The City Square Project has launched a public consultation. Please visit their website and fill in the consultation survey.
The third question on the survey asks whether you support the project or not.
If you don’t support the City Square project and want to save Union Terrace Gardens, vote No on the survey as well as sign an online petition.
You can also write directly to your local councillor and tell them what you think about any of the plans. Find your local councillor by visiting: www.writetothem.com
Compare The Square 
Great site and nice to see the facts in black and white next to one another.
I have always preferred the legacy the Arts Centre would create, rather than the removal of the only green space in the city centre for a square undoubtedly flanked by chain stores.
The 60s concrete creations we now look upon as monstrosities were not monstrosities when they were conceived….
Whilst i dont believe this is good Vs evil, the “civic” square has many more negative implications for Aberdonians and not many for developers for what i deduce.
What kind of legacy involves a car park anyway?
I sincerely hope the Civic Square project does not go ahead – why does Aberdeen need a larger civic space than Moscow, at an unknown cost to the taxpayer and with such environmental damage?
Good to see some initiative being taken on all sides – by Sir Ian but also by the peacock arts centre. In my humble view, they should not be mutually exclusive. I think a beautifully landscaped and accessible munciple area is a great idea with a balanced mix of green space, social space, arts/ performance/entertainment space and commercial space. It should not be about how big it is or about how many people, car parks or retail opportunities can fit in to it. Union Square has taken care of that. It should be about the people of the north east and the story we want to project to visitors. An iconic landmark that would say ‘Fit like’ to world. An outstanding sculpture that tells the story and provides a legacy for future generations. And in practical terms somewhere that could hold a local and continental markets without getting blown away! And even a hogmanay street party on a slightly smaller scale to Edinburgh! A space that could generate both revenue and happiness for the people of Aberdeen (not for tesco metro, costa coffee and mcdonalds)
One dimension to this that has not been discussed is the relationship with other plans and I am thinking specifically about the Bon Accord Area Supplementary Planning Guidance. A massive development in UTG may remove investment from the Bon Accord area leaving St Nic House as a blot – and not producing the renewed Civic Square etc proposals inherant in the SPG.
Union Terrace gardens are a well loved and well used green oasis in the very heart of Aberdeen’s City Centre. They are one of the defining features of Aberdeen. Yes, they could be described as “quirky” but their existence is also key to understanding Aberdeen’s evolution so they shouldn’t be paved over and hidden – for that is exactly what the “Civic Square” property development looks like doing.
Putting on my rose-tinted specs I can imagine that these gardens could – if cash was available (and, yes, I know its not) – be improved. They should not be destroyed, they should be celebrated.
Imagine, if you will, a vision of the railway and road covered over at the lowest practical elevation and new grass / gardens leading to pedestrian access to the Belmont Street [and a finally restored Triple Kirks?] and down under Union Street to the Railway Station and the new Union Square development.
This would not create new commercial property opportunities or car parks, merely a stunning centre to Aberdeen with revitalised gardens providing a “cultural corridor” past the proposed new Visual Arts Centre to the Library & Theatre and Art Gallery.
Let us dare to dream and not settle for the destruction of one of Aberdeen’s unique features to create an underground car park and some more shops, covered by a bland expanse of paving out of all proportion to the size of the city.
The original architects design in the early 90’s was the best. Keeping the integrity of the gardens intact and whilst designing a new landscape bridging over denburn road. This could allow both projects to happen with mutual interest. Hopefully someone will bring this back to the table and prevent a ton of concrete landing in the gardens
Why are my positve comments about the City Square Project being deleted? Isnt this site fair and balanced?
Dear Paul, I unfortunately had to remove your comment after receiving a lot of reactions on your comment in which you are using the word ‘gay’ in relation to any possible unwanted folk wandering around on the square. It risked becoming an attack on yourself which steers away from what this site is meant for. Please submit your comment again – without offending certain groups of the population – and I will be happy to publish it. Apologies for any inconvenience! Thank you
‘Joining the dots’
Dear Sir,
Thinking more and more about the Union Terrace Gardens fiasco, I have concluded that ALL public parks should be built over; not only in Aberdeen but everywhere. Given that all the business figure heads have bandied around the fact that Aberdeen is loosing the race for presenting itself as a destination city, but more locally, Union Street has failed as a high quality top class destination, I do believe that healthy open Green Space is to blame.
How dare our public parks not involve themselves in joining up the dots to configure retail like a lunar nightmare.
Covering Union terrace Gardens is not the answer. Reducing rents and rates is.
Steve Bothwell
Café 52
52 The Green
Aberdeen
Tel 07756951576
Planet of the apes
Quiet empty spaces. Ok. Given that the size and scale of all our public parks in Aberdeen are not adorned with hoards of people constantly trudging through their natural amenity, with Primark tragedies, surely all our Estate agents, business giants, and Trump puppets should gather round the nearest board room stone circle and magic these oasis’ away and fast track an asphalt melting pot to kick start an urban Nostradamus to induce an inner city coma.
Maybe a better idea would be to ‘draft in’ world experts with a fraction of Ian Woods promise. Theses experts would compile their own studies and provide their own conclusions.
This I am sure would clarify the choices, the real choices, for us – the public, and for the Aberdeen city council to mull over. However I do believe our robotic Councilors’ Gigabytes are in dire need of upgrading. New models perhaps. Or more planet of the apes!
Steve Bothwell
Café 52
52 The Green
Aberdeen
Tel 07756951576.
If in doubt watch this and FF to 4:30 if you are pushed for time although I’d suggest it’s worth watching all of it.
Seen it! WORK OF ART.
Steve
The man is a genius in the truest sense of the word. His insights leave me grinning from lug to lug.
d
To fund this the council needs £90 million, and where is this expected to come from?? Us the tax payer most probably! The council are cutting services, closing schools, risking our safety by not gritting roads and pavements properly yet they are looking to spend money they dont even have.
They need to get their priorities right and focus on whats needed, not a fancy get up some rich business man fancies!
There is still a lot of vagueness of what is to go below this city square. After seeing Jonathan Meades’s programme I agree that the last thing Aberdeen needs is more shops and car parks. Besides where will the other £50 million come from? Sir Ian Wood thinks his plan will also benefit the Peacock Arts Centre. Has he been in touch with them to ask their opinion? Has he noted their opinions on the city square scheme?
Can’t say there is much I can disagree with in Steve’s post. If this plan does get the nod I’ll look to seek employment elsewhere and a family move.
If i have to run any future business ideas of my own via the City Council they are surely doomed. So better that i bugger off and communicate via a ‘body’ of brains rather than a zombified mass of fools.
Cheers Jim!
I contacted Mr Meades (see video above) and he’s given me some useful thoughts on ways to expose the proposal as the nonsense I and others here believe it to be.
I’d be keen to share this with others in a more private forum than a blog comment.
d
Philanthropy (contributions to general welfare,) this is not, as our general welfare relies on our own taxes being channelled back into our cities and communities. Basically we will be worse off than we were before and be surrounded by a ‘fuzzy felts’ style park reminiscent of a telletubbies cartoon landscape, cartailny not reflecting the history and integrity of a quality city centre.
Natural topography plays an essential role when re – designing a city, but does not play a part when someone’s personal energy riches ‘high – jack’ natural beauty for his own ends.
Houston of the North? Well at least we’re half way there. With the voluminous obesities in this city, I do hope Ian Woods super structure is load bearing.
Richard Pelling has hit the nail on the head.
A perfect solution outlined, and yes there is the money! Come on Sir Ian, put your 50 million to this please.
I mentioned on my comments to one of the many P&J articles that if you tried to concrete over city centre gardens anywhere else in the world, people would go bananas. I took the wonderful Central Park in NYC as my example, having been there recently. The New Yorkers manage to have a main roadway through the park, an ice rink, restaurants, a fountain, a memorial to John Lennon and the Metropolitan Art Gallery, all without massive slabs of concrete!
The other point is that Aberdeen City Council are so financially stretched as it is, and are closing civic resources all across the board, so WHY can’t Ian Wood help fund some of these organisations? To date, at least half a dozen local libraries, schools, community centres, AND the most excellent educational resource that is the Aberdeen Environmental Education Centre, are threatened with closure in the next few months. Many of these organisations could quite happily present business plans which would in total probably not cost £50 million, so come on! Help preserve the infrastructure we’ve got, don’t go building an over-priced white elephant!!
