Skip to content
project banner

Vote for your preferred option

View 6 illustrated improvement options and read key considerations for each option. Please note these AI generated images are starting points to inspire discussion and are not intended to represent a final design. 

Once you've looked at the options vote for your preferred option from the drop-down menu.  

Voting closes at noon on Friday 14 November.

The option chosen will need to meet all legal requirements, including planning permission, building regulations, and flood prevention. After that, we'll look at the likely costs, and the final project will be shaped by what immediate residents prefer.

Improvement options


Option 1 - flower beds , seating and through path

  • Cost: Moderate (landscaping, benches, path installation), ongoing maintenance costs.
  • Maintenance: Regular upkeep of plants and path; could involve community gardening group.
  • Accessibility: Good if path suitable for wheelchairs and prams; path surface will be a consideration.
  • Community Use: High, a place to relax and socialise.
  • Impact on Area: Attractive and welcoming
  • Climate Friendly: Yes, supports biodiversity and green space


Option 2 - wide path and grassed borderoption 2 - wide path and grass border

  • Cost: Low, minimal landscaping; ongoing grass cutting/ path upkeep costs.
  • Maintenance: Grass cutting and path upkeep.
  • Accessibility: Good, wide path suitable for all users; path surface will be a consideration.
  • Community Use: Moderate, mainly for walking through. Less for socialising.
  • Impact on Area: Tidy and simple, but less attractive and engaging.
  • Climate Friendly: Some benefits as grass provides greenery but limited biodiversity.


Option 3 - fruit trees, raised planters and grass

  • Cost: Moderate (trees, planters, and installation); ongoing maintenance and grass cutting costs.
  • Maintenance: Seasonal care for trees and planters; could involve community gardening group.
  • Accessibility: Fair, raised beds and open layout; grass can be a challenging surface for manual wheelchair users.
  • Community Use: High, potential for shared gardening and produce.
  • Impact on Area: Strong, encourages community pride and activity.
  • Climate Friendly: Yes, supports biodiversity and green space.


Option 4 - raised beds, seating and surrounding pathoption 4 - raised beds, seating and surrounding path

  • Cost: Moderate (raised beds, path and seating); ongoing maintenance costs
  • Maintenance: Regular plant care and path surface upkeep; could involve community gardening group.
  • Accessibility: Fair, path surface will be a consideration.
  • Community Use: Moderate, good for sitting and relaxing
  • Impact on Area: Attractive and welcoming
  • Climate Friendly: Yes, supports planting and green space


Option 5 - play park and seatingoption 5 - play park and seating

  • Cost: High (play equipment, benches and landscaping)
  • Maintenance: Ongoing safety checks and landscaping; Council responsibility
  • Accessibility: Good, designed for families and children
  • Community Use: High, especially for families. Rothes has recently upgraded its playpark, so duplication may be an issue.
  • Impact on Area: Positive, active and family-friendly. Consider impact on nearby homes due to noise or increased activity.
  • Climate Friendly: Moderate, depends on materials and planting


Option 6 - parkingoption 6 - parking

  • Cost: High (surfacing and marking).
  • Maintenance: Surface upkeep; Council responsibility.
  • Purpose: Provides parking for vehicles, but not social or recreational use.
  • Community Use: Low, functional rather than social purpose.
  • Impact on Area: Neutral to negative, reduces green space and community feel.
  • Climate Friendly: No as increases hard surfacing, reduces greenery. Tarmacing over the area can lead to poor water drainage and increased surface runoff, potentially impacting nearby areas.


1.  

Vote for the option you prefer most here.

Further comments (optional)