TIE Committee - 11.10.12

Notice of Meeting and Agenda
Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee

Thursday 11 October 2012 at 10.00 am in the City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh PLEASE NOTE DATE OF MEETING
Order of Business Including any notices of motion and any other items of business submitted as urgent for consideration at the meeting.
Declaration of Interests Members should declare any financial and non-financial interests they have in the items of business for consideration at the meeting, identifying the relevant agenda item and the nature of their interest.
Minute
3 Minute of the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee of 13 September 2012 (circulated) - submitted for approval as a correct record.
Deputations
4.1 Muirhouse and Salvesen Community Council letter from the Secretary (circulated) 4.2 Davidsons Mains and Silverknowes Association letter from the Chair (circulated)
Motions
5.1 Dog Fouling Motion by Councillor Day Remitted from the Council of 20 September 2012 Committee notes the success of the Forth Neighbourhood Partnerships dog fouling initiative in 2011 which won national award for innovation and creativity. Committee also notes the continued issues relating to dog fouling and the negative impact which this can have on local communities. While most dog owners dispose of dog fouling responsibly it only takes one or two irresponsible owners to leave the fouling behind to make a neighbourhood look unattractive and uncared for, as well as presenting a potentially serious health hazard to young children.
To build on the successes of the Forth initiative, Committee calls for a report into how this initiative and it's successes can be rolled out across the city, targeting irresponsible owners who persistently allow dog fouling, the report to also consider the possible introduction of a Green Dog Walkers scheme, initially on a pilot basis. 5.2 Sheds for Bicycles Motion by Councillor Bagshaw Submitted in terms of Standing Order 28 Committee: 1) Notes that concerns have been raised about the location of sheds next to residential properties for the purposes of storing bicycles; and that enforcement action has been taken against householders in relation to such sheds. Recognises that accessible storage is one of a number of ways in which travel by bicycle can be made more attractive; and, in turn, contribute to the City Councils stated ambition of increasing bicycle use as a mode of transport. Instructs officers to prepare a report outlining possible ways in which provision for modest-sized, appropriately-designed and sensitivelylocated bicycle storage can be made without unduly comprising neighbourhood character and amenity.
2)
3)
Transport Forum
6 The Transport Forum report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated)
Environment
7 Managed Weekly Collection Update report by the Director of Services for Communities (to follow) South-West Edinburgh Legionnaires Disease Outbreak June to July 2012 - report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated) Trade Waste - report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated)
Infrastructure
10 Plans for Railway Control Period 5 (2014-2019) report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated)
Transport
11 Local Transport Strategy Proposed Extension and Timetable for Renewal report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated) Duddingston Village Traffic report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated) Belhaven Place Proposed Waiting Restrictions report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated) Silverknowes Eastway Potential Closure of Access Routes Linking Muirhouse and Silverknowes - report by the Director of Services for Communities (circulated) Carol Campbell Acting Head of Legal, Risk and Compliance
12
13
14
Membership Councillor Lesley Hinds (Convener) Councillor Jim Orr (Vice-Convener) Councillor Robert Aldridge Councillor Nigel Bagshaw Councillor Gavin Barrie Councillor Chas Booth Councillor Tom Buchanan Councillor Karen Doran Councillor Nick Gardner Councillor Bill Henderson Councillor Allan Jackson Councillor Richard Lewis Councillor Alex Lunn Councillor Mark McInnes Councillor Joanna Mowat Councillor Ian Perry Councillor David Walker Councillor Andrew Burns (ex officio) Councillor Steve Cardownie (ex officio)
Notes: 1) 2) If members intend to appoint substitutes they should contact Lesley Birrell, 0131 529 4240: email: lesley.birrell@edinburgh.gov.uk . If you have any questions about the agenda or meeting arrangements, please contact Lesley Birrell 0131 529 4240: email: lesley.birrell@edinburgh.gov.uk , City of Edinburgh Council, City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh, EH1 1YJ. .
3)
The agenda, minutes and public reports for this meeting and all the main Council committees can be viewed online by going to www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings . Members and officers of the Council can also view them by going to the Orb home page and clicking on Committee Business. A copy of the agenda and papers for this meeting will be available for inspection prior to the meeting at the main reception office, City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh.
4)
Please recycle this paper
Item no
Committee Minutes

Edinburgh, 13 September 2012
Present:- Councillors Hinds (Convener), Orr (Vice-Convener), Aldridge, Bagshaw, Barrie, Booth, Gardner, Bill Henderson, Jackson, Keil (substituting for Councillor Doran), Lewis, Lunn, McInnes, McVey (substituting for Councillor Buchanan), Mowat, Perry and Walker. Also Present: Councillor Edie.
Minute
Decision To approve the minute of the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee of 18 June 2012 as a correct record.
Barbecues on the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links Response to Motion by Councillor McInnes
(a) Deputation Friends of the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links The Committee heard a presentation from Audrey Simon, Heather Goodare and Clare Hewitt on behalf of the Friends of the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links raising concerns about the damage to the Meadows and the Links caused by the number of barbeques being placed on the grass and the resulting litter. The deputation asked the Committee to examine the legality of allowing barbeques on the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links and to review levels of Park Rangers and Environmental Wardens deployed throughout the park. The Convener thanked the deputation for their presentation and invited them to stay for the debate on the matter.
2 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012
(b)
Report by the Director of Services for Communities In response to a motion by Councillor McInnes, an update was given on the pilot scheme initiated by South Central Neighbourhood Partnership supporting barbeque use in the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links. The pilot scheme aimed to minimise the impact of barbeque use through provision of dedicated sites, awareness raising and improved litter management. An evaluation of the pilot would be submitted to the next Neighbourhood Partnership meeting on 24 September 2012 and would include recommendations on the future management of barbeques in the park. The new Park Management Rules for 2013-2023 were scheduled to be considered at the Council meeting on 20 September 2012 and would be taken into account as part of this review. Decision 1) 2) To note the update. To note that a report would be submitted to the South Central Neighbourhood Partnership on 24 September 2012 providing a review of the pilot; the report to also include an examination of the legal options open to the Council with regard to prohibiting barbeques on the Meadows and Bruntsfield Links. To instruct the Director of Services for Communities to prepare a report on the adequacy of toilet provision in the Meadows and possible options to ameliorate any problems identified. To discharge the motion by Councillor McInnes.
3)
4)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 18 June 2012 (item 3.4); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Water of Leith Flood Prevention Scheme Recent Flooding Events and Future Funding
Information was given on the review of the Water of Leith Flood Prevention Project. Phase 1 (Bonnington to Stockbridge) was currently under construction and due for completion in March 2013. Phase 2 (Murrayfield/Roseburn to Edinburgh Sports Club at Belford) had not started due to a shortfall in funding and Phase 3 (Balgreen to Longstone) had yet to be developed.
3 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012 Discussions were ongoing with the Scottish Government and COSLA to secure further funding for the overall project. Councillor Edie, local Ward member was heard in support of the proposals in the report. Decision 1) 2) To note that Emergency Flooding Procedures would be amended following the events of July 2012 and the subsequent Flooding Workshop. To agree that the Convener meet with Stewart Stevenson MSP, Minister for Environment and Climate Change, with a view to securing additional funds. That, prior to engaging with the Minister, the Director of Services for Communities report back to Committee in January 2013 with detailed data on cost to completion of each phase of the works along with a full assessment of finance and identification of risks associated with the Scheme; the report to also include information on flood insurance risks to businesses and residents beyond 30 June 2013. To note that a further report would be submitted to Committee advising if further funding had been secured from COSLA and suggesting a way forward; the report to also include estimates for completion of Phase 1 and implications for future phases.
3)
4)
(References report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Cleanliness of the City