My main issue is with the consultation process itself. From what I read in the press this is the ‘official’ public consulatation, implying council support.
Yet it is organised by the very people who are pushing the project with nary a nod to the alternatives. The PVA proposal isn’t mentioned because, and I quote, “It already has planning permission”. So not quite as impartial a consultation as it seems, despite the publicity blitz last week. Note how one of the two “present day” pictures on their web site emphasises the railway and dual carriageway and hardly shows the gardens
Why do we need to flatten a wonderful natural contour right in the middle of the city? To make it more like Houston? No thanks. If the gardens need tarting up, and they do, the PVA proposal is the better one far less intrusive.
Additionally, if the road and railway can be covered it will emphasise the varied architectual features opposite, visible from Union Bridge and the whole of Union Terrace. Need to fix the Triple Kirks though!
Sir Ian’s money would be better spent contributing to the demolition of St Nicholas House and developing the civic square already mooted for there.
Sir Ian Wood Square anyone?
I agree whole heartedly with Fiona-Jane Browns comments. Having been to New York a few times myself, here is a city where they have managed a healthy mix of city centre green space and concrete. I also think the Arts Centre is a much better idea than concreting over city centre gardens….what’s next, lets concrete Hazlehead, Seaton & Westburn Parks?!? Invest your money in creating a bus service more akin to the service Edinburgh has, buses turn up on time, are in abundance and at a fraction of the cost of First Bus.
I agree wholeheartedly with Kathleen, and with Steve. This project is a nonsense. Where will the money come from?
Where?
I do not want ‘city square’.
Fill in the consultation, join the facebook group, take a stand against this development and ‘consultation’.
I too am a fan of Union Terrace Gardens and it is important that we keep green spaces within city centres.
However there is a third option to these proposals – leave it as it is.
And there’s now a fourth option. Check out the Press and Journal Thur 21st. Rubislaw Quarry up for Grabs. A mere £30,000.00 Here you go ACSEF and Ian wood, buy the 5 acre hole and build over that instead. Job done!!
In the meantime i urge all of you who have expressed your views through this forum to pick up a copy of ‘What if’ written by Brisac Gonzalez (Architect for Peacocks) It’s superb and quick read and highlights basically how absurd Ian Wood’s lack of vision is. There’s copies here at Cafe52, 52 The Green, Aberdeen.
Everywhere else in the world major cities are moving in the exact opposite direction: reclaiming green spaces, ripping up concrete to make green oases in city centers…this proposal would destroy just about the only bit of green available to the eye. I am not from Aberdeen and while it is pretty enough it is so…..relentlessly gray! More green not less if you want to attract anyone here. A huge ugly slab of concrete over the only interesting bit of landscape is a terrible idea and clearly only of benefit to developers who as usual will make the money. People hype Ian Woods “donation”–well he will certainly recoup it in spades or he wouldn’t bother. This is NOT a philanthropic proposal! I do like the Peacock proposal as it does what the best contemporary urban architecture does, integrate into the landscape and preserving as much green as possible. The existing gardens could use some renovation, and I think the night lighting is an especially good feature.
Looking at all the plans and thoughts for the gardens has got me thinking that none of the plans on the table get the point of the gardens from the point of view of the people of Aberdeen, the gardens have always been the lung of the city and like lungs they are used every day but never thought of until something feels wrong. The Gardens are good but with what I feel are pretty simple and realistic changes could be great.
Sir Ian Wood’s plans are so out of touch with any form of public or environmental needs it’s actually insulting they are even on the table. As for this £50 million … well come on MR Wood hand over the cheque today put your money where your mouth is if the money was given today to the fund by the time the bills are due for paying (end of 2012 am told for the 1st spade) the interest alone would be £6,167,800 so if he has the £50 million to give, give it now and save everyone else in the city from the council cut backs what will come to fund the remaining £90million.
The whole idea of the gardens being brought up to a concrete street level skate board park is so stupid I feel insulted to even have to post a comment on it. It’s claimed the gardens are not used but you walk past on any summers day and the park is full from lunch timers enjoying the sun to families out for a day with the kids, concreting it over will not make it any busier in the summer and in the winter well let’s be honest no-one will be using it anyway as its too cold so unless they are planning under floor heating the whole park there will be no change to usage. Also the council can’t even clear the snow and grit the roads let alone a concrete covered park. Also I have heard a rumour that the £50 million has a nice little side policy regarding the renaming of the park on Sir Ian’s death to the Sir Ian Wood gardens! Nice try
If he wants to help the city by creating a civic centre his money would be much better spend getting the council out of the mess they are away to be in, in regards to the move they are half way through relocating from st. Nicolas house to Marshall collage. We hear they are now short of money for the project as they have not managed to sell off the old headquarters for the £30 million they need to complete the new building … so here is how to kill 2 birds with ones stone … get Sir Ian to build his concrete civic square on that site he has this so called £50 million to spend they need £30 million … job done.
Peacocks plans are at least more sympathetic to the gardens but I think that having their business as the focal point of the scheme does touch on a bit of a conflict of interest. For sure having a gallery / arts centre in the heart of the city will make a big difference to Aberdeen but it should be done without the expense of making the public feel uneasy at visiting the gardens due to it being turned in to a business related park.
For what it’s worth here are my thoughts … I feel that yes the gardens should be brought up a bit but I think bringing them up one level is plenty creating a platform for event holding like the international markets and seasonal events, the space under the raised level can be used as the car park and storage for the day to day running of the park as there is still am sure a road link to the park that is blocked off at the hmt and under union street bridge end. Extending out by the same width again from the arches with glass and steel on the top level will be great too that way the arches can be used for cafe’s, restaurant and retail units. Part of the problem that the park has is that it’s not 100% safe at night but once the units are filled and the light on that problem is ended. Also this will only require a minimum amount of tree relocation. Peacocks to me would be much better suited to taking over the space at the HMT end of the park with the Aberdeen city flower crest is at this moment in time the same building design will easy be able to fit in to that space and in all honesty I feel would be a better place for the building.
You have to laugh, cry or just get angry at Aberdeen City Council. At a time when they have closed schools, shut swimming pools and scaled back services, they are still mooting the idea by Ian Wood of raising the gardens. The council can’t afford it and on top of having to find over £100 million for the city bypass, this council is insane for even considering the idea. Lets get Peacock in there and then start maybe thinking of grassing an area over the rail and road beside the park at best. The gardens are a great place to escape from the hussle and bussle and humdrum of street level life. In a grey city, we should be adding greenery, not subtracting. If all else fails we could have a revolution and overthrow the council.
I am all for the new Union Terrace Gardens, no one uses them anyway, as for it being the only place thats green – thats just untrue – have you never been to Duthie park??? Hazelhead Park, Woodburn park??? Aberdeen needs to be brought into this generation and lure new visitors into the city, it is seriously lacking behind Glasgow and Edinburgh.
Discarding our heritage like a stinking sock.
Looming over the past will be a monument of vulgarity of the highest level, Sir Ian Wood square. No real trees, no real history and no real cash to boot.
An ancestral insult.
The ACSEF of evil has placated our town folk as if they were trudging peasants thankful for a bowl of social gruel, blanching facts will an over seasoned stock, deliberately enshrining a project of sociopath levels.
The public are at the end of the day silenced of opinion and especially decision making, whereabouts bullying talks and we surrender.
It’s a great shame not more of us town folk put pen to paper, stand up and vocalise their opinion, but we are herded in by editorial media and intellectually gassed as if our word meant nothing.
Social cleansing.
He has postured wealth by articulating a public smoke screen, where we will all benefit.
Very much like Donald Trump, where his all inclusive approach was anything but.
Major swathes of business will be affected by the Ian Wood’s wrecking ball as will the few who still enjoy the peace and harmony that adorn their every day life on Trumps Patch.
Sir ian Woods boorish, insipid offering leaves nothing to care for anymore but a posthumous bloated colic failure.
My reply to Susan Stuart is this: Has Edinburgh and Glasgow disgarded its past and heritage? No it has not. Doing this to Union Terrace gardens is sacrilage. Union St and the rest of the city centre will look even worse than it does already.
