Mike Shepherd Archives - Page 4 of 6

Where The Various Parties Stand On UTG

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

Apr 292011

7 months on from gathering comments from the Scottish Party Leaders on the development of Union Terrace Gardens, Mike Shepherd enlightens readers as regards where the parties stand 7 days ahead of the Scottish Election.

no images were found

CONSERVATIVES: Mixed views. The Conservatives in the council split last year, and the city centre park was one of the contentious issues leading to the split.

One of the splinter groups supported the development; the other has major concerns about the financial exposure to the Council of borrowing money to build the city square.

The Conservative candidate in Central Aberdeen, Sandy Wallace, supports the development of the park:

“21st century public space over 19st century public space is a no brainer. The question is can we afford it? We should make sure we can afford it. Building for our grandchildren’s future takes preference over employing yet more council officials.”

GREEN PARTY: Against the development of Union Terrace Gardens. In an Aberdeen Voice article, leader of the Scottish Greens, Patrick Harvie said:

“The Greens both locally and nationally fully support the campaign to retain the historic Union Terrace Gardens in their current form. The people of Aberdeen were consulted and rejected the proposal: it is shameful for the City Council and business to try to overturn that outcome.”

See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2010/09/scottish-party-leaders-comment-on-utg/

LABOUR: Against the development of the city centre park. Lewis Macdonald, the sitting MSP in the marginal Aberdeen Central constituency, has highlighted the issue in one of his election leaflets. In this, he pledges to oppose plans to fill in the Gardens:

“The people of Aberdeen should have the final say in what is done with Union Terrace Gardens.”

no images were found

LIBERAL-DEMOCRATS: Mixed views. In the Council group, Council leader John Stewart is the prime mover for the City Garden project when votes come up. He is also on the board for the City Garden project and is helping to progress the plans. On the other hand, Councillor Martin Greig and several Lib-Dem colleagues are consistent opponents of the scheme in council debates.

SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY: The main supporters of the City Garden Project, although largely silent on the issue in their current campaign. Kevin Stewart, a strong contender for the marginal Aberdeen Central seat, is also on the board for the City Garden Project. He has led most of his Councillors in support for the city square in council voting and this is one of the main reasons why it has progressed through the Council to date.

Alex Salmond was quoted in Aberdeen Voice last year:

“Aberdeen City councillors voted in favour of the proposals to build a new City Square and I understand a design competition is underway, which will seek the views of local citizens, as to what the development will look like.

It strikes me that in these tough economic times there is all the more reason to think big for the future of the North-East of Scotland. We should be excited by the scale of this vision and the commitment to ensure great things can be made to happen.”

See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2010/09/scottish-party-leaders-comment-on-utg/

UTG Remains Opportunity Site In Aberdeen Local Plan

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

Apr 262011

By Mike Shepherd.

The Council have decided to keep Union Terrace Gardens as development opportunity in the new Aberdeen local plan despite hundreds of objections to this.

A report to Council on Wednesday (27th April 2011) lists over 360 objections and only two in support.

Numerous objections are listed in an appendix to the report. These are typical:

“Support retention of public open space other than in exceptional circumstances. Financial incentives by private sector should not count as exceptional circumstances sufficient to outweigh normal polices else planning system simply becomes a question of deep pockets.”

“Union Terrace Gardens could be sympathetically improved by one or more of the following: providing access down, reopening the toilets, covering the railway and dual carriageway and opening shops, cultural facilities and cafes in the archways.”

“In line with the city’s policies, it should be subject to conservation orders, like Duthie Park.”

“Union Terrace Gardens is the most obvious remnant of the Denburn the tributary of the Dee that saw the earliest habitation. It is an important topographical feature that also highlights the significant engineering features of the Union Street bridge and Rosemont Viaduct. Without the gardens these features become unintelligible and the centre of Aberdeen‘s history is much the poorer.”

“Add Union Terrace Gardens as a protected site as per Policy D4 – Aberdeen‘s Granite Heritage.”

The Council position is stated as follows:

“Whilst there is clearly a high level of debate regarding the Gardens it is our contention that it is important to identify that options for the redevelopment of the Gardens are currently under consideration. Any development proposal for the Gardens will need to be considered against the Local Development Plan, including the City Centre Development Framework, which sets out criteria for the future of the Gardens. The scale and nature of any improvements will be subject to other consultations and ultimately a planning application.

