197558?UserKey=

A pro City Square campaign has just been formed called ‘Just Imagine’. The leader of the group is Michail Tzouvelekis, co-convenor of the Grampian PR Group an organisation for public relations practitioners, professional communicators and PR and communication students in the Aberdeen area.

According to the group:

“A number of concerned locals from all backgrounds and ages have spoken out against objectors to the City Garden Project ‘who continue to promote inaccurate messages’, as they believe they are over-shadowing the huge but largely silent support for it.”
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2198685#ixzz1I1A8ttBv

Older Entries Newer Entries