(a) Presentation by Keep Scotland Beautiful Carol Noble, Head of Operations, Keep Scotland Beautiful gave an overview of the standard methodology used in assessing cleanliness across Scotland. Cities were zoned and graded and resources allocated according to footfall levels and housing density. Decision To note the presentation.
(b)
Report by the Director of Services for Communities An update was given on the quality of the Citys local environment and the outcomes detailed in the Cleanliness Index Monitoring Systems (CIMS) Survey. Decision 1) 2) To note the report. That the Director of Services for Communities make presentations to the City Centre and Leith Neighbourhood Partnerships raising awareness of work undertaken in the area. That an analysis of costs of enforcement action balanced with available resources be included in the next monitoring report.
3)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 18 June 2012 (item 6); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Motions
(a) Powderhall and Hopetoun Parking on Roads within Developments Response to Motion by Former Councillor Gordon MacKenzie In response to a motion by former Councillor Gordon MacKenzie, an update was provided on issues around residents parking in the Powderhall and Hopetoun developments. Options to resolve the outstanding issues had been put forward by residents and were highlighted in the Directors report. Decision To note that further discussions would take place with the residents, the developer and other stakeholders as necessary and that a report brought back to Committee for a decision as soon as possible. (References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 27 July 2010 (item 42); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
(b)
Management of Trees in Council Ownership Response to Motion by Councillor Jackson In response to a motion by Councillor Jackson, information was given on proposals for the development of a single integrated approach to the management of all trees in Council ownership. An action plan for the development and management of tree stock would be prepared for consultation. Decision 1) 2) To note the contents of the report. To note that a further report would be presented in due course setting out an action plan for the development and management of Edinburghs trees and woodlands. That the report called for include: information on feasibility of taking action in areas most affected by self-seeding trees and vegetation in close proximity to residential properties guidelines for residents on what action they were permitted to take to alleviate the problem as it affects their property.
3)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 21 February 2012 (item 15); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted) (c) Local Nature Reserves Response to Motion by former Councillor Buchan In response to a motion by former Councillor Buchan, information was provided on how Local Nature Reserves could be further protected from development pressure and the potential for transfer of ownership from the Council to properly constituted Friends groups or charitable trusts. Decision 1) 2) To note the conclusions of the report. That a further report be submitted to Committee either following the establishment of a Community Empowerment and Renewal Act or when the Co-operative Council model had been further developed.
6 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012 3) To recognise that greater community ownership and involvement in Local Nature Reserves could lead to, among others, enhanced community capacity, access to new forms of funding and more community pride in landmark sites. To agree that greater community ownership and involvement was exactly the kind of direction signalled by the Councils ambition to become a co-operative Council. To support and facilitate greater community ownership and stewardship of Local Nature Reserves where there was local appetite to explore this, where capacity to take on that role had been demonstrated and where it was judged to be in the long term interest of the Local Nature Reserve and the wider community. To agree that the motion by former Councillor Buchan is discharged.
4)
5)
6)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 29 November 2011 (item 4); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted) (d) Cycling in the City 5% Transport Spend Commitment and the Delivery of the Active Travel Action Plan Response to Motion by Councillor Orr In response to a motion by Councillor Orr, it was proposed to transfer capital and revenue budgets to achieve the target spend on cycling and the appointment of an additional Project Officer to ensure the effective delivery of the projects associated with the additional funding. Information was also given on the draft programme of Active Travel Action Plan (ATAP) cycle projects which had been developed for 2013/14 and 2014/15. Decision 1) 2) 3) 4) To note the contents of the report. To approve the proposed 2012/13 Capital and Revenue budget transfers to achieve the 5% spending commitment. To note the creation of an Active Travel Co-ordinator post to assist in the delivery of the ATAPs walking related actions. That the Director of Services for Communities provide members with maps showing the additional spend on cycling throughout the City.
5)
To discharge the motion by Councillor Orr.
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 18 June 2012 (item 3.9); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted) (e) Bus Lane Camera Enforcement Review Response to Motion by Councillor Hinds In response to a motion by Councillor Hinds, information was provided on the outcome of the audit of 10 bus lane camera sites in the City together with a review of operational arrangements for managing enforcement. It was proposed: to amend both sites at Willowbrae Road to become operational once any changes had been made following local consultation to permanently decommission the site at North Bridge that the Leith Street site should not become operational until after the city centre tram works were completed to commission the cameras at the bus gates at Prestonfield Avenue and The Jewel
Decision 1) To note that the audit of the 10 sites had been undertaken alongside a review of operational arrangements for managing bus lane camera enforcement. To approve the recommendations relating to the sites at Willowbrae Road, North Bridge, Leith Street, Prestonfield Avenue and The Jewel. To note that the expansion of the bus lane camera enforcement system would be the subject of a future report. To note that the review of the bus lane network would be the subject of a further report following discussion and direction from the new Transport Forum. To discharge the motion by Councillor Hinds.
2)
3) 4)
5)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 18 June 2012 (item 3.11); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
The Sir Chris Hoy Cycle Network: A Golden Legacy for Edinburgh
The Council had asked the Committee to examine the feasibility of developing a Sir Chris Hoy cycle network in the City. Decision To continue consideration of the proposal to a future meeting of the Committee for further discussions with Sir Chris Hoy. (References Act of Council No 16 of 23 August 2012; report by the Acting Head of Legal, Risk and Compliance, submitted)
Sewerage (Scotland) Act 1968 Section 7: Agreements between Local Roads Authorities and Scottish Water
Approval was sought to implement Section 7 Agreements between the Council and Scottish Water in respect of new developments and road improvements. Decision To authorise the Director of Services for Communities to sign Section 7 Agreements under the Sewerage (Scotland) Act 1968 in accordance with the model agreement detailed in the report. (Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Seafield Waste Water Treatment Works Monitoring of Scottish Water Odour Improvement Plan
The outcome of the Odour Monitoring and Assessment Programme carried out during the period 1 June 2011 to 31 July 2012 was reported. Decision 1) 2) 3) To note the report. To receive further reports on the outcomes of the Seafield monitoring and assessment programme the first of which was expected in Autumn 2012. To communicate to Scottish Water concerns regarding the frequency of odour emissions identified during the monitoring period and that odour emissions continued to impact adversely on the local community.
9 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012 4) To make representations to Scottish Water for appropriate investment and action to reduce further the frequency and nature of odour emissions from the treatment works. To continue to work with the local community and Scottish Water to identify solutions and implement further measures to reduce odour emissions from the Seafield Waste Water Works. To note that over the period 1 March 2012 to 4 April 2012 there had been a total of 28 odour incidents amounting to 5.6 incidents per week.
5)
6)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 18 June 2012 (item 5); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Waste and Recycling Strategy

An update was given on the delivery of the Waste and Recycling Strategy and the work being undertaken to redesign and improve kerbside collection services. Decision 1) 2) To note the positive outcomes achieved to date through the delivery of the Waste and Recycling Strategy. To note the ongoing review of recycling services and the intention to present a further report on the outcome.
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 29 November 2010 (item 15); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
10 Use of Agricultural Ground for Allotments and the Use of Private Gardens for Food Growing
Information was provided on the feasibility of using private gardens and agricultural land on the outskirts of the City for food growing together with associated costs. Details were also given of the number of people currently on the Councils waiting list for allotments.
Decision 1) That land already in the ownership of the Council be used to establish new allotment sites before additional land on the outskirts of the city was purchased and that regular progress reports be presented to Committee. To note that the Council would continue to support the use of private gardens for food growing through organisations such as Edinburgh Garden Partners.
2)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 2 August 2011 (item 13); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
11 Services for Communities: Revenue Budget Monitoring 2012/13 Month Three Position
Details were provided of the month 3 revenue monitoring position for the Department of Services for Communities. At this stage, the Department was projecting a balanced General Fund budget for the year end and a balanced Housing Revenue Account. Decision To note Services for Communities revenue budget position for 2012/13. (Reference joint report by the Directors of Services for Communities and Corporate Governance, submitted)
12 InterCity East Coast Franchise Consultation

The Department of Transport had invited the Council to comment on a consultation on the minimum requirements for the next InterCity East Coast franchise. The submission deadline was 18 September 2012 and a proposed response was set out in the appendix to the report by the Director of Services for Communities. Decision To approve the draft response to the InterCity East Coast Franchise consultation. (Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
13 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Performance Report April/May 2012

Performance management information for April/May 2012 for the Department of Services for Communities was presented. Decision To note the Performance for the period April to May 2012. (Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
14 Edinburgh Tram Network Variation to Implementation Date of Traffic Regulation Orders

