EnvironmentNo Kingsford Stadium

Council planners find multiple flaws in stadium environmental reports

see council website, here (document since removed from ACC site, download from our link here)  they raise a multitude of concerns, omissions and problems regarding the ‘Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping report’ which has been submitted to them by AFC and their team. This ‘scoping report’  is a report detailing what they will or won’t look at in their environmental impact assessment. Are the team employed by AFC trying to rush these plans through? Are they attempting to pull the wool over the planner’s eyes and talking down the potential impacts? From the council’s own comments and our reading of the documents submitted so far, it would seem that they are. The council highlights a large number of issues, including:

screen-shot-2016-07-31-at-07-50-15Green Belt

They say “Alternative sites, relative merits etc, need to be considered in the context of the plan/policy departures needed for this site. The proposed development is located on green belt land, directly against policies NE1 and NE2” (policies NE1 and NE2 are about green space).

Cycle route

 “The assessment should also acknowledge that this is an important and busy cycling corridor between Aberdeen, Kingswells and Prime Four business areas, with the potential for conflict between different forms of travel with additional vehicle crossings”.


The traffic assessment plans are inadequate.  The council planners say “ The traffic assessment is considering the year of opening only, which would not take into account future developments in already allocated sites. It should include a cumulative assessment of traffic levels when all identified and planned development in the area has been completed to ascertain what effect the stadium proposal, an unallocated site, would have on LDP planned development”. (n.b. LDP is the local development plan which is how the council allocate and zone local development. This site is not zoned for development, it is green belt).


On the socioeconomics, the planning team say “A general weakness of the socio-economic impact assessment is its treatment of impacts on the “local level” …as being synonymous with impacts on  “regional level” and/or the “national level”…… The overall benefits of the proposed project to Aberdeen City or the region do not automatically translate into benefits for the communities in the local level (Kingsford, Kingswells, and possibly Westhill). They go on to highlight 6 areas that the developers need to look at, including employment, changes to where people will live locally and who might live there, local house prices and rents, effects on local police, fire, recreation and transport services, local finances, lifestyle/quality of life including but not limited to potential drink driving issues and community stress and conflict; integration, cohesion and alienation.


Both the city council planners and our own ecologist at No Kingsford Stadium group, are critical of the lack of consideration given to badger and otters, which are protected species. AFC’s ecological consultants had decided to not do a badger survey as they hadn’t chanced upon any badger signs yet.  The council say they need to do a proper badger survey. Our ecologist (who is trained in badger surveys), points out that badger signs are only seen in winter months and a quick walk about in the summer months when vegetation is high, is unlikely to reveal badgers. The council also criticise the assumption that any otters would be unlikely to be affected. They say “ at this stage it is too early to accept this, as there are no details of the proposals available. It would depend on the design of the proposals and any direct or indirect impacts on otter usage of the site” Our own ecologist agrees with the council on this and also agrees they need to look at disturbance of these species from noise and light, and not just from building on their habitat.

Contaminated land

They also raise concerns as to what will be done with construction waste and possible contaminated land.


They ask  AFC whether they have considered climate change and the risks of flooding. Given that there may be a lot of hard standing on the site, this could have the potential to increase flood risk elsewhere. This would not be allowed.


“Retention of the key characteristics of open, unbuilt character in line with the approach in the Aberdeen Landscape Strategy is central to this assessment”. ——- This document (see council website, here) highlights key reasons why this stadium cannot be built in this location.  The No Kingsford Stadium Group, constituted from residents of Westhill and Kingswells, shares all the concerns raised in this report from Aberdeen City Council.   You can support our campaign by giving what you can here.

Give Directly To The Campaign Fund


Contribute to our IndieGoGo Campaign

We’ve had an amazing response to our first IndieGoGo Campaign. We raised over £3000 in direct donations and via IndieGoGo.  We’ve already used some of that money to engage in publicity activities and to begin to approach a number of consultants however, we’ve been informed that we will need a significant level of funding to challenge these proposals via all possible means. Hence, we’ve launched our new IndieGoGo Campaign.


One thought on “Council planners find multiple flaws in stadium environmental reports

  1. As a resident of Westhill, I’ve tried to keep an open mind about this project. However, in my opinion the club wasted a golden opportunity at the consultation events to get local people onside. There are so many legitimate questions and concerns for our community, yet the club had so few answers. The sense I get from talking to people who are close to the club is that this project MUST happen, given past failures at Loirston and Kingswells. I believe this mindset is driving the lack of rigour and attention to detail that is needed for such an important project.
    For all those in favour of a new stadium at Kingsford – I respect your right to have this viewpoint. For all those not in favour – please make your voices and concerns heard, it is absolutely crucial that all opinions are aired because there is a great deal of influence and will in the camp of Aberdeen FC.
    Final thought – for those of you watching the TV programme “Scotland’s Game”, there are some timely reminders in there for clubs that over-extend themselves. It is difficult to see how the club could possibly finance this project given the state of the local economy and the relatively weak investment proposition that is Scottish football.
    Thank you to Say No To Kingsford Stadium for their time and efforts to ensure everyone’s eyes are open.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.