As a name, the Golden Z gives a bit to unpack. The moniker is a shorthand for the central shopping parades of Glasgow - the grand, historic boulevard of Buchanan Street creating a spine between Blythswood New Town and the Merchant City, joining Sauchiehall Street at the north and Argyle Street in the south.
For a pedant, it's not technically a Z. And it certainly, for now, is anything but golden.
While Buchanan Street has managed to retain its glinting upmarket glamour, despite key sites such as the neo-classical Royal Bank building lying vacant, the beleaguered Sauchiehall and Argyle streets are more leaden: they have been left in poor shape by multiple large scale fires, the economic downturn seeing off businesses from the city centre and an air of general decline.
There is a tendency to hyperbole when it comes to discussing the state of the city centre. It's the sort of vibe you see on community Facebook groups when residents irritated by fly tipping start gnashing their teeth over "rats the size of cats".
Glasgow city centre's problems are bad, but they're proportionate to a city the size of Glasgow and they are not uncommon to the scenes seen on other high streets around the UK.
The local administration has big plans to revamp the area - but the question remains as to whether these are all big talk and little more.
A glossy and ambitious recent report, A Vision and Plan for the Golden Z, was trumpeted at a large scale launch in August this year, inviting businesses, landlords, residents, and people using the city centre to attend and contribute.
The report makes plain just why the so-called Golden Z is vital: it is the centre of a region that is home to 35% of the Scottish population. It goes on: "it is an economic revenue generator, and an employment generator.
"It is the architectural, employment, and cultural epicentre of the region."
The report adds to this list: "People like it", which I enjoyed as a important element of many things that's often overlooked as we examine more weighty issues.
The most weighty issue here is: who's paying for it?
It's one thing to have lofty ambitions to completely reimagine a city centre as important as Glasgow's but entirely another to lure investment and encourage spending. An omission from much of the talk of the Golden Z's new dawn is who is investing.
Alongside capital investment and private investment, there also needs to be a push to encourage spending in the local economy - which is done by making the city centre fit with the needs of modern workers and shoppers whose habits have changed post-pandemic.
Shoppers are headed to out of town malls while office workers are working from home and no longer spending in city centre coffee shops on their lunch hours, grabbing a pint on the way home or picking up some shopping on their breaks. Encouraging staff back to offices is a challenge out of the hands of the council.
The situation is also a little chicken and egg: to make the city centre attractive to consumers and employees, it has to be attractive to consumers and employees.
Transformation of the city centre's fortunes also comes with the small matter of issues such as improving public transport - a whole other column in itself - and battling against critics of net zero plans such as the Low Emissions Zone.
The LEZ implementation and subsequent court challenge can be seen as a lesson in what can go wrong when plans are perceived as too onerous or ambitious for businesses.
But ambition is necessary here to ensure Glasgow's heart is attractive and sustainable for the future: office space will have to sit alongside new residential properties, residential and commercial properties will have to mix with increased greenspace and leisure spaces. The most dramatic changes in the city centre will be the redevelopment of both the St Enoch Centre and Buchanan Galleries.
The plans are exciting and bold but Glasgow City Council will also need the tools to ensure it can deal with issues such as vacant property - one such lever being compulsory sales orders (CSOs), a mechanism talked about by the Scottish Government and MSPs for at least 10 years.
Legislation currently exists to allow compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) and these have been used to good effect by Glasgow's council, buying up empty properties in disrepair around the city and ensuring they are brought back into good use.
It can be slow work, although it is effect. CSOs, on the other hand, are arguably faster and more effective because they pressure absentee landlords to gainfully use property or see the local authority force a sale at public auction.
In this very paper, earlier this month, Ivan McKee MSP and former business minister suggested it is "key" to give "councils full powers to vary relevant taxes and make use of compulsory sales orders". Susan Aitken, leader of Glasgow City Council, has also said that CSOs are necessary to help the council progress with plans to improve the city centre.
But 10 years later there's still a wait for politicians at Holyrood to do something about enacting the powers.
Local councillor Soryia Siddique recently asked a question at full council on this issue. Dr Siddique, of Labour, asked for an update on "discussions that have taken place between the administration and the Scottish Government regarding the manifesto commitment to introduce legislation to give Glasgow City Council powers to make CSOs following the leader's public statement that Glasgow needs this power".
Ms Aitken responded that the administration in the city has been discussing the issue with the government for "for years". She goes on to say that having CSO power would be an "important tool" in "removing blight in our communities".
The Scottish Government has said it plans to set up an advisory panel to look at options for reforming CPOs and on CSOs we wait.
On replenishing the Golden Z, Glasgow cannot wait. The city council will say that plans are well developed and well underway but turning lead into gold requires not alchemy but a huge amount of energy - and money. We wait.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel