Giving Away Union Terrace Gardens

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion  Comments Off on Giving Away Union Terrace Gardens
Mar 182011
 

By Mike Shepherd.

On April 27th, Councillors will be asked to vote to transfer the lease for Union Terrace Gardens to a third party body, either a limited company or a trust.

If the vote is passed, the Council will still nominally own the park, however control of the property will effectively be transferred by this action.

The public will not be aware of this coming up unless they have the skill and patience to dig through the multitude of reports on the Council website and find the appropriate report where this is mentioned. Even then, a subsequent report has only been issued to Councillors.

This came out on the 23rd February and includes a timetable for the City Square Project, the highly-controversial proposal to replace the city centre park with a three storey building and a roof garden. The relevant item concerns the full Council meeting on the 27th April as detailed below. Note that SPV is an acronym for Special Purpose Vehicle, essentially the limited company that will be designated to take the project through to planning permission and beyond.

“Paper to Council seeking approval of the SPV project business plan, approval to lease Council land to the SPV and permission for the SPV to take the project forward, subject to approval of the final detailed design scheme.”

In the next column is the following:

“ACGT will produce a business plan for the operation of the SPV up to the point where planning consent is obtained.”

This is a key sentence; the ACGT referred to here is the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust, a limited company formed in January this year.  Thus it looks as if there is some link between the SPV referred to in the timetable and the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust.

this is an attempt to force the issue on the City Square Project well in advance of planning permission being sought.

Who exactly are the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust? This is a good question as you will find very little in the media about the company. My understanding is that the trust has been formed by the businessmen involved in funding the project as a means of finding extra private funds to finance it and to take on key tasks such as managing the design competition.

Additional information comes from the articles of association for the trust which can be purchased from the Companies House website. These mention two board members, businessman Tom Smith who is also Chairman of ACSEF and Colin Crosby who is President of the Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce. It is not known who else is on the board. However, it is clear that there is as yet no council involvement. The articles mention that the Council have the option at any time to become a special member of the group.

The objects of the company are stated and are as follows:

The urban regeneration of Union Terrace Gardens and the Denburn Valley (the Gardens Site) to create a new civic space and gardens with the aim of creating jobs, investment and improving the quality of life for the citizens of Aberdeen. The civic space and gardens shall:

  • Include at least 5 acres of city square and gardens;
  • Provide improved accessibility to green space by allowing walk on, walk off street level access from all four sides;
  • Create at least 2.5 acres of all-weather covered space beneath the square and gardens at concourse level;
  • Incorporate key aspects of the heritage of the current gardens, including the arches, viaduct and Union Street Bridge at concourse level;
  • Cover the road and railway; and provide easy access to public transport;
  • To promote, operate and maintain the new civic space and gardens for the benefit of the citizens of Aberdeen.

 

Elsewhere within the articles we read of the powers of the trust. Two of these powers are of note:

– to purchase, take on lease, hire, or otherwise acquire, any property or rights which are suitable for the company’s activities;

– to sell, let, hire out, license, or otherwise dispose of, all or any part of the propertyand rights of the company;

A Press and Journal article provides extra information about the limited company. It has recieved more than £400,000 from Sir Ian Wood’s family trust and has received a grant of £375,000 from Scottish Enterprise through funding available for major infrastructure projects (note that this £375,000 did not come from the Peacock grant as mistakenly reported in a previous P&J article). The company will also be responsible for managing the international design competition which is intended to produce designs for the proposed city square in August.

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2172588

There are many issues involved; some of these are discussed here:

Control of the Property: If the vote is passed on the 27th April, Councillors will be approving to transfer control of Union Terrace Gardens to an SPV, likely to be a limited company / trust (possibly the City Gardens Trust). I have been told by the Council executive that the likely term of the lease will be 125 years. The Council will nominally own the property although a long term lease will in practice hand over total operational control to the SPV.

The vote to approve transferring the lease in April looks to be premature. The final design is not due to be approved until December this year and planning permission will not be sought until May 2012. By contrast Peacock Visual Arts were given planning permission for their arts centre in the Gardens and only then did the question of transferring the lease arise (they were never granted it). My opinion is that this is an attempt to force the issue on the City Square Project well in advance of planning permission being sought.

