Latest news with #TransportandEnvironmentCommittee
Edinburgh Reporter
a day ago
- Politics
- Edinburgh Reporter
Another delay to Edinburgh bus lane trial announced
Another delay to a bus lane trial that has been pushed back for six years will mean 'public transport will suffer', a city councillor has warned. Edinburgh's Green group has been pushing for the introduction of '7-7-7' bus lanes – ones open from 7am to 7pm, seven days a week – across the capital since 2015. A trial was supposed to begin at the start of this year, but traffic regulation issues and difficulty getting funding has now seen it shoved it back to February 2026. Green councillor and co-leader Kayleigh Kinross-O'Neill said the delay was 'disappointing', and would aid in worsening the congestion faced by the city's bus network. In 2019, Edinburgh's transport committee voted for a consultation to be held ahead of a trial of the scheme, with the survey running at the end of the year. But the results of the consultation were never passed on to councillors due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2022, the scheme was revived when councillors voted to have officers explore the feasibility of rolling out 7-7-7 bus lanes in the capital. It is unclear what progress was made with this, but two years later, in February 2024, councillors at the Transport and Environment Committee voted to have officers develop plans for a trial. And in August last year they approved the trial, which would have seen 7-7-7 bus lanes be rolled out along the length of the 44 bus route by the first quarter of 2025 – but no trial has come. At a meeting of the transport committee last Thursday, a councillor asked officers for more information on why the scheme was delayed yet again. Green councillor and co-convener Chas Booth said: 'The original committee decision from August of last year stated that the trial would start in the first quarter of 2025 – so that's already at least three months delayed. 'Can I ask what is the reason for the delay, and whether we have a new date for the trial to start?' Council officer Deborah Patton said: 'There are probably two main reasons. One is around orders, overlapping [traffic regulation orders] which needs to be sorted out, but will hopefully be sorted out later this year. 'The other really crucial one is funding for this piece of work. We had hoped that we would be able to secure some funding from Transport Scotland's bus infrastructure fund, and indeed have submitted a proposal for that to Transport Scotland several months ago. 'However, unfortunately, at the time of speaking today, we still haven't heard whether that bus infrastructure fund is going forward or not.' Another officer, Jamie Robertson, said the council is aiming to complete preparatory works for the trial by February 2026. Cllr Booth continued: 'Obviously, there is a long history to this. Committee, I think four years ago, even more, agreed to the roll-out of 7-7-7 bus lanes across the city. 'And now, we've seen a delay to just the very limited trial that committee agreed to last year.' Council officer Gareth Barwell said: 'We'll have to look at some form of a plan B on the funding of this if it's not successful. 'This is an important thing to do. We'll continue to push contacts at Transport Scotland and we'll keep members updated if we'll have to look at using resources differently.' Cllr Booth asked Mr Barwell if councillors could be provided with a written brief on the issues facing the trial. Mr Barwell said he was happy to do it. Labour councillor and Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'I think that would be helpful. I think if there's anything we can do as councillors to apply pressure in the right places to maybe speed up funding decisions, certainly as convener, I'm more than happy to do that. 'But maybe collectively as committee it's something we can take a brief on and take offline, and decide what a plan B might look like. 'I think it's fair to say, I'm slightly disappointed that it's taken so long to get to this point, and that we haven't managed to make as much progress as I would like to see. 'I want to see if there's any ways in which we could maybe speed this up.' Several other cities in the UK, including Glasgow, have rolled out 7-7-7 bus lane schemes. And in some parts of the country, bus lanes stay closed to other traffic 24/7. Cllr O'Neill said: 'It was disappointing to be told in Committee that there have been delays to the 7-7-7 trial. 'While we wait, more and more buses will be stuck in congestion and our public transport network will suffer for it. 'Funding is an issue across the board and we understand this, however we need the council to be transparent and explain what is needed. 'If this doesn't happen, how can we expect the public to come on the just transition with us?' Cllr Jenkinson said: 'Making public transport more efficient, reliable, and reducing journey times, are key objectives for us. 'I share the frustration over the delayed roll-out of this trial. Officers are working with transport partners to secure the necessary funding and progress experimental traffic orders to deliver improved bus priority infrastructure.' By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Edinburgh Live
2 days ago
- Politics
- Edinburgh Live
Seven year delay of Edinburgh bus lane trial 'will see public transport suffer'
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Another delay to a bus lane trial that has been pushed back for six years will mean 'public transport will suffer', a city councillor has warned. Edinburgh's Green group has been pushing for the introduction of '7-7-7' bus lanes – ones open from 7am to 7pm, seven days a week – across the capital since 2015. A trial was supposed to begin at the start of this year, but traffic regulation issues and difficulty getting funding has now seen it shoved it back to February 2026. Green councillor and co-leader Kayleigh Kinross-O'Neill said the delay was 'disappointing', and would aid in worsening the congestion faced by the city's bus network. In 2019, Edinburgh's transport committee voted for a consultation to be held ahead of a trial of the scheme, with the survey running at the end of the year. But the results of the consultation were never passed on to councillors due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2022, the scheme was revived when councillors voted to have officers explore the feasibility of rolling out 7-7-7 bus lanes in the capital. It is unclear what progress was made with this, but two years later, in February 2024, councillors at the Transport and Environment Committee voted to have officers develop plans for a trial. And in August last year they approved the trial, which would have seen 7-7-7 bus lanes be rolled out along the length of the 44 bus route by the first quarter of 2025 – but no trial has come. At a meeting of the transport committee last Thursday, a councillor asked officers for more information on why the scheme was delayed yet again. Green councillor and co-convener Chas Booth said: 'The original committee decision from August of last year stated that the trial would start in the first quarter of 2025 – so that's already at least three months delayed. 'Can I ask what is the reason for the delay, and whether we have a new date for the trial to start?' Council officer Deborah Patton said: 'There are probably two main reasons. One is around orders, overlapping [traffic regulation orders] which needs to be sorted out, but will hopefully be sorted out later this year. 'The other really crucial one is funding for this piece of work. We had hoped that we would be able to secure some funding from Transport Scotland's bus infrastructure fund, and indeed have submitted a proposal for that to Transport Scotland several months ago. 'However, unfortunately, at the time of speaking today, we still haven't heard whether that bus infrastructure fund is going forward or not.' Another officer, Jamie Robertson, said the council is aiming to complete preparatory works for the trial by February 2026. Cllr Booth continued: 'Obviously, there is a long history to this. Committee, I think four years ago, even more, agreed to the roll-out of 7-7-7 bus lanes across the city. 'And now, we've seen a delay to just the very limited trial that committee agreed to last year.' Council officer Gareth Barwell said: 'We'll have to look at some form of a plan B on the funding of this if it's not successful. 'This is an important thing to do. We'll continue to push contacts at Transport Scotland and we'll keep members updated if we'll have to look at using resources differently.' Cllr Booth asked Mr Barwell if councillors could be provided with a written brief on the issues facing the trial. Mr Barwell said he was happy to do it. Labour councillor and Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'I think that would be helpful. I think if there's anything we can do as councillors to apply pressure in the right places to maybe speed up funding decisions, certainly as convener, I'm more than happy to do that. "But maybe collectively as committee it's something we can take a brief on and take offline, and decide what a plan B might look like. 'I think it's fair to say, I'm slightly disappointed that it's taken so long to get to this point, and that we haven't managed to make as much progress as I would like to see. 'I want to see if there's any ways in which we could maybe speed this up.' Several other cities in the UK, including Glasgow, have rolled out 7-7-7 bus lane schemes. And in some parts of the country, bus lanes stay closed to other traffic 24/7. Cllr O'Neill said: 'It was disappointing to be told in Committee that there have been delays to the 7-7-7 trial. 'While we wait, more and more buses will be stuck in congestion and our public transport network will suffer for it. 'Funding is an issue across the board and we understand this, however we need the council to be transparent and explain what is needed. 'If this doesn't happen, how can we expect the public to come on the just transition with us?' Cllr Jenkinson said: 'Making public transport more efficient, reliable, and reducing journey times, are key objectives for us. 'I share the frustration over the delayed roll-out of this trial. Officers are working with transport partners to secure the necessary funding and progress experimental traffic orders to deliver improved bus priority infrastructure.'
Scotsman
5 days ago
- Politics
- Scotsman
Readers' Letters: George Street revamp money should be spent fixing roads
The latest pricey attempt by councillors to bring a European-style cafe culture to cold Edinburgh puzzles a reader who's just trying to avoid all the potholes Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Edinburgh Council's Transport and Environment Committee have approved a revamp of George Street at an estimated cost of £35 million. Add to this a further loss of over £3m from parking charge revenue. Further costs to the city are bound to be incurred over the projected two-year period of the construction phase. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The council recently estimated that some £86m would be required to restore the Capital's roads from their current potholed-riddled state. Edinburgh councillors ideal vision for George Street would see the current parking down the centre of the street removed, buses rerouted, the pavement widened and vehicles excluded for most of the day Given that there is a constant claim of underfunding, council officials should concentrate on addressing current issues rather than proposing yet another vanity project – £38m would provide a good start for the restoration of the city's roads and pavements, making it safer for road users and pedestrians alike. Derek Stevenson, Edinburgh Go compare 'The mullahs, enmeshed in corruption and incompetence, have squandered the nation's wealth on funding terror and proxy militias. The Iranian economy now lies in ruins, strangled by mismanagement' (Struan Stevenson, Perspective, 24 June). There are some fascinating similarities here with another regime rather closer to home. Tehran preaches Islamic fundamentalism; the Scottish Government embraces such lunacy as gender identity politics, universal basic income and Green anti-nuclear ideology. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The mad mullahs blame Israel as well as that 'Great Satan' the United States and its allies for problems they themselves have created, while the Scottish Government does likewise by demonising England and Donald Trump. Following a mercifully brief stint as First Minister, former SNP leader Humzah Yousaf and his acolytes seem to spend most of their time nowadays criticising every Israeli air strike and military action in the region, calling for sanctions against the Jewish state. They're clearly far more concerned with the Middle East than tedious old domestic issues. Just as the ruling Iranian clerics have wasted their country's money on arming terrorist organisations, the separatists in charge at Holyrood have poured money down the drain by deliberately implementing policies that diverge from the rest of the UK purely for the sake of being different, no matter how ludicrous or unworkable. And let's not forget the cost of commissioning all those endless independence papers. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and First Minister John Swinney: two clueless fanatics proudly running their respective countries into the ground. Martin O'Gorman, Edinburgh Follow the logic John Swinney believes that Professor Iain Gillespie, the disgraced former Principal of Dundee University, should hand back his £150,000 pay-off, stating: 'Given the awfulness of the handling of the finances of Dundee, it is the reasonable thing to do' ('Return £150K pay off, uni chief is urged', 27 June). Where to start with this total lack of self-awareness? Given the awfulness of Michael Matheson claiming for the astronomical internet bill from the taxpayer, is it not reasonable for him to return the almost £13,000 resettlement grant he pocketed when he stood down as a Minister? Given the awfulness of the ongoing ferry saga, is it not reasonable for a Minister (take your pick as to which one) to have been sacked? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Given the awfulness of the state of the Scottish NHS, is it not reasonable for Neil Gray to fall on his sword? Given the awfulness of the demise of the Scottish education system, is it not reasonable for Jenni Gilruth to step down? Given the awfulness of the handling of all these devolved issues, is it not reasonable for John Swinney and his Cabinet to step down and call an election so we can get a government of whatever persuasion that actually wants to make Scotland a better place and improve our services? They've been in power for 18 years and they have nothing to be proud of. Jane Lax, Aberlour, Moray Peace plea Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The 120-plus Labour rebels who are prepared to vote against the Welfare Reform Bill reflect the ideals of the Party in standing up for the poor and the vulnerable. They must be dreading next Tuesday's vote. The cuts in PIP and the Disability Allowance are particularly cruel. It takes a former Conservative prime minister to dub them as 'callous'. I'm surely one of many disillusioned voters who feel betrayed by this Labour Government. Where money seems to be tight for welfare, it apparently is plentiful for defence. Largely to pacify Donald Trump, the recent Nato summit has agreed to raise the spending on defence to 5 per cent of GDP with only Spain abstaining, in the biggest increase since the Second World War. Surely a truly scary increase in firepower spells an increased likelihood of war, where the first victims are welfare, and aid to the poorest in the world. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Never has the old cliche 'jaw, jaw, not war, war' sounded more reasonable. Before it's too late, there should be a world summit, convened to cease an arms race in which there is no winner. Only then can we usher in a stampede for peace. Ian Petrie, Edinburgh Welcome help Let's all stand together to make sure our elderly mothers, fathers, grandparents and friends have care in care homes when they need it. Without the dedicated immigrant staff working in care homes, almost all of them would have to shut, leaving nowhere for our relatives to go. Some with families would have to be looked after at home, and others, with no-one to care for them, would be in hospitals. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sadly, this would cause major bed-blocking problems, and in turn lead to a lack of hospital places for ill patients. We need to accept – we need immigrants. Anne Wimberley, Edinburgh Breathe uneasy H Douglas Lightfoot heaps praise on carbon dioxide but doesn't mention that having too much of it is toxic (Letters, 27 June). High levels in the blood can cause narcosis and death, conditions which intensive care units in Scotland fight hard to prevent every day; and when a cloud of carbon dioxide was emitted from a volcanic lake in Cameroon in 1986 it killed1,700 people. And to opine that high levels of it in the atmosphere don't cause global warming is plain wrong. Scientific evidence caused the Swedish Nobel prize winner Svente Arrhenius to conclude in 1896 that atmospheric carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Subsequent research has not shown him to be wrong. Hugh Pennington, Aberdeen High hopes Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad George Herraghty gives a confusing message on the efficiency of wind turbines (Letters, 26 June). While it is true that the maximum efficiency of a turbine, given by Albert Betz, is 59 per cent, the actual working efficiency – which is what we are interested in – depends on how much wind is blowing, and this increases with height. So the SNP have got it absolutely right and they deserve praise, not denigration. H Belda, Edinburgh Broken system For once I can agree with Jill Stephenson, 'the problem in both Scotland and Wales is that we have devolved rule' (Letters, 27 June). What Ms Stephenson apparently fails to recognise, though, is that if the NHS in Scotland is considered to be 'dying' (to quote the seemingly headline-grabbing budding-politician chairing the British Medical Association in Scotland) then in Wales, and in many parts of England, the NHS is already on 'life support'. The demise of Britain's public services is not only reflected in certain NHS statistics and struggling care services but across the spectrum of local council services (Birmingham is already 'bankrupt'), education (lowest UK science and maths PISA scores since 2006 – without England following a wider curriculum as recommended by the OECD) and welfare (due to austerity and continuing cuts to UK budgets). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Efforts to revive Britain's economy are not helped by unfunded commitments for massive financial spending on more weapons and nuclear power, while interest payments are now exceeding £100 billion per year, but the UK Government could immediately begin to address our failing democracy. The first-past-the-post electoral system for Westminster underpinned by an unelected House of Lords as a Second Chamber is an anathema to anyone sincerely advocating truly democratic representation. Perhaps if Ms Stephenson and others are not prepared to support fundamental change to the current highly flawed UK electoral system, she will now support a constitutional referendum ensuring the end of devolved governance in Scotland by giving the electorate here a simple choice of real change. Either direct Westminster rule or independent Holyrood rule – I look forward to reading Ms Stephenson's arguments promoting a revised Independence Referendum. Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian And finally... Evan if Iran did develop a nuclear bomb, it could never be delivered. They have a rotten postal system. Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Perth and Kinross Write to The Scotsman Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad
Edinburgh Reporter
6 days ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Reporter
Call to axe Sheriffhall Roundabout support beaten
A push to axe the council's support for a controversial upgrade to a congested city roundabout has been snuffed out by the city's transport boss. Plans to upgrade the busy Sheriffhall Roundabout, the only flat junction on the bypass, have been in the works since 2018, but work has not yet started on the project. At a committee meeting yesterday, the city's Green group made a bid to cut the council's support for the flyover, saying money could be better spent elsewhere. It was rebuffed by the city's transport leader, although he admitted building new infrastructure on the city bypass was not 'ultimately' the solution to increased traffic caused by population growth in the Lothians. While the bypass is Transport Scotland's responsibility, cutting the council's support would have sent a strong message of dissatisfaction with the project to Holyrood. Greens, both at the council and in the Scottish Parliament, have long opposed the flyover on the grounds that it could cause induced demand – the phenomenon by which adding more road infrastructure in an area can cause more people to start driving. They say that money should instead be spent on improving public transport links and building infrastructure to allow for more walking and cycling. Councillor Kayleigh Kinross-O'Neill, the Greens co-leader, said: 'Congestion is a human issue, no matter where and what it is, that unfortunately needs human-led behaviour change. 'We note the issues faced, and think we should be moving away from the conversation of the roads and staying on the path – no pun intended – of priortising walking, wheeling and cycling, and reducing car dependency. 'Totally appreciate that Sheriffhall is above all of us, and we're still awaiting the results of the public local inquiry. However we're all pretty tired of waiting, and we know there are better ways money could be spent across the region.' Cllr Kinross-O'Neill said some possible options could be putting money towards the trams, more park and rides and expanded bus lanes in the capital. She continued to say: 'We request that we withdraw the favour and support of the scheme, [or] any sort of waste of time road improvements that would cause congestion, not tackle it.' The exchange came as part of a debate over a motion by Conservative councillor Neil Cuthbert calling for action on congestion on the city bypass, as well as modelling on what future traffic could look like on the road. Edinburgh's Green group added their request to scrap support for the flyover as an amendment to the motion. Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson moved no action on Cllr Cuthbert's motion, which also eliminated the Green amendment. He said: 'One of the main reasons that there are times where the bypass does get congested – and it does get congested, from time to time I am stuck on it – It's as much to do with population growth, not only in Edinburgh, but predominantly in East Lothian, which has increased the traffic on the bypass. 'So how do you tackle it? I don't think that building a flyover is ultimately the solution. What you have to do is actually do things to do what you can to remove the traffic, to get it back to norms. 'So public transport solutions, like tram, potentially bus rapid transport links to East Lothian and Midlothian, are the long term solutions in regards to giving the people using the bypass an alternative option.' The debate over the flyover comes amid wider questions over the future of the project. A need for it was identified 17 years ago, and in 2018 it was included in the Edinburgh and South East Scotland city region deal, which put £120 million towards the project. But it has lumbered along slowly through the planning process, with more than 2,700 objections to its construction leading to an inquiry. Though it was submitted in October of 2023, the Scottish Government is still reviewing the inquiry's report. Earlier this month, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop told MSPs that she is waiting on advice from senior Scottish Government officials on the next steps for the project. She added that she was unable to provide a timeline for when action would be taken. By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Edinburgh Live
6 days ago
- Politics
- Edinburgh Live
Bid to scrap Edinburgh support for Sheriffhall roundabout plans snuffed out
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info A push to axe the council's support for a controversial upgrade to a congested city roundabout has been snuffed out by the city's transport boss. Plans to upgrade the busy Sheriffhall Roundabout, the only flat junction on the bypass, have been in the works since 2018, but work has not yet started on the project. At a committee meeting yesterday, the city's Green group made a bid to cut the council's support for the flyover, saying money could be better spent elsewhere. It was rebuffed by the city's transport leader, although he admitted building new infrastructure on the city bypass was not 'ultimately' the solution to increased traffic caused by population growth in the Lothians. While the bypass is Transport Scotland's responsibility, cutting the council's support would have sent a strong message of dissatisfaction with the project to Holyrood. Greens, both at the council and in the Scottish Parliament, have long opposed the flyover on the grounds that it could cause induced demand – the phenomenon by which adding more road infrastructure in an area can cause more people to start driving. They say that money should instead be spent on improving public transport links and building infrastructure to allow for more walking and cycling. Councillor Kayleigh Kinross-O'Neill, the Greens co-leader, said: 'Congestion is a human issue, no matter where and what it is, that unfortunately needs human-led behaviour change. 'We note the issues faced, and think we should be moving away from the conversation of the roads and staying on the path – no pun intended – of priortising walking, wheeling and cycling, and reducing car dependency. 'Totally appreciate that Sheriffhall is above all of us, and we're still awaiting the results of the public local inquiry. However we're all pretty tired of waiting, and we know there are better ways money could be spent across the region.' Cllr Kinross-O'Neill said some possible options could be putting money towards the trams, more park and rides and expanded bus lanes in the capital. She continued to say: 'We request that we withdraw the favour and support of the scheme, [or] any sort of waste of time road improvements that would cause congestion, not tackle it.' The exchange came as part of a debate over a motion by Conservative councillor Neil Cuthbert calling for action on congestion on the city bypass, as well as modelling on what future traffic could look like on the road. Edinburgh's Green group added their request to scrap support for the flyover as an amendment to the motion. Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson moved no action on Cllr Cuthbert's motion, which also eliminated the Green amendment. He said: 'One of the main reasons that there are times where the bypass does get congested – and it does get congested, from time to time I am stuck on it - It's as much to do with population growth, not only in Edinburgh, but predominantly in East Lothian, which has increased the traffic on the bypass. 'So how do you tackle it? I don't think that building a flyover is ultimately the solution. What you have to do is actually do things to do what you can to remove the traffic, to get it back to norms. 'So public transport solutions, like tram, potentially bus rapid transport links to East Lothian and Midlothian, are the long term solutions in regards to giving the people using the bypass an alternative option.' The debate over the flyover comes amid wider questions over the future of the project. A need for it was identified 17 years ago, and in 2018 it was included in the Edinburgh and South East Scotland city region deal, which put £120 million towards the project. But it has lumbered along slowly through the planning process, with more than 2,700 objections to its construction leading to an inquiry. Though it was submitted in October of 2023, the Scottish Government is still reviewing the inquiry's report. Earlier this month, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop told MSPs that she is waiting on advice from senior Scottish Government officials on the next steps for the project. She added that she was unable to provide a timeline for when action would be taken.
