West end residents in Aberdeen claim a neighbouring science centre’s makeshift car park has drastically increased traffic through their quiet street – and even driven away owls from the area.
The James Hutton Institute created a temporary overflow car park just off Macaulay Drive about 18 months ago.
Campus bosses formed it while a new access route was being built to the centre from Countesswells Road, and work was taking place on the existing parking area.
It was used by construction crews and staff, but architects for the institute say it was also welcomed by families visiting the nearby Scouts base and neighbouring nursery.
But the work on the existing car park finished in August, and it has still been used since then.
And James Hutton leaders recently sought permission from Aberdeen City Council to keep it there permanently – to be used when the other one is full, and for “community use”.
But Macaulay Drive residents lashed out at the idea, claiming they had endured months of traffic disruption and pleaded for the local authority to knock back the application.
Why did James Hutton Institute want another car park?
The space was previously used for storage purposes, with a few greenhouses.
According to documents sent to the council, the campus wanted to keep the car park in place “to support plans to create an Open Science Campus and integrate it further into the community”.
What do residents say about the proposals?
However, residents living in properties worth about £700,000 in the leafy area of the west end said the makeshift car park didn’t fit in.
Macaulay Drive man Hugh Keir branded it an “eyesore” in a letter of objection sent to the council.
Mr Keir said: “This is not an appropriate area for a car park, this application should be refused and the area reinstated.
“A significant negative impact has been felt by residents of Macaulay Drive over the preceding months.
“During this time the proposed site was used as a temporary car park which, in addition to being an eyesore, increased the noise and pollution which was audible and in close proximity to our home.
“Owls, deer, foxes, red squirrels and bats were seen and heard on a daily/nightly basis and there has been a distinct change in this.”
And Jackie Hodzic, another Macaulay Drive resident, said the temporary parking spot had led to more noise in the area.
Mrs Hodzic added: “We used to hear owls every night in this area, the increased lighting and traffic seems to have scared them off.”
‘Increased risk of traffic incidents with pedestrians’
Craigiebuckler and Seafield Community Council objected to the plans over fears that it could result in more traffic on Macaulay Drive.
The community council said: “Macaulay Drive is in a residential area with many young children and dog walkers coming through.
“The increase in traffic, generated by a permanent car park on the proposed site, will increase the risk of a road traffic incident involving a pedestrian.”
Was anyone in favour of the James Hutton Institute car park?Â
But some could see the benefits of the added parking spaces.
Caroline Fenton, manager of the nearby First Class Nursery, said it helped accommodate the recent rise in children attending the nursery.
Ms Fenton added: “My staff and families are forced to park on Macaulay Drive, which then brings into account the safety aspects such as families with multiple children having to exit the car on the road instead of the pavement.”
Do you think the James Hutton Institute car park plans should have been refused? Let us know in our comments section below
Why did council refuse the plans?
But Aberdeen City Council has sided with residents, and has now refused James Hutton Institute’s car park plans for for several reasons – including it “promoting car use”.
Papers stated: “The car park results in the loss of the open space as a public amenity, which supported local biodiversity and contributed to the local landscape character.
“Whilst the site is not in a prominent location, the absence of soft and hard landscape design, and the finish in hardcore aggregate and mats, have an informal appearance that detract from the visual amenity of the area.”
They add: “The proposal incentivises and thus likely increases reliance on private car travel to the surrounding uses, disincentivising the use of more sustainable modes of travel, including local public transport.”
You can see the plans for yourself here.
Read more:
- ‘Fed up’ Woodside neighbours fight to shut unauthorised Aberdeen garage leaving ‘damaged cars abandoned outside’
- Plans to demolish 150-year-old Lodge Hotel at Old Rayne approved with ‘no chance of it being resurrected’
- ‘It’s like a dream’: Huge new nursery at Fraserburgh Beach gets go-ahead
Conversation