Implications for the Design Competition: We are told by the P&J that the City Gardens Trust will run the design competition. This does appear to limit the scope of the competition however. The stated objectives of the Trust are exactly in line with Sir Ian Wood’s strict conditions for the City Square Project, that is – walk on, walk off street level access from all four sides.

This precludes any options that consider decking over the railway line and road but keeping the Gardens substantially intact; or improving the existing Gardens only.  There are plans later this year for an item which the timetable describes as:

“short-listed design proposals subjected to public scrutiny.”

The word consultation has not been used here, although this is what the item appears to allude to. It has already been stated in a Council meeting that option to keep the gardens substantially as they are will not be included at this stage.  Thus the public will only be asked to ‘scrutinise’ between modern designs for Aberdeen city centre.

The Involvement of Scottish Enterprise: It is poignant that the Scottish Government body, Scottish Enterprise have given a £375,000 grant to the City Gardens Trust when they also funded the public consultation where the public said no to the project with a sizable majority (1,270).

There are many in Aberdeen that are appalled at the loss of heritage should Union Terrace Gardens be built over with and a modern city square put in its place.  Now it also looks as if public control of the property will be transferred from the Council to a third party organisation about which not a great deal is known. If like me, you are appalled at what has been proposed and the way it is being done, write to your councillors and let them know what you think.

They can be contacted through the website:  www.writetothem.com

Please also consider joining the campaign group the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens on www.friendsofutg.org

Dec 252010
 

By Mike Shepherd.

Here’s a game for your Xmas party – spot the odd one out in this list:
Smersh, Spectre, the Black Hand, the Priory of Sion, Acsef.

The correct answer is of course Acsef. The others are sinister, shadowy organisations bent on world domination, while Acsef is Aberdeen city and shire economic future, the unelected body charged with  promoting  business development in the Aberdeen region.

Acsef‘s greatest moment has been the long-running saga of Sir Ian Wood’s city square project. The show has been on the go for over two years and looks set to run and run and run. Although whisper this quietly: just like the Red Queen in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, it doesn’t seem to have gone anywhere yet.

Acsef helped with the consultation for the scheme and we were all assured “This public consultation aims to find out if you would like to go ahead with the proposal to redevelop Union Terrace Gardens and the Denburn Valley to create a new civic space and gardens.” Ha!

We were also told that we could get a modern city square that looked like the ones in Melbourne, Chicago and Houston. “Acsef believes the city needs a centre that will reflect that aspiration and attract future talent and businesses. This is about jobs for today’s secondary pupils and undergraduates – our children and grandchildren.” You could call this the Nora Batty argument: The Grand old lady of Aberdeen needs a brand new mini-skirt to exert her charms on potential suitors.

The consultation went ahead and it looked as if Acsef could not lose. Even the header for the poll questionnaire gave you a prompt if you didn’t know how to vote “Have Your Say: We believe Aberdeen needs a large, vibrant, cultural and civic space and gardens in the heart of the city for today and for future generations.”

The results of the consultation were reported on the 13th April 2010; a majority of 1,270 said no to the city square project. Oops.

Local businessmen were not happy with the result of the consultation and wrote a letter to the Council urging them to go ahead

An analysis of the vote was published by Acsef. “The consultation results show that the public were nearly evenly divided over the City Square Project as proposed, although overall more were against the project than for it.” Don’t you just crack up at that “nearly evenly-divided” bit when a majority of 1,270 said no.

http://cdn.activecommerce.net/content/csp/CSP_Consultation_Report_FINAL.pdf

More of that wacky humour was to follow. Acsef provided a break-down of the comments made by people online during the consultation.

“I value having in the heart of the City this secluded amphitheatre with its mature trees and think it would be an act of vandalism to sweep it away.” Recorded as voting yes to the city square.

“We don’t want Aberdeen to turn into a concrete jungle” Recorded as voting yes to the city square.

“The prospect of a huge square in place of the gardens is a terrible prospect and I have yet to understand the contention that this is necessary for the future well economic welfare of the city…. do not support the project.” Recorded as voting yes to the city square.

There are over 200 responses like this in the report.

http://cdn.activecommerce.net/content/csp/Appendix2a-Feedback_Forms-Sorted_YesNo.pdf

Local businessmen were not happy with the result of the consultation and wrote a letter to the Council urging them to go ahead with the city square project and ignore the no vote, ‘due to misunderstanding of the project among the public’ and an ‘inability’ to appreciate its impact. Cheeky, cheeky!

http://news.scotsman.com/news/Reject-city-square-at-your.6275672.jp

Acsef now had the tricky matter of keeping the city square project going despite the public vote against it.

This was because as Ascef minutes record, “There is a mandate from the business community to proceed to the next stage”.  There was also the unfortunate position of the Labour party who had come out against the plan. They had to be dealt with. The minutes of the Acsef meeting on the 13th April mention that:

“Following discussion amongst private sector members of the ACSEF Board after the Special meeting on 22 March a letter had been drafted to senior members of the Labour Party expressing disappointment at the Party’s stance in relation to the project. Private sector Board members approved this for issue.”     http://www.acsef.co.uk/uploads/reports/21/13%20April%2010.doc

The Labour party were very upset at these comments, given that this was a publically funded organisation taking a political stance on a highly-controversial issue (both Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire councils fund Acsef with £230,000 a year each). Nevertheless, they were puzzled as to why no letter had ever arrived and further curious as to why Acsef had stated that it had received no reply from any of the Labour politicians it had been addressed to. It later transpired that due to a mix-up within Acsef, no letter had actually been posted. Labour MSP Richard Baker wrote in a scathing letter to the Press and Journal:   “When Acsef is confused about how this letter was sent, and when it certainly has not been seen by its intended recipients, how on earth can they comment on a lack of a response? This typifies the shambolic way this organisation has handled this crucial issue for the future of Aberdeen.”

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1821147?UserKey=

The time had come for creative thinking if the project was not to be lost. The original report on the consultation had stated “11,943 people went on to submit formal responses that have been recorded in the statistics.  This is a huge response rate when compared to similar style consultations. For example, the Edinburgh Tram consultation had just under 3,500 direct responses.” This was not good enough though. The board met on the 22nd of March and hatched a cunning plan “If views are roughly split there is an opportunity to say that although the public has spoken this is only in relatively small numbers.

Shangri-La would be rebuilt in the centre of Aberdeen and people would come for miles to see the giant concrete slab

Those wishing to see the status quo are in the minority compared to those who wish to see change such as updating and modernising the gardens.” Brilliant! As the great polemicists would say, it’s not the logic of your position that matters, it’s how you frame the argument that is all important. Or putting it another way:

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master— that’s all.”

This perspective was the key to moving forward, especially in view of Sir Ian Wood’s position expressed at the same meeting:

“A negative outcome from the consultation would be accepted graciously as the voice of the people having spoken.  If the outcome is split, one of the key conditions would be Aberdeen City Council support and resource to take the project forward to the next stage. “

http://www.acsef.co.uk/uploads/reports/21/22%20March%2010.doc

The Council decided to pre-empt the consultation and vote on the issue. This they duly did on May 19th, 2010 and they agreed to progress the city square project (or the city garden project as they now wanted it to be called).

Acsef clearly like a challenge and they had a whopper. The scheme was not only highly unpopular but given the grandiose scale of the city square (it would be just slightly smaller than Red Square in Moscow), the costs were likely to be vast, reasonably £200 Million or more. Sir Ian Wood had promised £50 Million towards the cost of the project.

Where was all the extra money coming from?

Aberdeen Council had the utterly bonkers idea that they would borrow up to £200 Million from central government funds largely to pay for the square and then wait for the money to be paid back by revenue from extra business rates.  Shangri-La would be rebuilt in the centre of Aberdeen and people would come for miles to see the giant concrete slab (earlier this year Acsef had ran an advert in the Press and Journal describing the city square as “a unique opportunity to put the city on the must visit list”).

City-centre traders would be making so much extra money that the rateable value for their businesses would go through the roof.  An extra twist to the saga came from the September Council Finance Committee. Consultants were to be asked “to make it clear that they are required to produce a business case that ensures zero financial risk to the Council.” So the Council borrows up to £200 Million with no risk at all. Hilarious! Aberdeen Council could potentially put the makers of Xmas cracker jokes out of business. In fact, ‘crackers’ just about sums it all up.