Information was given on representations received during the public consultation period to amend the implementation date of the Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO1) for the Edinburgh Tram Network. Decision To repel the objections and make the Variation Orders as advertised to come into effect on 24 September 2012. (Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
15 Parking in Central Edinburgh during Summer and Winter Festivals

Information was provided on the action taken by the Director of Services for Communities to implement free parking in the city centre, east end and west end over the summer festival period in 2012. Proposals to support the winter festivals in a similar way were also being explored. Motion 1) To note the decision taken by the Director of Services for Communities in consultation with the Convener, to implement free parking in on-street pay and display parking bays in the city centre, east end and west end over the summer festival period from 6 August 2012 to 1 September 2012 inclusive.
12 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012 2) To note that Essential Edinburgh and Marketing Edinburgh should commission a study to report on the success or otherwise of the summer campaign to be presented to all stakeholders. moved by Councillor Hinds, seconded by Councillor Orr
Amendment 1) To note the decision taken by the Director of Services for Communities in consultation with the Convener, to implement free parking in on-street pay and display parking bays in the city centre, east end and west end over the summer festival period from 6 August 2012 to 1 September 2012 inclusive. To request that Council officers produce an environmental report on the impact of the Alive After Five campaign and the possibility of offer a public transport alternative to attain the same ends. moved by Councillor Bagshaw, seconded by Councillor Booth
2)
Voting For the motion For the amendment Decision To approve the motion by Councillor Hinds. (Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted) 15 votes 2 votes
16 Double Yellow Lines in South Morningside

An analysis was provided of the results of the consultation with local elected members and residents on the potential reduction of lengths of double yellow lines on and around Craiglea Drive and the wider area to the west of Comiston Road. Decision 1) 2) To note the findings of an inspection and assessment of double yellow lines in the South Morningside area. To abandon the current traffic order to reduce the length of double yellow lines in the area.
13 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012 3) To commence a new traffic order to replace existing double yellow lines with single yellow lines at selected junctions and to include the southern section of Hermitage Gardens in the new order. To implement the Priority Parking area in South Morningside.
4)
(References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 21 February 2012 (item 28); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
17 Blue Badge Administration Arrangements for Mobility Assessments

An update was given on the new arrangements for mobility assessments together with associated financial implications. Decision To note the report. (References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 27 September 2011 (item 26); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
18 Objections to Nine Hour Parking Places Traffic Regulation Order

Information was given on representations received during the public consultation period to amend the conditions of nine hour parking places within the Controlled Parking Zone Extension. Decision To continue consideration of the matter to the next meeting to allow for briefing sessions to be arranged for elected members. (References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 10 May 2011 (item 27); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
19 Priority Parking Area B1 Proposed Amendments

Information was given on representations received during the public consultation period to amend the extent and location of waiting restrictions and parking places within Priority Parking Area B1. Decision 1) 2) To abandon the proposal to extend the double yellow lines and reduce the extent of the limited waiting parking place at the location. To make the remainder of the advertised traffic order.
(Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
20 The Shore, Introduction of a Contraflow Bus Lane, Parking Restrictions and Prohibited Traffic Movements
Information was given on representations received during the public consultation period to commence an environmental improvement project at Shore (South) along with the proposed traffic management proposals and promotion of the associated Traffic Regulation Order. Decision To set aside the remaining objection and commence the statutory procedure to make the Traffic Regulation Order. (References Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 27 September 2011 (item 6); report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)
Item No 4.1
Item No 4.2
Item no
Report no
The Transport Forum

11 October 2012
Purpose of report 1 To ask Committee to approve the proposed terms of reference and structure for the Transport Forum.
Main report
2 3
The Administration has a commitment to set up a city-wide Transport Forum of experts and citizens as an article of the Coalition Agreement. The intention is for the Forum to function as an advisory and consultative body which gives a greater voice to stakeholders and users of Edinburghs transport network. The terms of reference and proposed structure of the Transport Forum are set out in greater detail in Appendices 1 and 2. It is proposed to inaugurate the Transport Forum with a half day workshop in December. This would be chaired by the Convener of the Transport and Environment Committee, as it will be designated then; and there would be an initial discussion of over-arching strategic themes, as well as of the Main Issues to be consulted on in the new Local Transport Strategy.
4 5
Financial Implications 6 Resources to support the operation of the Forum will be provided by the Council, including administration resources from Committee Services and facilitation by Transport. These will be accommodated within existing budgets.
Equalities Impact 7 Transport policy changes are subject to equalities assessment, and there will be no new direct equalities impact arising from this report. The Transport Forum will include representation from the Transport Access Forum which exists to serve transport users with impaired mobility.
Environmental Impact 8 In its advisory role, the Transport Forum would give consideration to the environmental impact, among other issues, of the policies put before it for consultation.
Recommendations 9 It is recommended that the Committee: a) b) agree to the establishment of the Transport Forum, in accordance with the Coalition Agreement; agree to the structure as outlined, with up to 36 members, including up to ten people with specialist knowledge and up to six members of the public; and agree to arrange the inaugural meeting before the end of this calendar year.
c)
Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities
Appendices
1. Transport Forum Terms of reference 2. Proposed structure of the Forum and sub Fora Lynda Haughney; 0131 469 3633; Lynda. Haughney@edinburgh. gov. uk All An effective, accessible urban transport network underpins all four priorities in the current Single Outcome Agreement. The Coalition Agreement; The Local Transport Strategy 2007 2012/13 Transport 2030 Vision *
Contact/tel/Email
Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers
Appendix 1: Transport Forum: Terms of Reference

