Minutes of New Town & Broughton Community Council’s ordinary meeting, held via Zoom, on Monday 13 December 2021 at 7pm
Actions and decisions are red italic. ND (‘no dissent’) means that no-one spoke or voted against a decision.
Edinburgh Council has stated that ‘CCs can approve minutes, and take other decisions, remotely’, as so long as they ensure that ‘remote meetings are as accessible to members of the public and (as) well-advertised as possible’.
1 Technology check
The meeting opened online at 6:45 pm to enable all attendees to connect before the start of business.
|Mike Birch||NTBCC, RRCTMA||Bruce Ryan||Minutes secretary|
|Annick Gaillard||NTBCC||Alan McIntosh||Broughton Spurtle|
|Laura Graham||NTBCC||Cllr Joanna Mowat||City Centre ward|
|Stephen Hajducki||NTBCC||Damien Sharkey||Hub|
|Simon Holledge||NTBCC/EACC||Tom Valente||Hub|
|Jack Hugh||NTBCC||Gordon Mackenzie||Hub|
|Ken Lochrie||NTBCC||Hazel Rounding||shedkm|
|Stewart Mills||NTBCC/GKSA||Claire Yates||shedkm|
|Carol Nimmo||NTBCC||Jennifer O’Donnell||O’Donnell Brown|
|Richard Price||NTBCC||Michael Dougal||O’Donnell Brown|
|David Renton||NTBCC||Colin Smith||Turley|
|Alan Welsh||NTBCC||Hannah Munro||Turley|
|Peter Williamson||NTBCC, Picardy Residents||~6 residents/visitors|
2.b Apologies for absence
|David Clarke||NTBCC||Cllr Max Mitchell||Inverleith ward|
|Deidre Henderson||NTBCC||Cllr Hal Osler||Inverleith ward|
|Susan Macinnes||NTBCC||Ben Macpherson MSP||Edinburgh Northern and Leith|
2.c In memory
NTBCC was very sad to learn of the death of former member John Ross Maclean.
3 Minutes of monthly meeting held on 8th November 2021
Accepted subject to correcting the year in the title (proposed D Renton, seconded L Graham, ND)
4 Police report
See text of report in Appendix 1, or PDF on NTBCC website
The report was again short of information, and again had sections that did not suit visually impaired people.
5 Presentation on proposals for Beaverhall House & 16, 23-27 Dunedin St (HUB / Turley)
C Smith introduced the presenters: Hub Residential (applicant, prospective developer and operator), shedkm (architects for Beaverhall House), O’Donnell Brown (architects for Dunedin St)
5.a Presentation points: overall
- Beaverhall is ahead of Dunedin St: there has been much public engagement and some co-design
- Dunedin St: there have been meetings with local residents, leading to a potential way forward
- There will be monthly meetings with residents
5.b Presentation points: Beaverhall
- The area has a long industrial heritage (slides 1, 2), impacted by the Water of Leith.
- Hence a wider vision has been developed (slides 3, 4) based around Beaverhall Rd and Dunedin St. (The eastern section has some residential properties but there is some commercial/light industry use, especially in the western section.) There are many architectural styles in the local buildings. Hence shedkm wants to link into existing amenity in the area, and show how the overall area could develop.
- The Logie Mills application is not being brought forward just now, but is part of the overall area, as is a pocket park. There are links to St Mark’s park via the Powderhall development to the north.
- Shedkm and O’Donnell Brown have been working together to avoid plot-by-plot (i.e. disjointed) development.
- Slide 5 and 6 zoom in to the current plans, showing the important streets and their junction, which could have a café or community use. There is also space for yards (slide 9) and gardens.
- Hence the street frontage would have a residents’ entrance on Beaverhall Rd, and workspaces/studios tying the Dunedin St site to the Beaverhall site.
- It is important that a sense of place is developed, harking back to history and looking to the future.
- Hence the Beaverhall development would have a strong frontage, but broken up with entrances.
- The overall development would include a pend, creative space, space for residents and courtyards (slide 10).
- Vehicular access would be minimized, to create opportunities for green space (slide 11).
- Slide 12 is an impression of how the main corner might look, retaining the setts (cobbles) on Dunedin St.
- Hence the ground floor would be something like slide 13, setting the building back a bit.
- There is a change of level across the site.
- The phrase ‘factory living’ gives a narrative to the building and bring in other ideas (slides 14, 15).
- The courtyards would be separated by ‘fingers (slide 15). There would be 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units and studios.