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1940121?UserKey=

Yet the Council would have everybody think that the city square is a done deal; it is anything but. It is at least 18 months away from planning submission, everything is running at least 4 – 6 months late and very little of the project plan has actually happened yet.  There is much that could go wrong with the scheme before long and it probably will.

In the midst of the word he was trying to say,

In the midst of his laughter and glee,
He had softly and suddenly vanished away—
For the Snark *was* a Boojum, you see.

I wish you a Merry Xmas and I reckon that a happy new year for everyone will see the back of the city square folly. Join Friends of Union Terrace Gardens through our website and help send it out of the way: www.friendsofutg.org

Sep 032010
 

Alex Mitchell takes another wander through Aberdeen’s streets for Aberdeen Voice.

Planning Blight: Concerns have been raised about how long the present uncertainty concerning Business Rates and the anticipated chaos attendant on major construction projects will have on business activity in the vicinity of Union Terrace Gardens. Even the relatively small-scale resurfacing work around the Green has seriously disrupted trade & commerce there.

Princes Street in Edinburgh, for example, has been devastated by their Tramways project. The usual effect of ‘planning blight’ is that existing businesses and householders decide to sell up and leave whilst their properties retain some market value, while others who had been thinking of moving in to the affected area – setting up shop, investing in leaseholds etc. – decide not to.

The locality goes downhill as existing proprietors and residents move out and are not replaced by incomers and new entrants. The normal turnover in a healthy property market slows down and grinds to a halt. Property values fall; properties may become effectively unsellable at any price. Basic maintenance, repairs & renewals are neglected as properties come to be regarded by their owners as expensive liabilities rather than as profitable assets worth investing in. The whole area goes into a downward spiral, even if the development proposal never comes to anything.

Chaos, Destruction: In her book Lost Aberdeen (2004), Diane Morgan describes the hitherto-vibrant & successful St Nicholas Street/George Street shopping thoroughfare as being reduced to the condition of the Somme battlefield of WW1 for years on end during the 1980s comprehensive redevelopment by a public/private-sector partnership (sounds familiar) between Aberdeen City Council and the developer Bredero.

At that time ACC was in the dubious and compromised position of being both co-developer and the planning authority. All this destruction and the loss of many famous locally-owned stores, for the sake of a pair of undistinguished shopping malls and the questionable amenity of the top deck of the St Nicholas Centre. And George Street has never recovered. Now Fortuna’s Wheel has turned full circle and ACC are about to do it all over again!

The Post Office fronting on to Upperkirkgate has been empty for years. This is pretty much what the proposed City Square on the Gardens could be like, albeit on a much bigger scale.

We checked out the top deck of the St Nicholas Centre recently, on a warm, sunny weekday afternoon. It is exposed to the elements, isolated and cut-off from the mainstream of activity, cluttered with ventilator shafts and was mainly frequented by various unfortunates swigging cider surrounded by empty retail units. Only W H Smith is still in business. The Post Office fronting on to Upperkirkgate has been empty for years. This is pretty much what the proposed City Square on the Gardens could be like, albeit on a much bigger scale.

Bridge Street: Amusing news stories on 30th July 2010 about naked cavortings up on a roof; but there is a wider significance. Bridge Street is a major city-centre thoroughfare, linking Union Street with Guild Street; but the upper floors of the huge granite building in question would seem to be empty, whilst even the ground-floor shop premises, formerly occupied by Jessop’s, are described as being not only empty but in a derelict condition, and a second-floor roof recently collapsed under the weight of a teenage girl.

Much of our city centre is like this – magnificent but largely empty granite buildings, e.g., the Victoria Buildings of 1881 which dominates the westward view along Guild Street, where even the ground-floor premises are either boarded up or in very poor condition. Why is ACC seemingly hell-bent on throwing away public money on a largely unwanted City Square when the basic fabric of our city centre is falling apart all around us?

Saturday 14th August 2010: Sunny and warm. Union Terrace Gardens looking beautiful. Flowering plants like fuchsia and begonias last much longer than in more exposed, windswept and sun-scorched locations. Lots of people, and all the trees appear in vigorous health, contra ACSEF. Up on to Union Street, then Justice Mill Lane.