Purpose To provide a city wide Forum of experts and citizens to consider our future transport needs. The Forum will be established by the Transport and Environment Committee with the aim of providing an effective mechanism to influence the development of the citys transport strategy and service. It will be a consultative body to review current policy and strategic direction and to contribute to medium to long term planning. Membership and accountability The membership will include the Councils Transport Spokespersons and representatives from; Lothian Buses (representing bus operators), Chamber of Commerce and Federation of Small Businesses, Essential Edinburgh or Marketing Edinburgh, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh Living Streets Group, Spokes, Bus Users Group, Edinburgh Airport, Transport Research Institute, Institute of Advanced Motorists or AA, Rail Users Group, Edinburgh Transport Access Forum, Transport Scotland, Transform Scotland and Taxis. The Forum will also include up to 10 people with specialist knowledge. In order to include transport users we will advertise and invite applications from up to 6 members of the public (including a Community Council representative) which Transport Spokespersons will consider with a view to ensuring the balance in terms of representation. In addition, each of the 6 Neighbourhood areas would be asked to nominate a representative plus an additional representative from the City Centre in view of the complex nature of transport issues there. The Forum will be an advisory body. The Director of SfC will report annually on the Forums activity, progress and performance to the TE Committee, or the Policy Review and Development Sub-Committee as appropriate. The Forum will be reviewed after the first year. Operation The Transport Forum will be inaugurated by a half day workshop held by the end of the calendar year. Thereafter the Forum will meet four times per year and will be chaired by the Transport Convener. Sub-groups will be convened approximately 4 times per year, replacing/incorporating existing transport related forums and steering groups. Resources to support the operation of the Forum will be provided by the Council including; administrative support (agendas, minutes, action sheets) to be provided by Committee Services, facilitation to be provided by Transport Officers, and for development of the use of new technology. It is intended that the Forum will operate on a consensual basis and that any emerging recommendations will be reported to the TE Committee, or the Policy Review and Development Sub-Committee as appropriate.
Appendix 2: Proposed structure
Council Transport Policy

in line with Council outcomes and Capital Coalition pledges
Technical support and recommendations from officers
Transport and Environment Executive Committee
Roads & pavements
Transport Forum
Parking Active Travel
Public transport / accessibility
Policy Review and Development Committee
Road Safety
Item no
Report no
Changes to Waste Collection Progress Report

