These minutes consist of the Trams team’s responses to CCTT’s questions – both exchanged by email.
The June minutes are awaiting the Trams Team’s approval.
|Question/Query||(main) location of query, if applicable||Query author/CC||TT response (confidential/not for publication parts in italics)|
|1||Noisy late night works on WED/THU night and until at least 2.00am on Thursday (7/7/22) morning. The closure was from 07.30pm but I understand the specific work did not start until after 10.30pm
How can we best ensure that this nuisance is mitigated? Can we do a better job of communicating this work in advance so that residents are better informed?
|Picardy Place||MB/NTBCC||These works were to facilitate the installation of systems cabling as part of the infrastructure works and substantial notice was provided via socials/newsletter etc.|
|2||Sunday morning (10/7/22) fire at Dalmeny Street logistics hub, possibly fuelled by commercial waste (palettes, cardboard). What responsibility have the Hubs to enure that all commercial waste is off the street when they close for the weekend?||Dalmeny/Leith Walk||HT/LCCC||Commercial waste is for the individual businesses to manage.|
|3||Vehicles getting into difficulties entering Rennie’s Isle thinking it is a through roadhas been ongoing for several months despite it being reported and discussed at CCTT meetings (see photos shared with Chris W and Hannah R)||Rennie’s Isle||JM/LHNCC||The project is aware of the issue following reports from residents and additional signage has been put in place and the project continues to monitor the situation.
|4||Concerns about the siting of the bus shelter. It was previously sited adjacent to the road but it is planned to be installed against the wall of the railway bridge well away from the actual bus stop. The planned location will mean that anyone using the shelter will have a limited view of arriving buses. To get from the shelter to the bus stop will require the passengers to cross the pavement and the cycle path. From a Living Streets perspective this is creating additional hazards for bus users especially those with limited mobility or vision as well as other pedestrians and cyclists. The landscape drawings do not appear to show the bus shelters so I am unclear on the process that has been used to determine this new location. Has a risk or equalities impact assessment been undertaken? Please can you review the plans for the bus shelter and advise whether any changes can be made.
I understand that this bus stop has been the location of an accident previously between a pedestrian getting off a bus and a cyclist. I suggest that careful consideration needs to be given to future risks of such collisions which will be exacerbated by what we understand to be the current design.
Do you have drawings showing the proposed positions for all bus shelters along the route? Clearly the issues highlighted here may also be relevant at other points. As you are aware there is already a concern about the use of floating bus stops along the trams route and those concerns will be compounded by the inappropriate location of the bus shelters.
|Croall Place||MB/LCCC||The shelter has been positioned following discussions with CEC and JCD who provide and design each shelter. Each specific position has been risk assessed and positioned for best use of the area.|
|5||Drawing does show three proposed trees to be installed on the pavement which would further reduce visibility and space for pedestrians in a very congested area. The drawings show a further five trees to be located just along Leith Walk opposite Albert Street in an even more congested area for pedestrians. Is it still intended to install these trees at the locations shown?||Croall Place and Albert Place||MB/LCCC||Yes, these trees are within tree planters and so should the location not be suitable, alternative locations can be discussed.|
|6||Gayfield Square – the previous traffic management has been removed. How do we avoid it once again becoming a rat run on to East London Street given its proximity to the primary school?||Gayfield Square||MB/NTBCC||Not a project issue but will be reviewed within CEC.|
|7||How has the status of bike lanes between Pilrig and Annandale/Montgomery been signposted?||Pilrig to Annandale/ Montgomery||HT/LCCC||Status is that cycleways remain closed and appropriate signing is still in place|
|8||Has all signage been installed prior to opening of Pilrig to Annandale/ Montgomery? What are the enforcement arrangements?||Pilrig to Annandale/ Montgomery||HT/LCCC||All signs installed and NSL enforce as per regular enforcement.|
|9||What arrangements have been made to contact building owners regarding imminent OLE works when they may be on holiday? 10 days advance warning (project newsletter to 25th July) seems not enough.||Constitution Street||HT/LLCC||We deem 10 days to be adequate and building fixing agreements are in place with individual properties in advance of this ten day notice.|
|10||When will buses return northbound Pilrig to Annandale/ Montgomery?||Pilrig to Annandale/ Montgomery||HT/LCCC||Busses are now running northbound, however any queries relating to bus routes should be directed towards Lothian Busses.|
|11||Closure of Dalmeny Street has been poorly signposted resulting in cars speeding towards Leith Walk, then reversing? How can this be improved?||Dalmeny Street||HT/LCCC||Noted and will raise at TMRP.|
|12||Will all street lighting be operational by 30 November?||Newhaven to Picardy||HT/all CCs||No, in locations where new lighting is not operational temp lights or existing lights will be in place.|
|13||From a resident: “Armco barriers, normally found on motorways, etc, have been erected from the western end of the bridge to a point in front of what is currently the Cala sales office. I suspect the purpose of the barrier is to prevent trams, trucks, etc which leave the roadway ending up in the water of Victoria Dock. That’s fair enough but as I understand it, the function of these barriers is to absorb the impact of the crash and direct the momentum of the vehicle along the barrier line. However, here the barrier line is not on a motorway hard shoulder but on a footpath used by pedestrians and cyclists. So, it seems to me that whilst the barrier may protect occupants of vehicles, it does by putting pedestrians at risk of death or serious injury. Surely that can’t be right. Should the barrier not have been erected along the side of the road i.e. on the left hand rather than the right hand side of the footpath as shown in the photo?
Of course, there are no trams using Ocean Drive at the moment but the road is open in both directions and heavy goods vehicles including construction traffic may be using it.”
|Rennie’s Isle||JM/LHNCC||As previously discussed the design is a consequence of a safety assessment of the designers.|
|14||From a resident: Issues that have arisen during the past 18 months.
“Here’s a summary of my experience:
|Stevedore Place (?)||AM/LLCC||Verbal update to be provided at next CCTT and we are engaging directly with the resident in question in the meantime.|
|15||Follow up questions to (14): have TT staff attempted to verify any of the issues reported by the resident by attending the site unannounced? What action has HSE taken? What contractual measures are available to control the problems reported by the resident?||Stevedore Place (?)||HT||As per 14 above, verbal update at next CCTT.|
|16||Why did it take 10 days to fill the dangerous and repeatedly reported pothole between Gayfield and Annandale? Was is not deemed a priority, were there CEC internal communication issues or did CEC lack the capacity to deal with this in a timely manner?||between Gayfield and Annandale||HT/NTBCC||Understand you have now received response on this from G.Barwell.|