[indiekid]

An outsider's perspective, especially from a city like London is always appreciated. And your critique largely echoes our own. I'd happily pay higher taxes if I knew the money went towards public realm (and especially street trees)

 

[The Boy David]

We're all with you acquiescent, the state of our public realm in some places is absolutely shocking. Bafflingly so, and it drives us (on the forum at least), absolutely mad. We're not looking for the world; just some decent pavements! (and a bit more street sweeping as you pointed out)

I'm particularly pleased you picked up on the lack of trees - I blew a gasket on this very same issue just last week on another thread. I've never seen another city of Glasgow's stature that is so barren in places. It drives me mad!!

That said, delighted to hear that you had a good time here and that you think Glasgow's a cool place to be - I can't argue with you there! It's a fine city with some incredible architecture, fantastic districts, and a great city bustle. Let's just hope the Manchester forum doesn't get wind of your compliments, haha! (I think the guys in Brum have long since conceded their city is not up there with Gla or Manc )

 

[acquiescent]

We're all with you acquiescent, the state of our public realm in some places is absolutely shocking. Bafflingly so, and it drives us (on the forum at least), absolutely mad. We're not looking for the world; just some decent pavements! (and a bit more street sweeping as you pointed out)

I'm particularly pleased you picked up on the lack of trees - I blew a gasket on this very same issue just last week on another thread. I've never seen another city of Glasgow's stature that is so barren in places. It drives me mad!!

That said, delighted to hear that you had a good time here and that you think Glasgow's a cool place to be - I can't argue with you there! It's a fine city with some incredible architecture, fantastic districts, and a great city bustle. Let's just hope the Manchester forum doesn't get wind of your compliments, haha! (I think the guys in Brum have long since conceded their city is not up there with Gla or Manc )

Glad you liked my comments. As for Brum and Manc, I'm hugely interested in the rivalry between those two cities. It's fascinating how, when Brum really was second to London in almost every respect - in the 1960s - Westminster deliberately legislated to cut it down to size; whereas when Manchester occupies a similar position now, the government's wind is in its sails. Brummies are understandably aggrieved.

I'm actually a bit of a Birmophile - it's a great city, but it makes you work a bit harder than other cities for your reward; it doesn't present its many treasures on a platter. As for Manchester, well - I actually like the city itself very much - but I find the self-importance and crude evangelism of some of its proponents seriously offputting.

One of the things that elevates Glasgow above these two cities is the density of its residential architecture, tenements a uniquely Scottish phenomenon in the UK - which make residential areas seem properly urban (in a good way) rather than suburban. That's what makes Glasgow seem bigger and more metropolitan than Brum and Manc, which have really concentrated, built-up city centres surrounded by much lower-density development.

Having an Underground also helps - both Brum and Manc would love one of those, even if only one line that goes round in a circle!

 

[Torslander]

It does seem deeply ironic that a city nicknamed the Dear Green Place has so few trees throughout its public realm. They're pretty much an endangered species outside the parks. Even the lovely trees along Broomielaw are at risk of being removed to make room for ugly metal sheds.

The council should be forced to consider tree planting as part of every future piece of public realm undertaken across the city, unless there's a compelling reason they can't in that particular location. And it should be mandatory on every pedestrianised street.

 

[StephenP]

I've got to agree with you acquiescent, the pavement stuff is my pet hate about Glasgow along with the high levels of litter. However I hope a rise in council tax in the not too distant future will help towards this problem.

 

[david_gla]

I've got to agree with you acquiescent, the pavement stuff is my pet hate about Glasgow along with the high levels of litter. However I hope a rise in council tax in the not too distant future will help towards this problem.

At the risk of turning this political there is 0% chance of a rise in council tax anytime soon.

 

[milton]

I've got to agree with you acquiescent, the pavement stuff is my pet hate about Glasgow along with the high levels of litter. However I hope a rise in council tax in the not too distant future will help towards this problem.