11 October 2012
1 1.1 2
Purpose of report To provide Committee with an update on the recent changes to waste collection. Main Report Background
2.1
As part of the drive towards meeting the challenging national recycling targets, the Council approved the Waste and Recycling Strategy at the meeting of TIE Committee on 23rd November 2010. One of the key measures was to increase the range of materials that can be recycled through kerbside collections, while reducing the frequency of landfill waste collections. Committee agreed that as kerbside recycling collections are expanded, including the provision of a weekly food waste collection, that the Council would move away from weekly collection of individual green wheeled bins. Following on from the Alternative Business Model (ABM) Review, Council agreed on 24 November 2011 to proceed with implementing the internal improvement plan or Public Sector Comparator (PSC) for Environment Services. The PSC included proposals to move ahead with managed weekly collections, (i.e. weekly collection of food waste, red and blue recycling boxes on alternate weeks and refuse and garden waste bins on alternate weeks, except in winter when garden waste collections are monthly). The financial assumptions with in the PSC were subsequently built in to the revenue budget for Services for Communities as part of the budget setting process for 2012/13. Some members will be aware that the refuse collection service has been through an extremely challenging period since 2009 as a result of Modernising Pay and a range of changes to staff working arrangements. The introduction of the new collection arrangements needs to be seen in this context and in light of the inherent risks which the service has been carrying. On 10 September 2012 a number of major changes to waste collection were therefore implemented. These included: Managed weekly collections for households with individual wheeled bins which involved the provision of weekly kerbside food waste collection 1
2.2
2.3
service and a change in the frequency of collection of green (landfill waste) wheeled bins to once every two weeks. A complete re-routing of all waste collections (with the exception of the red and blue recycling boxes which are collected by Palm Recycling) The introduction of new shift patterns. Individual wheeled bin collections (both the green landfill bins and garden waste bins) are now collected 5 days a week on a double day shift with an early shift starting at 6.00am and the late shift finishing at 10.00pm. Communal bins, packaging banks and trade waste are now collected seven days a week on a 4x4 shift. Food waste collections continue to be collected on a flat five day shift.
2.4
All the above changes are part of an approved programme of efficiencies aimed at delivering significant increases in recycling and associated financial savings. When the PSC was adopted, these savings were then built into the revenue budget for Services for Communities from 2012/13 onwards. As the previous collection routes had developed in an ad hoc fashion over a number of years they had become imbalanced and inefficient with significant variations in workloads between routes and different days of the week. A major re-design of all routes to iron out these imbalances and increase the productivity of each route was carried out using specialist routing software. The re-routing exercise together with the new shift patterns has meant that the collection days for most bins has changed although only the green wheeled bins have had a change in the frequency of collection. All the above changes were supported by a comprehensive programme of internal and external communications. All households with individual wheeled bins received a leaflet in the week commencing 6th August advising them of the changes in the way their bins were being collected with a new collection calendar and other information being sent from 20th August. This was supplemented by radio and press adverts and a door knocking campaign by recycling advisers which focussed on areas where participation in recycling has traditionally been low. Staff were also kept informed of all the changes, consulted on the shift changes and involved along with union representatives in the re-design of the collection routes. The scale and complexity of these changes is very significant. There are 236,000 properties in Edinburgh that receive a refuse collection service. Of these approximately 139,500 properties have individual wheeled bins, 52,000 properties are served by 6,000 communal bins, 29,000 properties by 1556 side loading or OMB bins, 8000 properties are served by 2029 paladin and chamberlain bins and 7,500 properties present waste in black sacks. In addition Waste Services have 2,580 trade waste customers with around 4,214 bins and 800 receiving black sack collections In addition to the above there are also recycling collections. There are approximately 118,000 properties with garden waste bins, 141,451 with individual food waste bins and a further 29,176 with access to communal food waste containers. There are also 2,200 packaging banks collected by Waste 2
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
Services. The red and blue recycling boxes are collected by Palm Recycling and have not been affected by the changes. 2.10 On average there are 60,000 collections a day or nearly 300,000 a week. In addition to the challenges of re-routing so many collections across the city there were also other risks to the changes. Firstly the success of new managed weekly collections for individual wheeled bins was dependent on residents becoming quickly familiar with the new collection arrangements and making greater use of the kerbside recycling collection to dispose of their waste. Poor public buy in would result in the increase in recycling not being achieved and widespread problems with side waste (excess waste presented alongside the wheeled bins). The other main risk was the potential lack of co-operation of the refuse collection staff. The workforce had only ended a long running industrial dispute over Modernising Pay in November 2011 and the losses in earnings that staff will face when pay protection ends in October 2013 still remains a significant source of discontent. Progress to date 2.11 2.12 The changes were implemented on 10th September as planned and this section summarises the impact of the changes to date across the different collections. Individual green domestic waste bins Collection frequency of these bins changed from weekly to once a fortnight and as outlined in section 2.10 above was perceived to be the change that carried the greatest risk. To date these collections have kept on schedule with the exception of the small refuse collection vehicle which services harder to access locations such as some of the colonies. This route will continue to be monitored to see if it needs to revised in order to ensure regular completion. There have been some problems with the accuracy of bin locations on routing schedules given to collection crews leading to some missed collections. However routing schedules are updated daily with the more accurate and detailed information. There have also been some missed assisted collections and where this occurs arrangements are made to collect the bins as soon as possible. Crews are reminded to note the assisted collections listed on their route schedules and route attenders are used to double check that assisted collections are not being missed.
2.13
The vast majority of households have quickly adapted to the new collection arrangements for green wheeled bins and the incidence of excess or side waste has been lower than anticipated. Route attenders have been recording the number of bins presenting side waste or overfull bins and of the routes surveyed so far an average of only 1.14% of bins have presented with side waste. Crews are being instructed to take excess waste although there have been some instances where this has not occurred and this has been raised with the staff concerned. As the changes become firmly bedded in we will gradually move to a position where excess waste is not collected and 3
households who continue to present it will be visited by recycling advisers and encouraged to use the recycling services. 2.14 Although managed weekly collections had only been in place for three weeks by the end of September the impact on the amount of waste going to landfill has been very encouraging. The amount of waste sent to landfill in September 2012 dropped to 9,945 tonnes, a decrease of 3,399 tonnes on the previous month and 2,569 tonne reduction on September 2011, a saving of approximately 250,000 in landfill costs in one month alone. If this trend continues then the budgeted landfill saving of 1.4m in 2012/13 will be realised. Garden waste collections - The frequency of these collections remains unchanged. There have been some delays with garden waste collections caused by seasonal high volumes of garden waste but the majority of garden waste bins are being collected on schedule. Food waste - The collection frequencies for food waste did not change but routes were changed so that collections were on the same day of the week as green and brown bins. Route sizes were also increased to improve productivity but this had to be balanced with the anticipated increase in participation. Route completion performance in the five food waste routes in the west of the city has been variable and an additional route has now been added in response to higher than anticipated levels of participation and to compensate for current delays. Further reviews of these routes will be undertaken to make sure that they are correctly sized. Where food waste caddies have not been collected on schedule, residents are asked to leave them out and they will be collected later that day or the next day. The food waste collections in the east of the city have been delivered on schedule.