Think about it.
An alternative to this proposed act of Architectural Vandalism could be a £50 Million statue of Sir Ian Wood, funded by himself of course, which would be erected somewhere near the entrance of Trump’s Golf course so all the cash rich visitors can comment on how ‘Great’ he is.
It’s not about the rich ‘giving something’ back’ it’s about the preservation of what is already great and what represents our City’s Identity.
The rich are never satisfied!
Why is there even consieration given to the monstrous idea by messers Wood? It beggars belief!! Has common sense completely gone? If he wants it, he pays for it…end of story……Stop this absolute madness….ALL THE LOCAL CHARITIES AND SUPPORT SERVICES HAVE BEEN TOLD THERE IS NO FUNDING NO INCREASE, ONLY CUTBACKS……A GREAT BIG NO IS THE ONLY ANSWER
Recently returned from an informal meeting in Edinburgh where i posed the question, – If i were to approach Edinburgh City Council and the people of Edinburgh with an application to Build over Princess street Gardens, what would be their reaction. There was a bemused silence.
The silence talked volumes.
That day, in that park i counted 10 people and 1 squirell. It was beautiful, peaceful and healthely reflective. Sadly the last thing i wanted to do was return to Aberdeen. But alas my business is here. I wish it wasn’t.
I am absolutely horrified to see that the proposal to concreate over the Gardens has reared its head again. Steve Bothwell is quite correct no-one in Edinburgh (where I now work) would even dare to propose concreating over the Princess Street gardens. The PSG are very well used, with lots going on, and is always stuffed full of people on a sunny summers day. If UTG is not being similarly used, then the council should be considering what improvements they can make to the existing gardens NOT trying to destroy them.
An energy hunting ground for the Rich
Sir Ian Wood has been entrenched in oil exploration for decades as has many other oil companies who choose to base their explorative bases here in Aberdeen. As with our oceans, stocks disappear through over explorative practices and only now has the penny dropped, where – be a panic seeking dimension has occurred.
Wind farms are pooh – pooh’d and alternative power still remains a questionable subject, of which still demands a huge amount of research.
Given that the European Union headline the essential need for sustainable energy, why should our natural environment be destroyed via the cataclysmic retardation that the civic square promotes?
Susan,
Sir Ian has generously supported many in Aberdeen in the past, and he truly believes in this vision. Unfortunately, it’s a terrible concept, and we’ll need something much better to achieve the goals of ACSEF.
Aberdeen has historically been ignored in terms of funding – look at all the regeneration cash pumped into Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee – so I can see why some people are desperate to grab any investment we may get, but we have to look at the best for the city, beyond Sir Ian’s lifetime, and beyond our own – and his concept just isn’t good enough.
ACSEF should be ashamed they haven’t carried out a proper consultation, and I only hope that now that James Milne has voiced his opposition, that this debate will cease to be “arts vs business”, and start to be about what’s best for the people of the city.
There is an obvious way forward, and ACSEF should support it with or without Sir Ian’s donation.
Tom Smith’s comment regarding Annie Lennox’s absence is short-sighted in the extreme.
I am sure Annie Lennox has traversed the globe several times, experiencing the good the bad and the ugly. So maybe she can instantly relate to the bad and the ugly without the need to gawp at a scale model, as suggested by Tom Smith.
Jim Milne’s point about intimidation is exactly right. In fact Acsef has set out to brain wash the public through false promise, side swiping the real fact; Peacocks have Planning Permission in place. When someone comes along and waves £50 million in the air of course it will attract huge attention, but when a small creative, forward thinking group struggle and battle for (in comparison) peas meal, this will simmer under the public radar.
Annie Lennox does not need, nor does anyone else need to see their facts, because there are none.
An energy hunting ground for the Rich
He has been entrenched in oil exploration for decades as has many other oil companies who choose to base their explorative bases here in Aberdeen. As with our oceans, stocks disappear through over explorative practices and only now has the penny dropped, where – be a panic seeking dimension has occurred.
Wind farms are pooh – pooh’d and alternative power still remains a questionable subject, of which still demands a huge amount of research.
Given that the European Union headline the essential need for sustainable energy, why should our natural environment be destroyed via the cataclysmic retardation that the civic square promotes?
Perhaps a world first for Aberdeen
It can’t see the trees for the Wood!
One comment made is that no one uses Union Terrace gardens; a comment that is correct. If you see photos of the gardens from some years back the gardens were used regularly be the residents and workers of Aberdeen.
Isn’t the problem about how secure the public feels in this space; I have been told that the public toilets at Union Terrace were some of the cleanest in Aberdeen, but since the gardens have been effectively taken over by the homeless and junkies the public do not feel safe to visit the gardens anymore.
Improve the facilities, the security and cleanliness and the public will use the gardens as the City Fathers wished us to.
So the architecht behind the Arts Centre plans has come up with an alternative plan to incorporate the two ideas (link below) – about time someone spoke some sense…. The Civic Square and the Arts Centre do not have to be mutually exclusive. A lot of people are for the square and a lot are for the arts centre – we need to focus on meeting in the middle if everyone is to be happy with the outcome.
http://annebonnar.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/aberdeen-needs-some-arbitration-conciliation-and-negotiation-to-create-a-winning-21st-century-civic-and-cultural-centre/
Run UTG down to strengthen case for concreting it over, fact or fiction. Discuss 😉
d
I had to laugh at RIchards comments left on the 15th of February. He feels that the gardens are full of junkies and homeless people and that nobody uses the gardens. If you actually went and used the gardens, when it’s a nice day, you’d realise that this is untrue. It seems that a lot of people who have never been to the gardens, or who went there years ago have this idea that no-one cares about the gardens. Just look at it on a sunny day. If the gardens are not as busy as they were years ago, the same can be said for other aspects of aberdeen, such as the beach, and pittodrie for the football. Some people’s priorities have changed, and rather than do some shopping and sit in the park, its now the case of shop and get home. Are we going to concrete over all the places in Aberdeen, that are not used by the same amount of people as a 1950’s picture. Who knows, perhaps that was an amazingly good day, beautiful, sunny and in the 20’s. Enhancement of the gardens is needed, not wrecking it by concrete slabbing it.
Have any of you read the FAQ’s on the Consultation site? I found it very informative. I was very surprised to read that there are no plans for a car park – in fact it is unlikely permission would be granted for another car park in the city centre (I can only assume this is due to anti-congestion planning), that there will be as much garden space in the proposed square as there currently is in UTG, that it will not be another shopping centre – it will be a civic space which will, most importantly, contain a contemporary arts centre – they state that an arts centre has always been central to their square plans. I like that everyone can benefit from this development, and not just people who like and appreciate the arts.
Graham, I agree, UTG does get used on sunny days. In fact, I have used them on sunny days… to get drunk and kick a footie about with friends. I certainly wouldn’t take my children there on a sunny day!!
Even just calling it the city SQUARE project is a mistake. These gardens are a place for leisure, entertainment, relaxation, play, sport, enjoyment etc this SQUARE appears concrete, boring, stark, large, exposed, cold, modern (for now) .
Raising it to street level would be a mistake. The lower level is part of the tradition and charm,the gardens feel like a haven in the centre of the city. They should raise it but maybe only to the first ‘toilets’ level or a bit lower so as not to totally obscure the arches at both sides, the quirky walkways to Belmont St and the toilets. The toilets should be preserved, they are a fantastic piece of history! Belmont street would likely make use of the lower ‘accomodation’ in their buildings as they would then have a ‘high rise’ view over the gardens – lovely! It would also means less shaded areas. They could use the existing arch and ‘road’ at HTM for one of the underground access points. Make valuable use of the Triple Kirks. Can we have a drop off childrens play place (underground obviously), maybe with some natural light, the city doesnt have one and they are a godsend – mums and dads would choose to shop nearby if there was one. What about a water feature for model boats or paddling if we were lucky enough which can double as an ice rink in winter?
The gardens could be great but not if they are turned into a SQUARE!
Jason Robertson I like your ideas.
Julie, I like your ideas – a childrens play place and water features would be wonderful…..
Kelly, the FAQ page on the consultation site is less revealing than the feasability study linked to (under “technical”). There you can see that of the £120-£140m estimate, £11.7m is allocated to the provision of 490 car parking spaces. That the FAQ page conceals this is misleading. The arts centre (“central” to the CSP) is allocated £8.2m – a mere £3.5m LESS than the cost of the car park. Why the cheaper element is “central” yet the more expensive one isn’t even mentioned is something that only Acsef and their PR folk can answer.
I myself have a master plan sitting on my desk. One day I hope to give some of my fortune back to the community, by building the worlds largest casino and titty bar on top of Duthie Park. The deal is this: I put up 0.05% of my cronies hard earned venture capital. The tax payer funds the rest of the project which will only cost £150M* and in exchange I am forced to take sole leasing rights to the completed structure.
Of course it will also be necessary to build 10,000 one bedroom exclusive luxury executive villas in order to fund my plan. But it will be an eco-village (the walls and roofs are made out of recycled paper), so that’s OK then 🙂
People will come from all over the world to see my masterpiece and this will add £££zillions upon £££zillions to my local economy. It will make Aberdeen the envy of the whole world. It will be just like the Taj Mahal but with slot machines and tits.
*that’s just the cost of the foundations. But we can’t leave it like that so clearly the tax payers will need to cough up another £350M to complete the project. This may necessitate the city taking out a loan (my brother-in-law’s private bank offers competitive rates). The tax payers could then spread the repayments over the rest of their working lives. IT WILL BE WORTH IT. Of course my one of my cronies construction companies are expected to win the tender for this work.
The Consultation DOES include the Brisac Gonzalez scheme in a roundabout way- if you look at the technical detail section http://www.thecitysquareproject.com/technical-detail/ it has a third option where the Peacock centre is incorporated into new landscaping which makes the gardens more accessible and actually looks quite good.
This third scheme is reminiscent of the Yokohama Ferry Terminal which has encouraged tourists to view it in much the way Bilbao’s Getty centre has.
Everyone here should take a closer look at this third option and comment on the Consultation website properly- it’s the only real feedback the Council will probably pay attention to.
Thanks fat cat for that. Titty bars is where its at. In fact i saw the best tit ever, Tom Smith.
Anyway tax payers money is for the wasting is it not. ‘Hello Sir, do you want something you have no clue about or do you want to be ridiculed as someone who has no worth?’
PUBLIC THAT WILL BE 500 GRAND!! NOW
Yet again in last night’s PRAVDA sorry I mean evening express even more (UN)biased options for the city’s “good and the great” this time (SOON TO BE SIR … if his firm doesn’t go bankrupt before the list is out next year) Mr Milne saying that the Union terrace gardens (sorry CITY SQUARE … what’s all that about ? have the council already renamed one of the most historic pieces of green space in the city already ?) project is “a vital piece of infrastructure that is badly needed to transform our city centre.” Wow now there is a statement “vital to the infrastructure of the City” more like vital to your recent purchase of the Triple Kirks site more like. He goes on to warned Aberdeen could become a “backwater” if it didn’t embrace the vision; this the same “backwater” of a city that has made you your £100’s of millions is it? Well if you’re talking about the same place you need to have a close look in the mirror Mr Milne as for as much as I feel that Sir Iain Wood’s (so called) £50 million offer for HIS project is an insult to the gardens at least he has made an offer and not just sat there counting his coppers like Ebenezer Struggle.
That brings me nicely to this (SO CALLED) £50 million … let’s all be honest he doesn’t have it; if he does “SHOW ME THE MONEY” it’s all talk nothing more if he wants’ real backing and respect for his project put the cash in a fund today … time to put up or shut up Sir Ian.
In yesterday’s paper he is saying if the product isn’t finalised soon he will draw his offer of the £50 million; so what’s this now a children’s playground game to you is it? “It’s my ball so if I don’t get to play am taking it with me” GROW UP Sir Iain, have some backbone and think about what is best for the city, it’s people and the greater future not just about your One man mission to leave behind a legacy after the guilt of sitting on your big pile of cash for the last 20 years and doing nothing for the city other than being a big LOCAL employer.
SORRY TYPO
…. in ref: to Sir Iain money offer …
WITH draw (not draw) his offer of the £50 million;
Sorry all but hey at least I blog from the heart.
J