I think that's on the cards. That said, if we just collected the already owed tax from the dodgers, then we'd have a lot of cash to spend on the city. Over £1bn is owed in Scotland since council tax began.
I don't know the most recent figures, but in 2009-10, Glasgow had £17m in unpaid tax! Some of that is from people who genuinely can't afford it, and that needs to be tackled as an issue in itself, but the fact remains that there are many local residents who are simply ripping-off the system.

How much litter can we collect with £17m in a year? How many extra employees can we have maintaining our parks?

 

[david_gla]

Council tax bills for this financial year have just been issued, 0% increase. It has been Scottish Government policy for years not to raise council tax, I can't see that changing until after May 2016 when the next Scottish Parliament elections are held. If the SNP are re elected I would expect council tax to remain held at its current rate or replaced by a new tax.

 

[Gommsta]

aa

 

[Charlie_]

I'd personally favour a Land Value Tax over a property tax - incentivizes rather than penalizes development/building improvements and also incentivizes density. It obviously also incentivizes the council to focus on projects that increase land values which more or less coincides with the types of spending most conducive to development/regeneration.

 

[Gommsta]

aa

 

[Sweet Zombie Jesus]

LVT (or something similar) was brought in a few times by Labour in the 60s/70s I think (corrent me if I'm wrong, I just remember was the mid 20th century) and was immediately abolished by the Conservative governments that followed. There's a possibility though that it could be brought in by the Scottish Government though. There's a better chance of SNP/Labour finding concensus on that one and if I remember rightly, there are people in Holyrood looking into a council tax alternative, although no proposals have came out yet.

 

[Charlie_]

I think GCC commissioned a study into its viability a couple of years back? but i don't know what became of it. I guess it'd be easier politically to push through at the city level than national level because you wouldn't have the big land rural land owners lobbying against it?..... although its positive secondary effects would obviously be weaker since it'd be set at a lower level

 

[madsidsav]

LVT (or something similar) was brought in a few times by Labour in the 60s/70s I think (corrent me if I'm wrong, I just remember was the mid 20th century) and was immediately abolished by the Conservative governments that followed.

The LVT definitely sounds good in theory. Does anyone know if there was increased construction during these years?

 

[Charlie_]

The 1931 Labour budget included a land value tax, but before it came into force it was repealed by the Conservative-dominated National Government that followed shortly after.[54]

An attempt at introducing site value taxation in the administrative County of London was made by the local authority under the leadership of Herbert Morrison in the 1938–9 Parliament, called the London Rating (Site Values) Bill. Although it failed, it sets out detailed legislation for the implementation of a system of land value taxation using annual value assessment.[55]

After 1945, the Labour Party adopted the policy, against the opposition of a substantial body of MPs, of attempting to collect "development value": the increase in land price arising from planning consent. This was one of the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act 1947 and it was repealed when the Labour government lost power in 1951.

 

[Jimbob]

If I remember correctly, when I was living in Toronto there were tonnes of art installations, statues, greenery outside all of the new builds. My local friend pointed out that under Ontario law if a developer wins the right to build there they need to put something into public realm as well. I thought it was a great idea, it should definitely be done here.

 

[Gommsta]

aa

 

[milton]

I'm not entirely sold on this render, however this is the sort of community project I'd like to see all over the city:

http://www.moflococo.org/?page_id=77

Grow MoFlo
In 2014 the Community Council was awarded £2400 of Glasgow City Council funding from the Langside Area Partnership to kick off the project.

GrowMoFlo is an environmental project aimed at building on the wonderful community spirit of Mount Florida, to make ours a cleaner, greener and even better place to live.