2.15
2.16
2.17
Waste Services have good stocks of food waste bins and aim to complete all outstanding deliveries this week. Residents can now use plastic bags to line their food waste caddies as our contractors have installed equipment that separates them from the food waste before it is treated. Additionally we are trialling the sale of compostable liners at the Drumbrae Hub and Blackhall library for 1 a roll. If this proves successful it will be rolled out to other libraries and neighbourhood offices. There is evidence now to suggest that use of kerbside food waste collections is increasing. A survey of food waste routes carried out at the end of September indicated presentation rates (number of food waste bins being presented for collection) of 28% compared to 16% in May 2011. Food waste tonnages have also increased to 399 tonnes in September, an increase of 66 tonnes from the previous month and an increase of 338 tonnes compared to September 2011. Side loading bins (large on-street bins with foot pedal) - Collection frequencies for these bins remain the same. There were some delays to these collections of the new routes in part because the crews were unfamiliar with the routes but also because we had to adjust routes to allow for the resurfacing works on 4
2.18
2.19
Gorgie Road. For the last week these crews have been completing all their collections on schedule however crews are reporting higher than normal volumes of waste and a high incidence of excess waste presented around the bins. There is some evidence to suggest that residents and businesses are using these bins to dispose of waste even though they have their own collection arrangements. 2.20 Chute fed bins (paladins and chamberlains), on street communal, developments and trade waste bins - The collection frequency of these bins remains the same These bins were collected over five days but are now collected over seven days. These collections have experienced the most problems with delays and missed collections but with the help of additional contingencies are now running on their scheduled days. There a number of reasons for the challenges on these routes including: Crew familiarity with new routes and the location of development bin shelters and trade waste bins. On large developments complex numbering systems make it difficult to find bin shelters and trade waste bins are often located remotely from the premise that they serve. Additional information on bin shelter and trade waste locations is being added to daily route schedules. Access arrangements access to bin shelters on developments often requires keys or electronic keypad access codes. The management of these access arrangements was sometimes poor with crews not being given the correct key or keypad code. A survey of housing developments has now been carried out in order to ensure that accurate information on both bin shelter location and access arrangements has been recorded and passed on to collection crews. Route size although it is still too early to reach any firm conclusions, the size of some of these routes may need to be revised in order to ensure route completion.
2.21
Packaging Banks - The collection frequency for these bins remains the same. They were collected over 5 days but are now collected over 7 days. There were initially some delays to collections but routes have been amended to increase capacity and these routes are operating on schedule. Red and blue box collections These collections are carried out by Palm Recycling and have not changed frequency or day and routes have not been amended. It was anticipated that there would be an increased demand for red and blue boxes from residents but the response from the public has been so positive that requests for new or additional boxes has exceeded expectations (6,200 outstanding requests at the end of September) and Palm have struggled to meet the demand. Palm have now increased their stock of boxes and are now delivering them at the rate of between 300-500 a day and hope to have cleared all outstanding requests within the next couple of weeks. An options appraisal for replacing the red and blue box scheme has been commissioned and the outcome and recommendations for a new scheme will be reported to this committee in due course. 5
2.22
2.23
2.24
Customer Complaints - The problems that have been experienced since the changes were implemented on 10th September have led to an increase in complaints. Although provision had been made for an increase in complaints the volumes were larger than anticipated. Hampered by inadequate ICT systems complaint handling has sometimes been poor with many customers having to contact Waste Services several times before receiving a response. Generic responses, failure to give a clear indication of when missed bins would be collected and then failure to collect a bin even when a date or time had been given added to a poor customer experience for some residents. Although the number of complaints is now reducing and improvements have been made to the management of complaints further work is required to ensure that complaints are handled more effectively. Financial implications The changes implemented to waste collection services in September were designed to increase the amount of waste that is recycled and achieve savings in landfill costs of 1.4m in the current financial year. Landfill tonnages from September show a significant decrease in line with projected savings. If this trend continues then the 1.4m saving will be achieved. The full year value of these savings in 2013/14 will be 2.4m. Provision was made for additional collection crews to help respond to any problems or delays as the new collection arrangements bedded in. However the problems with non-completion of some of the food waste and communal and trade collection routes have proved to be greater and more persistent than expected. Contingency resources have therefore been increased to get these collections back on track and minimise the impact on the public while a more permanent solution is developed. Contingencies will be reduced once we are confident that all the issues that have impeded full route completion have been resolved and a final cost of these additional resources can then be calculated. Equalities Impact The content of this report is not relevant to the Equality Act 2010 public sector general equality duty. Environmental Impact The increase in recycling and the diversion of waste from landfill represents an environmental improvement, with a reduction in carbon emissions and more efficient use of finite natural resources. Conclusions Waste collections are going through the biggest change in decades. The changes have been designed to increase the efficiency of collections, increase recycling, reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill and achieve significant savings in both collection and disposal costs. In terms of the strategic and policy objectives of these changes, early indications are that these will be achieved. The increased demand for red and blue boxes, increased food waste 6
3 3.1
3.2
4 4.1 5 5.1
6 6.1
recycling and reduced landfill tonnages for September all point to the to increase in recycling and landfill diversion being achieved. 6.2 However there have been undoubted problems and some customers have experienced varying levels of disruption with some having to suffer unacceptable levels of service particularly on some of the food waste and communal and trade collections. Waste Services have had to use additional contingency resources to help these collections keep on schedule and are working to put in place permanent solutions. Procurement of a new ICT system for Environment Services including waste collection is currently underway and it is anticipated that this will result in a significant improvement in the management of information relating to bins and other Waste Services assets, provide real time management information on route completion and missed bins and enable more efficient resolution of customer complaints. Recommendations Committee is asked to: a) Note the action taken to deal with disruption to certain parts of the service; b) Note the contents of this report.
6.3
7 7.1
Appendices Contact/tel/Email
None David Lyon Head of Environment - 529 7047 david.lyon@edinburgh.gov.uk
All 1
Item no
Report no
South-West Edinburgh Legionnaires Disease Outbreak, June to July 2012