“In light of the above, the Council does not agree with the suggestion to remove this opportunity site from the Proposed Plan and to remove the Gardens from the opportunity site.”

See: http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=13439

Once the local plan has been approved by the Council, the next stage is for the plan to be independently assessed by a reporter. It is to be hoped that this issue is picked up and dealt with by an examination in public, not the least because a quarter of the 1,544 representations received on the plan concerned the Gardens.

The Council seem to be determined not to listen to the public on Union Terrace Gardens. They also ignored the outcome of the public consultation on the city square even though a majority of 1,270 said no to the development of the park.

The comment made above by the Council that:

“The scale and nature of any improvements will be subject to other consultations”

… is difficult to take seriously in this regard. The Council appear to be only interested in one outcome and it’s not what the public want.

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

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.

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

Giving Away Union Terrace Gardens – Part 2

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion Comments Off

Mar 252011

Last week, Mike Shepherd wrote an article on the next steps for the scheme to develop Union Terrace Gardens. Mike gives an update on this week’s events.

A timetable was published containing an item for the council meeting on 27th April when Councillors would vote on approving transfer of a lease for the park to a third party organisation, most likely a limited company or trust. This organisation was designated as a ‘Special Purpose Vehicle’ (SPV).

If approval for leasing the park were to be given, then this would have been about a year in advance of any planning permission being sought for the City Square Project.

This week, I was forwarded an email from the Council Executive stating that Councillors will not now be discussing the lease transfer next month. The following are direct quotes from the email:

“… On a more general point, the basis on which UTG could be available for development still requires to be carefully considered and shall, doubtless, be the subject of considerable legal scrutiny and Elected Member decision before any disposition is finally known.

“From having read your constituent’s comments … it may be the case that your constituent is referring to the “City Gardens Project Plan timetable for key decisions” report approved by Council on 6th October 2010 which highlighted the forthcoming Council meeting of 27th April 2011 as the date when a report would be presented to Council seeking approval, amongst other issues, for lease of land (UTG) to the project’s Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company.

“As detailed in an Information Bulletin Report to Council of 23rd Feb 2011, a request to Members to approve any lease will first be subject to the approval of a Business Plan by the SPV company prior to Elected Members being asked to take any decision regarding the terms upon which appropriate development rights may be granted to the Special Purpose Vehicle. In other words, as work on the Business Plan etc is currently ongoing following the recent incorporation of the SPV company, Elected Members will not be asked at Council on 27th April to approve any lease or grant of development rights to the SPV.”

The timetable for progress on the City Square Project will now have to be revised and it is not known if or when the issue of transferring the lease will come up in future.

Last week also saw the appointment of the company to manage the design competition for the city square.

It is expected that the competition will be launched next month and short-listed designs will be made public by the end of September.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2188050?UserKey=

The Press and Journal reported on Saturday that the City Garden Project managers were proposing to bid for funding from the Heritage Lottery Fund. Given that the scheme involves the destruction of the Victorian Union Terrace Gardens, replacing it with a three storey building and a modern roof garden, this did cause a bit of a stir in the city.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2186720?UserKey=

One website has suggested how the City Square could ‘display and showcase our history and heritage’.

“Imagine walking under the new space with natural light filtering into an airy space that is bursting with historical documents and artefacts, currently held in the city’s archives, passing by studios and rehearsal rooms where dancers, actors and musicians practise, coming up onto street-level to be faced with displays showcasing physical pieces of our history and telling the story of our rich heritage.”

http://thecitygardenproject.com/history_and_heritage.asp

The vision of replacing heritage with a heritage museum angered a good number of Aberdonians, and emails were sent to the Heritage Lottery Fund in protest. The head of the fund replied to the effect that they hadn’t received any application as yet, and as such they couldn’t comment. However, they did note the following:

“We expect all applicants for funding to consult with relevant stakeholders, including the local community, in the development of their projects and we consider this as part of our assessment alongside a wide range of factors.”

Much has happened in a week and more is to come next week. The Union Terrace Gardens situation is fast moving, complex and to some extent shrouded in secrecy. It is not easy to follow, or even understand everything that is happening. However, be assured that some Councillors are also starting to lose track of the situation and are making their concerns known.