In partnership with Urban Roots, CARCAP, Mount Florida Primary School and Glasgow City Council, we held a launch event in September 2014. The event was an opportunity for folk to discuss ideas, concerns and aspirations in relation to the environment of Mount Florida. The event was attended by 50 people and resulted in two environmental priorities:

1. Letherby Triangle Re-modelling

A re-modelling of the Letherby triangle and surrounding road infrastructure is proposed for the following reasons:

To help improve the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.
To help improve the safety of children and adults accessing Mount Florida Primary School.
To provide a multi-functional civic space for Mount Florida. A place for meeting, markets, celebratory events, growing and leisure.
To foster community spirit and enhance the physical identity of Mount Florida.
We will be undertaking an extensive public consultation over the next few months.

2. Back Court Landscape improvements

Landscape improvements to the back court located between McLennan Street, Clincart Road, Florida Street and Florida Drive. A consultation event was held in March 2015 and resulted in the following wish list for the back quad:

A place to play
Growing fruit and vegetables
Growing flowers and climbers
A place to relax (benches, deck chairs)
A place to socialise (trellis, gazebo, barbeque)
A bright clean garden (currently overgrown and a dumping ground)
Regular refuse clean up
Feed the birds
A treehouse/gang hut to play
A well-kept lawn
Other Projects:

A couple of other environmental projects are already under way:

Stanmore Social Community Garden located between Stanmore Road and Cumming Drive, which was launched on the 8th August 2014, and is a partnership project between Stanmore Social, Cathcart & District Housing Association and Urban Roots. for updates on this project, follow the Stanmore Social Facebook page.

Adoption of Mount Florida Train Station – Scot Rail have agreed to allow MoFloCoCo to beautify the station by installing raised flower beds and hanging baskets.

What I'll also say is this: given that Mount Florida is seen by countless thousands of visitors and residents visiting Hampden, it is nothing short of a disgrace the way it is treated. There is rubbish everywhere, zero attractive public realm, and the station should be one of the best looking in the city, as opposed to the drab hole that it is.
I'd bulldoze the building, replace it with something akin to Maxwell Park's station, and have planting everywhere (and for God's sake, maintain it!).

How much money does this area gift the city's economy? It must be in the tens of millions, yet other than profiting a few local takeaways, the area actually suffers from hosting events! It's left looking like a bomb-site, residents can't park on certain streets, and no-one seems to care.
Change definitely needed.

 

[Charlie_]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28309787


:cheers:

Any word on this?

 

[dadabouttown]

Glad you liked my comments. As for Brum and Manc, I'm hugely interested in the rivalry between those two cities. It's fascinating how, when Brum really was second to London in almost every respect - in the 1960s - Westminster deliberately legislated to cut it down to size; whereas when Manchester occupies a similar position now, the government's wind is in its sails. Brummies are understandably aggrieved.

I'm actually a bit of a Birmophile - it's a great city, but it makes you work a bit harder than other cities for your reward; it doesn't present its many treasures on a platter. As for Manchester, well - I actually like the city itself very much - but I find the self-importance and crude evangelism of some of its proponents seriously offputting.

One of the things that elevates Glasgow above these two cities is the density of its residential architecture, tenements a uniquely Scottish phenomenon in the UK - which make residential areas seem properly urban (in a good way) rather than suburban. That's what makes Glasgow seem bigger and more metropolitan than Brum and Manc, which have really concentrated, built-up city centres surrounded by much lower-density development.

Having an Underground also helps - both Brum and Manc would love one of those, even if only one line that goes round in a circle!

I couldn't agree more. I always get that feeling in Manchester/Birmingham of sudden transition from centre outwards to low rise, low density, lack of place. And of less historic fabric in the centre to retain and respect.

Successful placemaking development should in theory be more widespread in Glasgow because there are many more jigsaw pieces in place to build upon.

Most of the buildings and places we admire now in Glasgow - and which appealed to Acquiescent owe their appeal to ambition and a contextual approach that creates a sense of place.

My biggest wish is that the planners to bear this much more in mind when creating entirely new places (Pacific Quay?), building upon a core (Canals quarter/Spiers Wharf?) or simply filling a central site (110 Queen Street? Buchanan Centre extension?)....