cyclists

by

Second ‘trams to Newhaven’ consultation: NTBCC’s response

(The following is the text of NTBBC’s submission to CEC’s second ‘trams to Newhaven’ consultation, submitted 7 November 2018)

Trams to Newhaven consultation
Response by New Town & Broughton Community Council

Main points

  • We welcome the progress that has been made but feel the vision for public realm at Elm Row could be more ambitious.
  • We would welcome more detail on the anticipated future of bus services on Leith Walk.
  • There should be comprehensive consultation on traffic management during the construction phase.
  • There are some concerns about the plans for junctions at London Road and Leith Walk.
  • We consider that no use should be made of the ‘triangle’ at Picardy Place which would prevent the possibility of its eventual incorporation into the public space in front of the Cathedral.

We welcome this further engagement by the Council; evidence of a degree of responsiveness to feedback; and the greater transparency with which the engagement has been conducted. We also welcome the postponement of a final decision to allow for more rigorous scrutiny and clarification of bids received.

The proposals for Elm Row show some signs of progress however the revised plans could, in our view, do more to reflect some of the possibilities discussed at the design workshop held in June. Continue reading →

by

Response to consultation on Picardy Place: December 2017

(NTBCC submitted the following to Edinburgh Council today [19 December 2017].)

Overview

The New Town and Broughton Community Council (NTBCC) welcomes the decision by the City of Edinburgh Council (CEC) to hold public engagement activities in connection with proposals for Picardy Place. The proposals have generated a high level of local concern and we have received an unprecedented number of representations from residents, both at our meetings and by email.

However, the consultation, though welcome, was tardy and brief. Given this, NTBCC consider that to demonstrate good faith CEC must now take time to consider and respond to the many questions raised by local residents and other interest groups, rather than press ahead with a scheme which few are convinced is the best that can be achieved. If CEC maintains this is not possible, then they should make clear why a decision must be taken before these questions have been answered. Continue reading →