- There would be ‘honesty’ about the materials, hence the exposed look in slide 17. There would be good quality homes.
- Higher floors would step away from the street (slide 18).
- Slide 19 shows the ‘industrial’ precedents for look and feel: red brick, metalwork, factories. The penthouses would have roof terraces on the set-back elements.
- Massing has been modeled (slide 20), showing how the development would fit in a dip, matching surrounding buildings.
- These ideas are further explored in the section shown on slide 21. The dip allows different uses of the lower levels. Level 4 would be a kind of datum.
- Sustainability is important (slide 22), so the design includes blue/green roof, solar panels, bike stores and EV charging.
- Slide 23 shows a summary of the plans: 205 units including 52 affordable units, and compliance with LDP policy requirements.
- Slide 24 shows further detail on roofscape and streetscape.
- Slide 31 shows the ground floor would have residents’ lounges and studios, then residential parts with exteriors showing horizontality, then set-back penthouses. The whole would have a brick/industrial nature.
5.c Presentation points: Dunedin St
- Slide 27 shows the location of the two parts of this site.
- Slide 28 shows opportunities to enhance the different characters of the area.
- Slide 29 shows the existing site, including the factors making up its character.
- Slide 30 shows possible ground-floor uses: there will be a variety of activities. There have been conversations to find out what the local community wants. It’s a landscape-led proposal.
- A Welsh: the swing-park on Broughton Rd exists because NTBCC persuaded CEC. The area is a flood-plane, despite ameliorations.
- This was the focus of early work. The ground floor will not be residential. We are working with Beaverhall House residents to find out the sorts of spaces they would want on the ground floor.
- A Welsh: It would be welcome to include something from a foundry, because of the Beaverhall foundry’s history.
- The pressed window pieces hark back to this history. So there is an opportunity for such artwork.
- A Welsh: I hope the swing park won’t be used as an access point to the new development.
- K Lochrie: It would have helped to show the heights of existing buildings, and a comparison with the planned buildings.
- We can forward drawings showing this. The principle is to generally follow the datum of the existing buildings, but penthouses would sit above this, but would not interrupt other views.
- K Lochrie: how would residents here get to work, given there is only 1 bus service and provision of only 6 parking spaces?
- There is a lot of development in the wider local area, so services should change to match this. There is also the tram. Nationally, we (Hub) encourage cycling. We sign up to car clubs. We are long-term investors in the area, so we want to support residents but our preferred forms of transport are car-share and cycling, which we incentivize.
- K Lochrie: half of the flats on the spurs face north. Is there information on daylighting?
- Daylighting and sun-lighting have been key to our plans. We can share further work on this.
- A McIntosh: access to Powderhall (to the east) may not be set in stone, so should the developers and CEC collaborate on costs to make this happen?
- A McIntosh: Are the developers aware of the recent application to make 25 Beaverhall Rd into a leisure facility?
- The applicants were looking for space within an existing building, so this would be a temporary change of use.
- A McIntosh: Please explain what ‘buildings grounding themselves’ means.
- This means it’s not a podium with columns, with residential on top of that.
- R Price: a potential concern is the intent to make non-residential areas into residential. This harks back to the aims of the 20-minute neighbourhood. So these plans for non-residential ground floor uses are welcome. So I’d like to see imaginative ideas for the ground floor, ideally bringing employment to the area. It is welcome that you are trying to maintain existing occupancy, providing continuity between past and future. The area itself could be improved: it has a mixture of architectural styles, but there is potential to make this area nicer to live in and explore. Maximising the benefit of Dunedin St is very welcome. Can there be access to the pocket park from Dunedin St? The swing park needs some help. But overall, this all looks good.
- D Renton: how many parking spaces are reserved for disabled people? Some adapted vehicles need more space than a typical car-club space.
- Current plans show 7 parking spaces, all of which would be accessible. They would be managed by on-site staff, rather than being exclusive to specific residents.
- D Renton: what proportion of flats will be accessible to wheelers? If this is less than 100%, what charging facilities are there for mobility scooters in public areas?
- This is work in progress but we estimate around 10% will be adapted for disabled residents. The units are build-to-rent, so will not be sold off. The whole building will be accessible. We can share details later.
- Every unit will be accessible by lift. There will be accessible charging points throughout the building.
- M Birch: it would help if links to local cycling infrastructure didn’t go via the main road.
- S Hajducki: CEC policy says most developer units should be dual aspect, but you are at 49%. For privacy, facing windows should be 18m apart. There should be a minimum of 2% daylighting in kitchens etc. Will this be proven?
- We will hit the dual-aspect target.
- The design guidance doesn’t specify 18m. There is flexibility in guidance for urban developments.
- We are undertaking detailed daylighting assessments, which we can share. It will be part of the full application.
6.a Update from the Council’s ‘Engagement Sessions’ & community response
- M Birch: the two presentations/information sessions in NTBCC’s area (Broughton St Mary’s, Rose St) were heavily attended. A small number of officials were present, leading to long delays in speaking with attendees. These were not consultations: while many questions were asked, it is not clear that many satisfactory answers were received. Hence it’s necessary to wait for CEC’s response to comments. There will not be maps showing the city centre bins until April 2022. Before that, CEC officials will seek CEC committee modifications to parameters around siting of bins.
- NTBCC has submitted comments on the TRO covering CPZ area N1 (which covers Beaverhall, Broughton Rd, parts of Bellevue). These are being considered by the communal bin team: it wants to meet NTBCC in January to review details and principles.
6.b Gull-proof bag campaign update / next steps
- M Birch: there have been discussion between the GPB forum and heritage bodies, including Edinburgh World Heritage. The forum is trying to gather information. It has submitted an appeal due to lack of environmental impact assessment: this is now with the Scottish Government reporter, who published on 8 December that no change to the screening decision is being sought. So there will be no EIA for this, despite Historic Environment Scotland calling for one.
- C Nimmo: yet the reporter had said that there would be contact with stakeholders, so can this be challenged?
- A resident: it appears that there is no way for residents’ representatives to feed into Edinburgh World Heritage.
- A resident: I am very cynical of this process: the plan is poorly argued and was always likely to be unpopular in this area. A planning officer decided that the increase from 290 bins to 360 sets of 6 bins would have no environmental impact, and so could be treated as only a traffic matter, hence avoiding any scrutiny. Is this an abuse of process? As far as I know, heritage/civic bodies have not objected to the plans apart from the Cockburn Association. Most residents are not aware of the plans. The Raeburn Place engagement was very poor. The councillors I’ve contacted are against the current plans, but are not optimistic about changing them.
- Cllr Mowat: there has been little change in CEC’s position, despite a motion on increasing recycling. CEC has received £7·7m from Zero Waste Scotland, which will fund the planned bins. It seems TROs will not be advertised until the Spring. If there is such slippage, then the issue will overlap with CEC elections, which can be used to send messages. I have questions about the costs, and am becoming convinced that it is better for people to take responsibility for the waste they produce. Use of the TRO/permitted development process is unfortunate.
- A Welsh: NTBCC could consider amelioration, using a precedent to site bins on garden-sides of roads where possible.
See full report in appendix 2
7.a EV Charging Points (TRO/21/24) response & next steps
- M Birch: NTBCC submitted a response to this TRO. We have had a positive conversation with the EV charging team, which is working to very tight deadlines, but was open to some of NTBCC’s ideas.
7.b ‘Travelling Safely’ (formerly ‘Spaces for People’)
- M Birch: TROs have been issued: the period for comment has been extended to 21 December. NTBCC will respond. NTBCC is still frustrated about the lack of engagement from CEC officials, so is has drafted a participation request. The Community Empowerment Act 2015 assumes that such requests are accepted if organisations are properly constituted and have relevant voices.
- There was discussion of the request’s breadth, of submitting several requests and the potential workload(s).
- Action: MB to circulate the draft for further comment, then submit it.
- A resident: CCs have ~£1000 per year budgets – this is far from enough.
- Cllr Mowat: I’ve submitted an amendment to review CC funding and relevant community engagement, following on from a lack of remedy of criticisms in the 2019 best value audit report. While NTBCC has moved to online very well, other CCs are struggling, and all CCs would appreciate funding for online meetings.
- Cllr Mowat: responses to my question to full council on the Drummond Place crossing are due this week. I’ll forward them to NTBCC when I can. This has been an issue since 2012-13, and has been at the top of the list for many years.
7.c Trams to Newhaven – key issues / update
- Action: NTBCC members to read transport report in appendix 2.
8 Engagement and communications
8.a PSMP (‘Use of Public Spaces for Events’) – NTBCC response (15 December)
- C Nimmo: S Holledge has co-ordinated the large amount of work undertaken by NTBCC
- Decision: NTBCC fully endorsed the submission drafted by S Holledge and colleagues.