The Gardens should not be given away to a limited company without time for due diligence on behalf of the elected members and it should most certainly not be railroaded through in the manner that published timetables suggested would be the case. Union Terrace Gardens has a real estate value worth tens of millions of pounds to the city.

To the citizens of Aberdeen they are of course, priceless.

Old Susannah No.28 – A Year Half Full? – Or Half Empty?

Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour Comments Off

Mar 252011

Happy 9-month birthday to Aberdeen Voice! And Old Susannah’s column has now been running for 6 months.

I was having a quick lemonade with Fred Wilkinson (or ‘Freditor-in-Chief’ as I call him) and he explained how the Voice was born. He was talking to friends, and they were discussing whether it was possible to create as great, impartial, investigative and intelligent a newspaper as the ones we already have in Aberdeen, and they decided to give it a go.

Nine months later, there are dozens of contributors and thousands of readers – but no advertisers the Voice is beholden to.

There are three things I particularly love about the Voice itself.

The first is that absolutely anyone who has something reasonable and coherent to say is welcome to submit an article.

The second is the stories the Voice has broken. For instance, when Trump’s organisation explained to the world’s media that they never considered the use of compulsory purchase orders at Menie, Voice published an excellent article proving this simply was not the case.

When Councillor Malone told the Press & Journal that only ‘about one’ Aberdeen resident contacted her objecting to the deer cull, the Voice’s readers sent in proof to the contrary in spades. And while the Union Terrace Gardens situation gets murkier and more confusing by the minute, the Voice breaks important developments that that are not covered in other local press publications….. for some reason.

The Third great thing about Aberdeen Voice to me is the growing number of readers that are getting involved. People are writing in to the Voice for more information, contacting their elected officials on matters featured in the Voice, and are writing to Voice contributors with important leads, comments and very kind words of encouragement.

Then there are the people who make the Voice a reality. First there is Fred Wilkinson (or ‘Dave’ or ‘Wilkinson’ as Councillor Malone calls him), the editor-in-chief. He has two teenage children, his band, and a host of other projects and yet he finds the time to bring all the contributions together, chase down delinquent sub editors and bring together edition after edition for publication on time, every week.

Mike Shepherd and Sarah-Jane Duffus are two of the leading Union Terrace Gardens writers and activists. Their energy and dedication to saving the city’s only centre park, not to mention probably the most valuable, irreplaceable and beautiful city centre civic asset in Aberdeen, is admirable. It is no wonder that they have ACSEF worried and complaining publicly that the UTG Friends are ‘organised’. They bloody well are.

Rob is the Aberdeen Voice ‘tech guy’ who has a dozen or so of his own projects going, yet can show up to take amazingly high quality photos on breaking stories with lightning speed.

I was honoured then and more so now to be part of this amazing group of people

He has the patience of several saints and continuously improves the technology behind the Voice; its growing readership has meant lots of work for Rob – who also has to try and get me up to speed with technical developments – not an easy task.

I also owe a debt of thanks to Rhonda Reekie, who writes on a variety of subjects. Some six months ago she contacted me and wondered if I’d like to consider writing something for the Voice. Well, six months on and I really must thank the Council and the Big business interests for continuously generating material to write about. I was honoured then and more so now to be part of this amazing group of people and this much-needed and much-enjoyed electronic newspaper which is Aberdeen Voice. Thanks.

I was sick for two weeks, during which the world has become overcome with problems from Libya to Japan. Closer to home, the Scottish Parliament decides not to call in the Loirston Loch stadium plan (as one fellow objector put it, ‘I am surprised they had time to open the envelope, let alone weigh up the issues.”).

One minute we are to kill deer, then no, then yes. To make matters worse, it looks like Stewart Milne homes are losing money, as young would-be purchasers are having their mortgage applications rejected – home sales in the Milne Group may be down as much as 20%. No wonder the poor man wants to increase parking costs at Pittodrie. It’s more than Old Susannah can keep up with.

I was, however, very pleased when I heard about the lorry-load of cement that was dumped on Aberdeen’s roads; I thought it was a great way to fill in some of the potholes. Sad to say, it turned out that this was a mistake, and not a cunning plan by our Council (well, it did sound like the kind of thing they might do). When I finally got out of my sickbed, I was shocked to find that a pothole on Victoria Road had been filled in.

If you don’t do return your form, you will be deemed to have ‘taken leave of your census’ and may be fined.

This was also a bit sad for the locals, as we’d been planning on stocking this particular hole with trout. The material filling the hole doesn’t appear to have been ‘tamped down’ at all, and it is of a completely different material than either the road or all the other patches. I have every confidence it will last as long as the other road mends have done. I give it two weeks.

Tuesday was busy – first it was the excellent Mark Edwards ‘Hard Rain’ exhibition and presentation at Aberdeen University. I fully recommend a visit to see the work which will be up for a month. Immediately afterwards I raced to Peacock Visual Arts which hosted ‘Run Down Aberdeen’ – another excellent film by Fraser Denholm and Mike Shepherd. I missed the film – which you can now get online – but was entertained by the panel discussion featuring Fraser, Councillors Martin Greig, Kevin Stewart, and Lewis MacDonald MSP.

The gallery was packed, including the area just outside the gallery. I did get a chance to ask if there was any connection between Stewart Milne’s Triple Kirks plan and the desire to turn our Victorian garden into a parking lot. I didn’t exactly get an answer.

Right, time to define some of the terms arising of late. Apologies for the long intro.

Census (noun) A polling of individuals and householders, usually undertaking by governments, in order to aid future planning.

We are currently all receiving our Census forms, which must be returned by 27 March. No doubt the post office will provide its usual swift service and not a single form will be lost. If you don’t do return your form, you will be deemed to have ‘taken leave of your census’ and may be fined.

It is unfortunate that the population can no longer respond with “Jedi Knight” as an answer on the religion question

But you will, of course, want to reveal to the government every detail of your life, family, health, finances etc. That’s how they keep giving us the great, forward-thinking services enjoyed today by the elderly, people with special needs, school children and the poor. The number of bathrooms in your house is crucial to these calculations.

(Naturally all details will be kept strictly confidential – unlike all of the past instances of confidential information being left on trains, leaked or lost).

Aberdeen couldn’t be the great place it is if 10 years ago people hadn’t done their census forms. It is just unfortunate that we’re closing our schools down while at the same time building new ‘affordable homes*’ on every patch of green that still exists. I guess the Census back then must have said our population would quadruple.

It is unfortunate that the population can no longer respond with “Jedi Knight” as an answer on the religion question. This is unfair discrimination against Jedi Knights, and just goes to prove that the dark side of the force is in control in Scotland. Any resemblance between Ms Dean and an Imperial Storm Trooper (or one of those furry muppet alien squeaky things) might be more than coincidental. May the Farce be with you – get those Census forms in.

*Affordable Housing (noun) dwelling places priced lower than fair market value, intended to benefit people with low incomes.

Are you a multimillionaire feeling the pinch? Need to build some luxury des-res homes in the greenbelt (where there is no VAT to pay on the land) in a hurry and cheaply? Need to convince those sceptical, uncooperative, incisive Councillors that new housing should be built rather than old buildings converted? Well then, ‘affordable housing ‘ is your ticket to your next few million.

The local authorities will always give you planning permission anyway, but the phrase ‘affordable housing’ is music to their ears: it will help them to justify the approval to build your unique, individualistic, state-of-the art homes where endangered species currently roam unchecked.

You’ll probably get a tax break for building ‘affordable homes’ as well.

There is dancing in the streets today as people rejoice over the 1p reduction in the price of motor fuel

What happens is this: your development goes up, and you build say 2 to 4 ‘affordable homes . The press tells the world what a great guy you are, and announces the date for the homes to be sold. People then queue up on site to buy these bargains for days in advance of the sale. The first few people get the homes, and move in to spend many happy years living in a luxurious new development.

None of these buyers will instantly sell their bargain property for a massive profit – that would be morally wrong and would defeat the purpose of ‘affordable housing’ in the first place.

Budget (noun) a set list of rules for fiscal expenditure.

In the UK the budget is set by established financial wizard and genius, George Osborne.

There is dancing in the streets today as people rejoice over the 1p reduction in the price of motor fuel. People can now fill their tanks for about 17p less than before. What will you do with your 17p? You could put it towards the cost of a drink, but it won’t pay for the increased cost of your cigarettes (which you should really quit anyway – unless you’re immortal and super-rich).

The ‘coalition’ government was no doubt left with a huge mess to clean up, and bombing Libya will no doubt go a long way to helping us get back on our feet. Or something. We did after all sell Libya all those finely crafted, UK made handcuffs, riot gear, clubs and shackles – time to capitalise on the investment.

By bombing them, we’re making more money for UK Defence Contractors. Result!

The old joke was ‘A capitalist is someone who will sell you the rope they are going to hang you with’. The Libya situation is an interesting take on this sentiment. Clearly nothing is more important than British Jobs – and the idea of weapons large and small no longer being made in the UK is too much to bear.

The North Sea Oil industry will be stumping up an extra few pence in tax, and George Osborne has promised to close some of the tax loopholes exploited by the rich for decades. I just hope none of our important, famous multi-millionaires are troubled by this budget. Somehow, I doubt they will be.

Next week – more definitions and a look back at some of the Old Susannah outstanding issues

Run Down Aberdeen – A New Documentary

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Events, Featured, Information, Opinion Comments Off

Mar 182011

By Fraser Denholm.

A new documentary, launched next week, takes a look beneath the layer of grime, which, in recent years, has coated the grand granite facades of Aberdeen’s unique city centre. Run Down Aberdeen seeks to highlight and investigate a number of issues which have, and continue to contribute to the current condition of the city, a number of issues which regular readers of Aberdeen Voice may be all too familiar.

In the short yet prolific life of Aberdeen Voice, the city’s premier online outlet for citizen journalism and campaign writing, there have been a number of contentious issues which have attracted most of the site’s column inches. Controversial developments, urban decline, council mismanagement and the seemingly perpetual struggle between the public and private sectors have been the order of the day at Aberdeen Voice since its inception.

Framed around the widespread and growing state of perceived neglect, Run Down Aberdeen looks a little further than the chipped cornices, tarnished street plaques, empty shop units and grubby pavements which face the residents and visitors of Aberdeen. With the help of local politicians, writers and citizens, the film discusses both the historical and contemporary developments, which continue to shape the future of the city.

The documentary was commissioned as an expansion of a Facebook group which has already been the subject of an AV article by Mike Shepherd, the group’s founder and the film’s executive producer. While the group’s ethos is to encourage members of the general public to highlight areas of concern by posting photos, it seemed counterproductive to either echo this or make the film about what the group was achieving (A few weeks after the group’s establishment a number of the areas highlighted in the early photographs were tackled by Councillor Martin Greig).

Therefore the film, while establishing the apparent neglect, looks into initiatives proposed or already under way and how these developments will effect or remedy the situation.

Big ticket projects have been proposed which aim to be a universal panacea to Aberdeen’s decline: The City Square Project claims to safeguard jobs and economic stability while delivering “transformational” change to a “third rate” city centre; “One Aberdeen” the Aberdeen city development company is aimed at:

“maximising the use of the city’s unused assets and to drive and promote the regeneration and economic development of the city as a whole.”

While the Green Townscape Heritage Initiative seems successful in its attempts to regenerate the Green area of the city and working with a range of heritage organisations to restore the historic buildings and streetscapes.

On the other hand there is widespread dissatisfaction amongst the people of Aberdeen – the establishment of Aberdeen Voice is a prime example of this. Every day there are more and more protest and pressure groups within the city struggling with the City Council’s decisions and projects, which will affect their everyday lives.

But how do we consolidate this? How can a city regain its population’s faith once it has been lost? And what can the everyday person do to influence the city around them? And most importantly where does the future of a city like Aberdeen lie?

For forty years the city has apparently prospered on the back of a finite resource, and with that resource now dwindling and the corporations based in Aberdeen, who have been drawn to the city to exploit it getting itchy feet, how should the city move forward, and who exactly should define where to go?

Run Down Aberdeen Trailer from Fraser Denholm on Vimeo.

Run Down Aberdeen will premiere at Peacock Visual Arts on Tuesday 22nd March at 7pm.

The Screening will be followed by an open discussion chaired by Joan Ingram featuring the filmmaker, Lewis MacDonald MSP, Councillor Kevin Stewart and Councillor Martin Greig.

Giving Away Union Terrace Gardens

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion Comments Off

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

The Peacock Grant And The City Square Project

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion Comments Off

Mar 082011

The City Square Project is a highly controversial proposal to replace Union Terrace Gardens with a three-storey building topped by a modern city square. This week, unlikely as it seems the scheme became more controversial as Mike Shepherd tells Aberdeen Voice.

The latest revelations concern the luckless Peacock Visual Arts (PVA) proposal for Union Terrace Gardens.

The local art group, Peacock Visual Arts, had planned to build a “centre for contemporary arts” in part of the Gardens. The £13.5 million building was to contain a gallery, a TV studio, a print studio, a restaurant and offices for Peacock Staff.

The intention was also to provide a base for Aberdeen City Council’s Arts Development and Arts Education teams as well as extra space for the City Moves dance agency. The project had been awarded funding from Aberdeen Council (£3 million), the Scottish Arts Council (£4.3M) and the Scottish Government body, Scottish Enterprise (£2 million).

See:- http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/archive/182/over-9m-of-core-funding-now-in-place

After planning permission was granted to Peacock in August 2008 by the Council, Sir Ian Wood then stepped in and in November 2008 announced his own plans for Union Terrace Gardens, a civic square described by him as “a cross between the Grand Italian Piazza and a mini Central Park”. Scottish Enterprise paid for a technical feasibility study for the City Square Project and then promoted the consultation to gauge public opinion on the issue. Aberdeen Council now found themselves faced with two projects competing for the same lease of ground. Councillors later decided at a full Council meeting in May 2010 to support the City Square scheme rather than the Peacock Visual Arts centre.

The Peacock contemporary arts centre was effectively killed off by the May Council vote

In reply to a recent question as to what was spent out of the Peacock grant, Scottish Enterprise listed £190,000 spent on the technical feasibility study for the City Square Project and £226,000 spent by Peacock on architect, design and project management costs. No indication is given as to when the agreements to do this were signed off.

See:- http://fraserdenholm.blogspot.com/2011/02/use-it-or-lose-it.html?spref=fb

Thus money intended for the Peacock scheme looks to have been allocated to a feasibility study for a rival project which ended up replacing the Peacock scheme itself as the Council’s preference (Scottish Enterprise, it should be said, have acknowledged that if the PVA plan had been approved they would have honoured the £2 million grant).

It was later reported in a Press and Journal article that Aberdeen Council had secured permission to use a further £375,000 of the grant funding for the City Square Project. What this money is to be used for is not allowed to be, as yet, in the public domain.

See:- http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2153115?UserKey

The Press and Journal report states that the Peacock grant now stands today at £1.2 million out of the original £2 million allocated. The grant was left open after the vote in May. According to information provided by Scottish Enterprise the money is nominally available to fund similar projects to the Peacock scheme until the end of March this year, at which point it has to be returned back to central funds.

The Council monitoring officer has been asked to launch an investigation into the matter

The Peacock contemporary arts centre was effectively killed off by the May Council vote. Although Peacock had been asked to locate their arts centre within the proposed city square building, this proved unacceptable to them and there was no chance of an alternative proposal surfacing in time for the March 2011 deadline.

The Council executive confirmed to Scottish Enterprise in November 2010 that the Peacock funding was no longer required; they nevertheless made a request to reallocate the funds to alternative projects under revised terms. Kevin Stewart, the Council’s finance convenor, told the Press and Journal that seven proposals had been drawn up, costed and presented to Scottish Enterprise.

See:- http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2154909

In response to a question I had asked him as to whether the money could be given to Peacock for new facilities, Cllr. Stewart replied that:

“Council officers put forward a number of worthy projects that could use the funding, including Peacock, but these were all rejected by Scottish Enterprise.”

The £1.2 million grant to Aberdeen Council from Scottish Enterprise now looks as if it will have to be returned to central government funds at the end of March. The Council monitoring officer has been asked to launch an investigation into the matter under the Local Government in Scotland Act.

See:- http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2163875

Item	Grant	Allocated from the grant	Amount remaining in grant
Original Peacock Grant	£2 million
Technical Feasibility Studyxx for the City Square Project		£190,000
Spent by Peacock		£226,000	£1, 584,000 (“£1.6 million)
Additional funding for the City Square Project (P&J) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx		£375,000	£1,209,000 (“£1.2 million”) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Older Entries Newer Entries