Oct 182013

With thanks to Kenneth Watt.

UTG displayThe Friends of Union Terrace Gardens held their AGM on Saturday Oct 12. The meeting celebrated the group’s achievements over the past year, and discussed plans being proposed for the future of the gardens.

Robin Mcintosh was re-elected as chair of the group which seeks to campaign and act to improve and preserve the city’s green heart.

The group discussed John Halliday’s proposals to raise the gardens and voted to reject the outline plans on the grounds that it would involve too much structural change as well as the possibility of a car park under the park.

Also on the agenda was a discussion with council leader Barney Crockett who reaffirmed the administration’s commitment to keeping UTG as a Victorian park. He took on board feedback from the group who continued to express an appetite for more council-supported investment and improvements.

Robin Mcintosh said:

“Today’s meeting allowed us reflect on our successes from the last year: hundreds of new plants; secured funding for new furniture; sound relationships with council gardeners as well as being taken seriously in decisions being taken about the park at administration level.”

“The group was unanimous in its rejection for Halliday’s plans and instead looked to develop further our own alternative vision for the Gardens. Councillor Crockett was keen to hear our views and provided an insight in to what the administration in considering about city centre regeneration.”

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

  2 Responses to “Friends Of UTG Reject Halliday Plans At AGM”

  1. The Friends of Union Terrace Gardens have a vision. Their vision is for a tranquil place in our city centre where we can relax.

    John Halliday also has a vision, complete with artists impressions, but how believable are they? Remember the artists impressions for the failed City Garden Project? A significant number of impossibilities were flaunted to gull the citizenry. Let’s hope we are not being misled once again.

    Union Terrace Gardens are located on Common Good Lands. These are supposedly for the use of Aberdonians (and visitors), in perpetuity, not for some commercial interest to make a profit from.

    One final note: Aberdeen has a serious traffic problem. Could anyone explain to me how closing off streets is going to improve that situation? Where will the displaced traffic go? Perhaps one of Mrs Boulton’s famous “tunnels” will emerge on to the agenda?

  2. I agree that we must try and preserve as much of the original Union Terrace Gardens as we can whilst still making it a more attractive and accessible haven in the city centre. However, over the years, many of the mature trees have grown to such a size and height that a great part of the gardens is now in gloomy shade – one can now hardly see the gardens at all from Union Bridge. I would like to see most of these huge trees removed and replace by smaller ones to open up the gardens to as much natural sunlight as possible. I am also in total agreement that the gardens should NOT be raised to street level but I strongly feel that they could be raised to the level of the upper walkway and still retain the feature of a sunken, and sheltered, garden area. The area below should be made into a FREE car park to attract visitors to the gardens and to the city centre since current parking restrictions are deterring many from visiting the city centre at all. The current proposals to pedestrianise both Union Street AND Broad Street would be the death-knell of our once thriving city centre and the area would further deteriorate – where on earth is the displaced traffic supposed to be diverted?

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>