8.b NTBCC members / local residents ‘Walkabout’ (New Town area) on December 15
- S Holledge: This will start at 2pm at the east end of Drummond Place, lasting 75 to 90-minutes. All are welcome, but attendees should take precautions about COVID transmission. The CEC roads officer has insisted that NTBCC should report any problematic drains to him, rather than him attending the walkabout.
8.c Update from Engagement & Communications Committee meeting
See full report in Appendix 3.
9.a NTBCC co-ordinated response to ‘City Plan 2030’ consultation (20 December)
- R Price: CP2030 is the local development plan, due to run for 10 years. It earmarks residential development sites to meet Scottish Government targets for housing provision. (This is more important to peripheral CCs, due to green-belt impact.) In the NTBCC area, it would convert some currently non-residential areas (e.g. Broughton Market, Batley’s cash and carry etc) into residential areas, but confusingly does not include Beaverhall and Dunedin St.
- The most important part of CP2030 is policy for determining planning applications – there are some significant changes. I will undertake a before/after comparison this week. NTBCC made a long submission ~18 months ago, for example suggesting that the proportion of affordable housing should not be increased from 25% to 35%, but making sure that such housing is truly affordable.
- Action: NTBCC members to contact RP if they will take part in his review.
9.b ‘Christmas Markets’ / Temporary installations planning process
- R Price: NTBCC has submitted comments on the three Christmas Market applications as well as the Festive village in St James Square. They were brought forward very late, with buildings already being constructed, so some facilities operate and are then dismantled prior to determination being made. This can negate the planning process. NTBCC doesn’t have issues with festive operations in principle but does have issues with what is built.
9.c 108, 114-116 Dundas St
- R Price: the application for this site, to which NTBCC objected, and which was refused by CEC’s DMSC, has been appealed. This appeared on the DPEA website today.
9.d George Street redesign meeting
See report in Appendix 4
- S Holledge: there will probably be another meeting about this in February. NTBCC members are encouraged to attend.
10.a Interaction between Licensing applications & planning submissions
- C Nimmo: it should be impossible to obtain licenses without planning permissions. There are deficiencies in processes.
- A Gaillard: concerning occasional licenses, this is very true. For example, it was not clear to DMSC members whether Bar Hütte (St James) licensing had been approved, putting this committee into a difficult position Decisions were made via delegated authority: CCs are not statutory consultees for this in the licensing process. Hence if applications are late, can local authorities just refuse them? It is not clear whether Bar Hütte has followed certain requirements. There is delay in updating the CEC portal.
- Cllr Mowat: we did stipulate that the stage should not be used, so it’s disappointing to hear from some residents that it is being used. I will ask planning to investigate.
- Cllr Mowat: there is a motion for full council for CCs to be fully consulted.
11 How / Where / When: planning for NTBCC meetings in 2022
- C Nimmo: NTBCC should continue to meet online at least until Spring 2022, continuing to meet on the 2nd Monday of most months (not January 2022).
- Decision: NTBCC to hold a business meeting on Monday 24 January.
- Decision: NTBCC to not meet in July
- Action: S Holledge to lead on publicity for monthly meetings, with dates to be agreed at the business meeting.
- Action: B Ryan to update website to state there is no January monthly meeting.
- Action: M Birch: to tell Broughton St Mary’s that NTBCC will not meet there in January, February March 2022
- Action: NTBCC to review whether to meet at BSM in April onwards. (NTBCC has already paid for 10 more months.)
12 Any other business
13 Appendix 1: text of police report
13.a Looking Back
- During October and November 2021, COP26 made a huge impact on Policing across the whole country including Edinburgh City Centre.
- Whilst a large number of local officers were deployed in specialist roles, they were replaced by officers backfilling their posts from other departments and bolstered by Mutual Aid officers from across the UK.
- Several protests took place within Edinburgh which were facilitated by our officers. These passed peacefully and with minimal police intervention.
- With the return of Christmas related events in the city centre, our Winter City operation started at the end of November. This is a dedicated detail based at the West End Police Station with additional officers to carry out patrols in the city centre. There has been an influx of people entering the City Centre to enjoy the Christmas atmosphere, and for the majority this has been facilitated without incident.
13.b What We’re Noticing
- Recent developments with the new Covid19 variant has brought some uncertainty in how the next few weeks will play out. The increase of positive cases and new guidance that comes with this is of concern for everyone. At the time of writing the Christmas Markets, Christmas events and the Hogmanay party are still going ahead as planned. There is a dedicated Policing response already in place for each planned event, and every event will be policed in line with Government guidelines.
