A new scheme to prioritise Edinburgh infrastructure projects has been approved by councillors, despite some of them holding concerns over several issues.
The new City Mobility Plan aims to determine which projects the city will prioritise working on in the next decade.
Officers recommended that councillors accept a priority list which saw 73 projects approved to go ahead, and 61 others paused – with most either not having been started yet or having already been paused before the plan’s release.
Labour councillor Stephen Jenkinson, who convenes the Transport and Environment Committee, heralded the plan, saying the time to take action was now, and that it is a “a necessary piece of work.”
But some councillors raised concerns over the priority list, questioning the system used to select projects to carry out or pause and the geographic distribution of projects.
Infrastructure projects were scored on a matrix which judged elements of each, such as cost effectiveness and benefit for public transport – but some projects with higher scores were paused, while others with lower scores were approved.
Liberal Democrat councillor Kevin Lang said: “Coming into this committee meeting, I feel like I had two fundamental issues with this report. Now I feel like I’ll leave with three.
“The first is around what has been quite a complex scoring matrix. I don’t think it’s an unreasonable question to ask, [why do] you get a project scoring 20 paused when a project with 10 is proceeding?
“My second worry is around deliverability. I completely admire and respect the optimism that exists. Let’s be frank, this is a council that can take three years to change a speed limit and six years to put in a speedbump.”
Lang’s third concern was about developers’ compliance with section 75 orders, which involve developer contributions to infrastructure projects.
Earlier in the meeting, a council officer said that most projects were continued or paused based on their score, but that some broke from this pattern due to extenuating circumstances, such as projects being eligible for certain bespoke funding.
The Liberal Democrat group had lodged an amendment calling on the report to be paused, giving councillors and officers more time to look at it.
Meanwhile, the Conservative group put forward their own list of projects to be continued and paused, using different scoring criteria.
Conservative councillor Neil Cuthbert, representing Colinton/Fairmilehead, asked officers: “It does feel like a report for lovers of spreadsheets. Just looking at the different projects, I don’t think it’s any surprise that the ward with the most projects is the city centre.
“The wards with the second and third most projects are Forth and Almond. I don’t want to go through the list, but Colinton/Fairmile is at the bottom of the list. There’s two [projects].
“I wondered if there’s any comments about why there does appear to be quite a disparity in a lot of different areas?”
Council officer Sheila Paton said: “This is a long legacy and history of projects that have come forward over the years. We haven’t deliberately tried to exclude any geographical areas, as I’m sure you can imagine.
“In terms of the focus on the city centre, we have a sense of how much of the proposed ten year programme would potentially be dedicated to the city centre.
“And we feel like it’s in proportion with how complicated the city centre is, how important it is.”
Interim Executive Director of Place Gareth Barwell added: “This list here hasn’t added new schemes. This is officers broadly trawling through the commitments of this committee.
“A lot of these are actions we’ve inherited due to growth and development.”
The SNP group put forward an amendment adding three projects to the ‘proceed’ list, while the Green group wanted to see council officers begin looking at a congestion charge in the capital as a possible infrastructure funding source.
At a vote, seven councillors supported a joint Labour, SNP and Green position, while two supported the Conservative position and two supported the Liberal Democrat position.
Cllr Jenkinson said: “I’m really pleased that we’ve agreed this bold programme for our city. Prioritisation allows us to work smarter with the resources we have available – making sure we have a clear and achievable path to achieving our objectives.
“This programme follows the successes of major infrastructure projects such as Trams to Newhaven and active travel projects including the City Centre West to East Link (CCWEL), Roseburn to Union Canal and Leith Connections.
“This is an extensive piece of work which allows the City Mobility Plan to be agile, and able to adapt in the future as necessary.”
Three projects were added to the list after amendments by political groups, and a fourth was added pending further work on how to fund it.
Among these was the Causey project, which seeks to turn the traffic island at the junction of West Crosscauseway and Buccleuch Street into a public events space.
The project, which campaigners have spent over a decade seeking funding for, was added to the priority list as a result of an SNP amendment.
The group also got the Portobello Town Centre project, which seeks to widen footways and reduce road traffic in the area, and a new cycle link over the bypass near Heriot Watt, over the line.
An amendment by the city’s Labour administration, meanwhile, got approval for the funding of more toilets for bus drivers at the ends of routes, pending finding a funding source.
Cllr Jenkinson said: “The project which I’ve identified as part of my amendment is a very particular project. It is currently marked for pause, but just for this financial year.
“The topic itself of provision of bus driver toilets at key locations, which are predominantly the terminuses for buses, is a very important one.
“Personally, and I hope the committee will agree, that it’s a project that, once the uncertainty around funding is clarified, is unpaused.”
Graeme Smith, an industrial officer for Unite, which covers Lothian Buses, said: “Access to a toilet at work is a basic right so it is important that the Council gets this right for our members in passenger transport.
“This is a matter of health and safety. It is also an equalities issue, more acutely impacting workers who are older, pregnant or have a health condition.”
By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter
