WORK to secure funding to transform a city garden will get under way after residents voted in favour of the controversial £140 million project.
People in Aberdeen voted by a majority of more than 4000 in favour of the proposal to turn Union Terrace Gardens into the Granite Web, 70,000sq ft of green space along with a cultural and arts centre, a café and two new plazas.
The issue has divided opinion in the Granite City, but after the ballot papers were counted yesterday, 45,301 people had voted for the project – which will be backed by up to £85m of tycoon Sir Ian Wood's money – compared with 41,175 who wanted to retain the gardens.
A total of 86,825 votes were cast online, by telephone or by post, including spoiled papers, out of 165,830 ballot papers which were issued – a 52% turnout.
It means that just over 27% of people eligible to vote in the city did so to voice their support for the project.
Oil services tycoon Sir Ian said he was conscious of the narrow margin of victory for his vision and how divisive the issue had become.
He said: "The referendum result inevitably gives the impression of winners and losers, but today it's the citizens of Aberdeen and future generations that have won.
"The majority vote is in favour of this exciting opportunity to regenerate and transform our city centre."
Planning will now begin towards realising the vision of the Granite Web, the winning design which will raise the gardens and spread them over the road and railway.
Aberdeen City Council will proceed with a Tax Incremental Financing application to the Scottish Government's Scottish Futures Trust in an attempt to secure a maximum contribution of £70m for the project and a further £22m for other parts of the city centre regeneration.
The council will also negotiate an agreement with the Aberdeen City Gardens Trust (ACGT) to make council-owned land available for the scheme. The land will remain council-owned and assets on the land will become council property.
Sir Ian said the small majority indicated there was still a lot to do to convince some people of the exciting merits of the city centre regeneration.
He added: "I thoroughly regret the divisive nature of the debate over the last three years but I really hope, now that democracy has spoken, those who have voted against will accept the outcome and participate in developing this exciting vision."
Mike Shepherd, of campaign group Friends of Union Terrace Gardens, which fought hard against the development, said the group would now have to consider what to do next.
Aberdeen City Council leader Callum McCaig said: "This has been a hugely important issue for the people of Aberdeen and I think the strength of feeling has been reflected in the turnout, which has far exceeded many people's expectations."
The result was welcomed by Colin Crosby, director of ACGT, as a positive outcome. He said: "There is now a mandate to progress the project and the wider city centre regeneration which it unlocks."
He also called on Aberdonians to forget their differences. "The vote was very close and the project has caused a divide across the city," he said.
"It is therefore important that everyone involved comes together in the best interests of the city to deliver the regeneration scheme which will benefit citizens, businesses and visitors alike."
Charles Renfro, of the New York-based Diller, Scofidio + Renfro architecture and design studio which produced the chosen Granite Web proposal, said: "We are thrilled that the public have come out in favour of the City Garden Project, albeit by a small majority.
"This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring a new pulse to the heart of Aberdeen though year-round activities and ground-breaking design."
He added that the design would be fine-tuned to deliver a project "for all Aberdeen to use and enjoy".
He said: "We are convinced that this park will become the pride and joy of the city in the years to come and we will work hard to convince everyone of that in the coming months."
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 hereComments are closed on this article