- The City Centre has seen a noticeable increase in footfall, especially those enjoying the night time economy. It has been reported in the news this week of an Assault which took place on Meuse Lane on 11th December. There is an ongoing investigation into this incident by our Violence Reduction Unit. This appears to have been an isolated incident, and we are appealing for witnesses that may be able to assist with the enquiry. Please contact 101 if you witnessed the incident or if you have any information pertaining to this incident.
- Over the past few weeks there has also been an increase in reports of groups of youths congregating in the City Centre and associated Anti-Social Behaviour. With the school holidays approaching this is something that will be monitored. Local officers are working with the Community Alcohol Partnership along with other youth groups to engage with youths and address ASB and concerns surrounding this.
13.c Looking Forward
Policing over the coming weeks will be drawn to the Christmas events, Torchlight procession and Edinburgh’s Hogmanay and street party. These events are expected to attract significant numbers this year, and Policing in the City Centre will reflect this. Additional officers are allocated to the main events allowing for local officers to focus on the local community and any issues or concerns they may have.
If there are any issues which we feel you should know about, we will of course update you in the forthcoming newsletters, but if there is anything you would like us to address, or crime prevention information you would like us to provide, please let us know and we will tailor the content accordingly.
In the meantime, we hope you have a safe, Merry Christmas and wish you the best for the New Year!
Kind Regards, City Centre Community Policing Team
13.d Advice and Support
This section contained some images of text, some of which was too small to read. There was information on
- Victim Support Scotland, helpline 0800 160 1985, also https://victimsupport.scot/contact
- Supporting people with dementia:
The Herbert Protocol is here to give you some reassurance and help keep your loved ones safe. The system provides the police with everything they need to know to search for the person living with the dementia.
It’s a form that is kept at home containing important information regarding known routines, habits as well as descriptions of your friend/relative and details of their and others involved with their care. It can be handed to Police so that you do not have to worry about gathering the information during what can be a very stressful time.
You can download the form from https://www.scotland.police.uk/what-s-happening/missing-persons/the-herbert-protocol. It should be kept up to date so that all the information is relevant and current. A recent photograph should also be kept with the form.
The police will only need the form when the person is reported missing and the form will be returned when the person is found.
If you believe the person is missing and at risk of harm, please call ‘999’ at the earliest opportunity. Tell the operator you have a Herbert Protocol form.
13.e About Us
- Local Area Commander: Chief Inspector Murray Tait
- Inspector David Duthie
- Sergeant Cameron Walker
- Sergeant Robert Richardson
- Plus 8 officers allocated to community issues in Edinburgh’s City Centre.
13.f Contact Us
- 101 for non emergencies
- Twitter: @EdinPolSE
- Facebook:Edinburgh Police Division
- Web: scotland.police.uk
14 Appendix 2: transport report
14.a Electric Vehicle Charging Places
We have submitted a response to the TRO consultation regarding the three EV charging places proposed for our area. Despite supporting in principle the plans for installing on-street charging, we have formally objected to the locations on India Street and East London Street; both of which we consider unsuitable for the planned Rapid chargers. We also had a positive meeting with the EV charging team who were able to answer a number of questions about the current and future plans for rollout of on-street charging. We will be posting further information about the planned installation on the NTBCC website.
14.b Tram Works
- Elm Row Public Realm – In response to a document highlighting various concerns with the design of this space submitted jointly by Living Streets Edinburgh, Edinburgh Access Panel, Edinburgh Bus Users Group and Spokes Edinburgh and the Community Councils Together for Trams group (which includes NTBCC), the Trams Team have agreed to reconsider some aspects of the design. We await further clarification of their plans.
- Picardy Place Work and Traffic Management Plans – We have noted increased congestion at some times of day and certain days of the week. This situation has not been helped by increased traffic associated with the St James Quarter and the closure of North Bridge to northbound traffic. Further changes to the traffic management will be required in the New Year once the next phase of work commences.
14.c Spaces for People
As reported previously several of Spaces for People measures in our area are being retained under the new banner of ‘Travelling Safely’. The Council has issued the initial advertisement of an ETRO for these measures. Comments are due to be submitted by 21 December. We will be submitting comments but given the continued lack of engagement on the measures in our area, it is proposed that we issue a Participation Request under the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 in order to ensure that we have the opportunity to contribute to any future decisions. This Participation Request will focus on the Broughton Corridor from Canonmills to Picardy Place and will build on the work that we did last year that set out a long-term vision for “Broughton High Street”.
14.d 2022 Transport Priorities
Following a couple of meetings of the Transport Committee, we confirmed our priorities for the coming year as follows:
- Trams to Newhaven Project – There will be increased activity at our end of the project, which will result in further road closures and diversions. We will maintain a significant presence on the Community Council Together for Trams group and look to involve other Community Councillors from the northern New Town area. Our goal is to ensure that we can have prior knowledge of planned changes and ensure that their impact for residents in our area is mitigated as far as possible.
- Travelling Safely – If the Participation Request is accepted we can expect an increased level of work activity to ensure our views on the changes in our area are taken into account. This will require additional input from Community Councillors across our area.
- Interfaces with other Travel Groups – The dialogue with Lothian Buses and recent initiative regarding Elm Row has shown the benefit of cooperating with other groups, especially those focussed on Active Travel. It is planned to establish more effective arrangements for liaison with all of these groups including having a link person from the Community Council for each.
- City Mobility Plan – Although this plan was approved earlier this year, there has been very little further information about the implementation of the various recommendations. Given that this document is intended to drive transport policy over the next ten years it is important that we are fully engaged in the next steps. We will actively seek opportunities to do so.
- Other Council Transport Initiatives – We will continue to monitor and engage in other Council transport initiatives including the installation of on-street EV charging and the introduction of a city-centre Low Emissions Zone. Both of these initiatives will overlap with the work of the Environmental Committee.
Prepared by Mike Birch, 11 December 2021
15 Appendix 3: communications report
The committee met on 3 December. (Present: Deirdre Henderson, Simon Holledge, Carol Nimmo, Bruce Ryan (apologies from Laura Graham)
We discussed the use of media by NTBCC including video, and newspapers. We agreed on the value of using ‘soft power’. Simon recommended NTBCC start releasing short video messages, promoted via the website and twitter.
We also talked about the forthcoming walkabout on Wednesday, 15 December starting from Drummond Place and including streets east of Dundas Street. It was agreed that the next walkabout would be somewhere west of Dundas Street.
Signage was also mentioned. Carol would check the cost of making hi-viz vests with the logo. Simon would check the cost of making two pennants with the NTBCC logo.
[Simon later found Edinburgh Banners <https://www.edinburghbanners.co.uk> could make two ‘feather beach flags’ size 630 x 1400, with poles — with our design — for £120. Is that too expensive?]
We also talked about the future for NTBCC. Would we have hybrid meetings? Deirdre noted that Drummond Community High School now have a hi-tech communications room put in by Bentley Systems (DEC) with monitors etc. Deirdre would contact Drummond High to see if the tech there is compatible and if the room might be available.
Simon Holledge, 12 December 2021
16 Appendix 4: George Street & First New Town redesign meeting, 9 December 2021
- The meeting marked the beginning of Phase 3 (RIBA Stage 3) with 33 attendees, including CEC (Tony Holsgrove, Daisy Narayanan etc), LDA, Lothian Buses, Streets-UK, Assembly Rooms, EWH, HES, Cockburn Association, the George St Association, Essential Edinburgh, Spokes, Bus Users Group, Living Streets, Edinburgh Access Panel, Sustrans etc. I represented NTBCC.
- The contractors have changed. We now have Atkins <https://www.fgould.com/uk- europe/topics/atkins/>, “one of the world’s leading design, engineering and project management consultancies”, and Faithful+Gould <https://www.fgould.com> apparently its parent company. (Tetra Tech, Mark Rinkus et al, are no longer involved.)
- The “Terms of Reference and Remit” for Phase 3 were announced. Rene Sommer of Atkins described the, “Concept Design Refresh” and “Concept Design Review and Development”, followed by questions.
- William Duncan of the George Street Association asked pertinent questions: whether the schedule, with construction in Spring 2024, was over-optimistic, and when we could see the under street layout showing drains, sewers and utilities, as more clarity was needed if we were going to have well-designed infrastructure for the street (the same point I’ve been repeatedly making myself in meetings/emails so far with no success).
- Terry Levinthal of the Cockburn raised the current issue of cafés and bars occupying public pavement space etc.
- Concerns were expressed by the various interest groups for cycling, buses, pavements, disabled access etc, mainly clarifications of detail already discussed in earlier sessions.
- The next meeting would be in Ideally we might decide to have two NTBCC attendees — there is a lot to cover.
- Despite being on Teams, the meeting was actually recorded. I asked Fiona Robertson if the recording could be released, at least to stakeholders. She promised to ask if this could be done.
Recommendation: We ask William Duncan of the George Street Association to come and talk at NTBCC.
Simon Holledge, 13 December 2021