Decided to walk back along the old road into Aberdeen from the south, via the Hardgate, Windmill Brae and through the Green.

Huge granite buildings loom above the lower reaches of Windmill Brae, e.g., the Royal Hotel on Bath Street, resembling an immense French chateau – also the impressive Venetian Gothic façade of the former Palace Theatre (1898) on Bridge Place. The main thoroughfare of Bridge Street itself was laid down in 1865-7, swooping over the old route in from the south to link Union Street with Aberdeen Joint Station, Guild Street and the Harbour area.

Bridge Street also links with Bridge Place, which stands on a ridge extending from Holburn Street to Crown Terrace. The ridge slopes steeply down to the Harbour, forming a natural amphitheatre, used in medieval times for the staging of various events. Along this ridge were fought the battles of the Craibstane, the Langstane and the Justice Mills.

So this is a topographically and historically complex area. As elsewhere in Aberdeen, the Victorian streetscape of Bridge Street, Bridge Place and Bath Street was superimposed or built on top of the alleys and wynds of the medieval burgh. Windmill Brae effectively goes underground, passing below Bridge Street and terminating at the TrinityCentre car park.

So I turn right and walk along an alley and up some steps and emerge facing the magnificent but ruinous frontage of Ellis & Wilson’s Victoria Buildings of 1881. It is seriously difficult – I take my life in my hands – getting past the entrance to the TrinityCentre car park and the junction with the Denburn By-Pass on the urban motorway of Wapping Street. Thence along Rennie’s Wynd to the Green for a much-needed cup of coffee at Café 52 with Dorothy Bothwell. People walked this route (more-or-less) into Aberdeen for some 600 years before Union Street was built. Now it’s hardly worth trying.

Why should we have to scuttle about underground, in the dark, like half-blind rats in a sewer?

However, in effect, I walked around three sides of the huge TrinityCentre; west, south & east. The trouble is, once you’re on the Wapping Street motorway, there’s no obvious way out! We wonder how much of an older Aberdeen was wrecked to create this urban nightmare – truly the road to nowhere.

But we are told that one can walk directly from the foot of Windmill Brae through the lower level of the TrinityCentre car park. A pedestrian walkway follows the path across the one-time Bow Brig and emerges on to the Green. Ho-hum. I must admit I have never set foot in the Trinity Shopping Centre, nor its multi-storey car park. I don’t think we should have to, either, to get around our own town. The car park is described as “dark and dingy (aren’t they all?) especially at the Green end”. These places give me the horrors, even on a bright sunny day – urban-nightmare-in-daytime territory. Why should we have to scuttle about underground, in the dark, like half-blind rats in a sewer?

About the only positive here is the return of the place-name ‘Trinity’. When the former Trinity Shopping Centre was bought over by the group calling itself simply ‘The Mall’ in 2006, they rebranded the place as ‘The Mall, Aberdeen’, resulting in predictable confusion with all the other shopping malls in Aberdeen. They had in the process thrown away the medieval place-name ‘Trinity’, which goes back some 800 years on this site to the Trinitarian or ‘Red’ Friars, to whom William the Lion (reigned 1165-1214) is said to have granted his palace on the Green for use as a monastery.

The Mall group sold the centre in Dec. 2009, and it is now being promoted as the Trinity Centre. Otherwise the ancient name ‘Trinity’ would remain only in Trinity Street (behind the Tivoli Theatre) and Trinity Lane, which runs from Exchange Street across Market Street to Shiprow.

Jul 232010
 

By Alex Mitchell.

Monday 12th July 2010, warm and sunny. Left the car in the Denburn car park, walked under the Viaduct and into Union Terrace Gardens – the one substantial green space in Aberdeen city centre – beautiful, verdant, quiet, restful, and well-maintained as always by Council Parks and Gardens staff. A fair smattering of people sitting around, including women with children. No drunks. The trees all seem in good health, despite ACSEF propaganda. Up on to Union Street. The awful, tacky Sports Direct shop frontage – formerly Zavvi, before that the Virgin Megastore – is still in evidence, months after we were assured by the Planning Department that it would be dealt with. Continue reading »