page 1 of report - recommendations
Transport and Environment Committee
10.00am, Thursday, 22 May 2025
City Mobility Plan – Capital Investment Programme Prioritisation Outputs Decision/Scrutiny Decision Wards All
Recommendations
1.1 Transport and Environment Committee is asked to: 1.1.1 Note the work undertaken to review capital investment across the City Mobility Plan (CMP) Implementation Plan and the prioritisation of projects, summarised in Appendix 1; 1.1.2 Note the approach taken to prioritisation and programme development as set out in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.18. 1.1.3 Approve the proposed CMP Capital Investment Programme (CMP CIP) project list set out in Appendices 4a and 4b, noting the significant degree of dependency on external funding and on potential Visitor Levy (VL) revenue for making progress on the programme. 1.1.4 Approve regular annual reporting on programme funding, progress and proposed changes, with a report normally in August or September. This timing should coincide with knowledge of external funding awards. 1.1.5 Approve the list of projects and programmes that it is proposed to pause work on, set out in Appendix 5. 1.1.6 Agree to conclude the major junctions review project, note the specific comments relating the individual locations in Appendix 7 and agree that further updates to committee will be on a project-by-project basis.
Green amendment urges Road User Charging to fund more active travel, bus and 'place' schemes
Addendum by the Green Group
Transport and Environment Committee
22 May 2025
Item 7.5 – City Mobility Plan – Capital Investment
Programme Prioritisation Outputs
Add at the end of recommendations:
1.1.9 Notes that section 7 of the report includes a link to the City Mobility Plan’s
integrated impact assessment, but that a separate IIA for the prioritisation exercise was
not carried out, and has concerns that some of the impacts, for example pausing the
Portobello 20 minute neighbourhood project which includes significant numbers of
dropped kerbs, may have a negative impact on disabled people, but further notes there is
an existing rolling programme of dropped kerbs which could compensate for this;
1.1.10 Notes that this prioritisation exercise has not attempted to assess whether similar
mobility objectives could be delivered at lower cost for the schemes in the CMP;
1.1.11 Notes that the pressure on capital budgets which has necessitated this
prioritisation exercise is a result of insufficient funding to deliver the CMP, notes the
Convenor has previously written to the Scottish Government pointing out the problems
that single-year funding creates;
1.1.12 Further notes that powers exist under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 for the
council to introduce road user charging which could generate significant revenue to
invest in CMP projects; notes the Scottish Government is about to announce a regulatory
review to consider gaps in the secondary legislation to enable RUC but nonetheless
agrees that the council should approach the following organisations with a view to
entering preliminary discussions on whether there is common ground in our approach to
road user charging, both at an officer and elected member level, with:
a) Glasgow City Council
b) Sestrans
c) Edinburgh’s geographically adjacent councils. i.e. East Lothian, Midlothian, West
Lothian, Scottish Borders and Fife;
Page…
Small section of Tory amendment, to scrap most bike, walk, low-traffic schemes. Appears to want more car freedom.
Impossible to give text here because it is in a massive table
Start of SNP amendment, to move 3 schemes up the ladder from 'paused' to 'proceed' (in the 10-year programme) - Causey, Portobello and city centre cross-streets
Amendment by the SNP Group
Transport & Environment Committee
22 May 2025
Item 7.5 - City Mobility - Plan Capital Investment
Plan Prioritisation Outputs
Amends 1.1.5 to read:
Approve the list of projects and programmes that it is proposed to pause work on, set out
in Appendix 5 with the exception of The Causey Project (West Crosscauseway),
Portobello Town Centre (20- minute neighbourhood) and A71 Heriot Watt to Sighthill
Active Travel Improvements, which should be changed from ‘pause’ to ‘proceed’.
Agrees to defer any decision on pausing Cross Streets (North Castle Street (cross
streets), Hanover Street North – Public Realm, Cycling & Ped Improvements and
Frederick Street (North and South) until the next Transport and Environment Committee
due to their crucial operational inter-relationship to the success of the George Street
Project.
Notes that all projects are within large funding envelopes and therefore agrees that
projects which are “unpaused” will be funded through reprioritisation of existing funding
packages, and reallocation of slippage in other projects.
Agrees this for the following reasons:
The Causey
Agrees that despite the scoring of this particular project, The Causey represents over a
decade of previous commitments from the council to the local community to progress the
project and believes there is a serious reputational risk in any further delay to make
progress on the ground (either in a phased approach or fully delivered).
Understands that The Causey has at several times in its history as a project been
allocated / earmarked funding through various streams including Place Based Investment
Fund (PBIF) and allocations from the capital road renewals budget in addition to The
Causey Development Trust securing funding and materials from other sources.
Notes that the project has been hailed in o…
#Edinwebcast
#CMP #CityMobilityPlan
Report
1. Prioritises🚶🚲👩🦽🚌 schemes
2. Highlights funding needs
--> democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/documents/s8...
Green amendt: highlights #funding
Tory: scrap most 🚲 & #LTN schemes
LibDem: rethink scoring
SNP: upgrade 3 'paused' schemes
@thecockburn.bsky.social