11 October 2012
1 1.1
Purpose of report To respond to the Motion by Councillor Chapman at Council on 23 August 2012 regarding the Legionella outbreak. To report back to Council or the Health, Social Care and Housing Committee no later than October 2012 on lessons learned from the 2012 Legionella outbreak and on measures to ensure that there can be no recurrence of the incident with such tragic consequences.
1.2
Management of the Legionella outbreak within the Council rests with Environmental Health and Scientific Services. These services report to the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee. The report on Councillor Chapmans Motion has therefore been directed to this Committee. Councillor Chapman has been consulted on this report.
1.3
This report provides the Committee with an update on the current situation pending conclusion of the investigation. Main report On 3 June 2012, NHS Lothian identified an outbreak of Legionnaires Disease. The outbreak was declared over on 17 July 2012. During the intervening 45 days there were 55 confirmed and 30 suspected cases identified and treated by NHS Lothian. Tragically, three confirmed cases died as a consequence of the disease. Epidemiological evidence through mapping of cases, analysis of travel diaries and analysis of wind speed and direction suggested that a common outdoor airborne exposure occurred over South-West Edinburgh between 23 and 29 May 2012.
2 2.1
2.2
2.3
An Incident Management Team (IMT) led by NHS Lothian was established on 3 June, in accordance with Guidance on the Management of Public Health Incidents, published by the Scottish Government, and Management of Legionella Incidents, published by the Health Protection Network. The Councils Environmental Health and Scientific Services were members of the IMT, as were the Health and Safety Executive. To date the IMT has met sixteen times to manage the outbreak. Investigation of the outbreak is continuing with further laboratory investigations and epidemiological studies in progress. Epidemiological studies include a Case Control Study, to quantify specific risk factors of patients who developed serious illness, and a Prevalence Study, to identify the number of persons with mild illness treated in primary care, who actually had Legionella infection. These studies are being led by NHS Lothian with assistance from the Councils Environmental Health and Scientific Services. Initial results from the Prevalence Study indicate that a low proportion of cases investigated or treated by NHS Primary Care were positive for Legionella infection. The IMT is in the process of conducting structured debriefs and review of lessons learned from the incident response, in accordance with the Guidance on the Management of Public Health Incidents. A review is also in progress internally within Services for Communities, which will contribute to the IMT led review. The IMT review will be completed and published within three months of the IMT being stood down, subject to progress with the investigation being carried out by the Police and the Health and Safety Executive. Preliminary assessment has indicated that the co-ordinated public health, environmental and clinical response to the outbreak helped prevent ongoing exposure and mitigated associated mortality and morbidity. Lothian and Borders Police and the Health & Safety Executive are jointly investigating the circumstances of the three deaths, under the direction of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS). In consequence, it is not appropriate to provide further details until these investigations have concluded. It is proposed that a full report on the lessons learned and measures to be taken to avoid a future outbreak of the disease will be made to the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee following publication of the IMT review of the incident. The Cabinet Minister for Health and Wellbeing and Lothian Healths Director of Public Health and Health Policy have written to commend staff for the speed, thoroughness and quality of response during the incident. Financial Implications The costs associated with this outbreak will be managed within existing departmental budgets.
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3 3.1
4 4.1
Equalities Impact This report proposes no change to current policies or procedures and as such a full impact assessment is not required. The contents have no relevance to the public sector Equality Duty of the Equality Act 2010. Environmental Impact Assessment of any environmental impact will be included in the final report of the incident. Recommendations Committee is asked to note this report and require a further report following publication of the NHS Lothian Incident Management Teams report on the outbreak investigation and future control activities.
5 5.1
6 6.1
None Dr Andrew Mackie, Environmental Health & Scientific Services Manager 0131 469 5925 andrew.mackie@edinburgh.gov.uk City-wide Outcome 2. Edinburghs citizens experience improved health and well being with reduced inequalities in health. 1. Management of Public Health Incidents. Guidance on the Roles and Responsibilities of NHS led Incident Management Teams, Scottish Government, Oct 2011. 2. Guideline on Management of Legionella Incidents, Outbreaks and Clusters in the Community, Health Protection Network, 2009 *
Item no
Report no
Trade Waste
Transport, Infrastructure and Environment
11 October 2012
1 1.1
Purpose of report To present to Committee an overview of the issues and challenges around the management of trade waste in the city, outline approaches in other Authorities and suggest options for further examination. To examine enforcement powers around trade waste and consider whether additional powers /bylaws are needed. To discharge the instruction from Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee on 13 September to report on Trade Waste. To discharge the Motion from Councillor Buchan from Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee on 21 February 2012 on restaurant waste containers outlined in Appendix 1. Summary Management of trade waste presents a range of challenges particularly in the city centre. Individual businesses have responsibility for the storage, presentation and collection of their trade waste with the Council having powers to enforce acceptable arrangements. At present these powers are not fully utilised. There are examples of City Authorities in England who have moved to a zero tolerance approach to trade waste with significant positive impact on the local environment. It is proposed that a detailed study of the potential for this approach in Edinburgh be carried out and reported back to a future Committee. Main Report The management of trade waste across the city presents a range of challenges. Presentation of waste, location of containers and frequency of collections all potentially impact on the surrounding environment and on local residents with particular problems emerging in city centre areas.
1.2 1.3 1.4
2 2.1
2.2
3 3.1
3.2
Individual businesses are responsible for the presentation and management of their trade waste. They can contract with either the Council or any commercial waste collection service who will provide storage containers and uplift of waste. The Council is required to provide this service where the business has been unable to make other arrangements and will charge for this. The market for waste collection is complex and highly competitive; businesses can make considerable cost savings by seeking the most advantageous deal available at any time. In many cases this results in a compromise between size of container and collection frequency. It is more cost effective for a business to pay for a large waste container and arrange for less frequent waste collections. A direct consequence of these market arrangements has been the substantial increase in the number, size, shape and purpose of trade waste containers in evidence around the city. Individual businesses are responsible for the care of their own waste up to the time that it is collected and this has mitigated against arrangements to share containers. In crowded areas, particularly around inner city and tenemental properties, there is limited opportunity to store trade waste containers within premises with the result that the containers are commonly stored permanently on the street. The combination of variation in collection arrangements, large containers stored on the street and the cost benefit to business in reducing the frequency of uplifts results in substantial quantities of waste being present on streets throughout the day and night. The net result is generally to the detriment of the local environment. Existing Enforcement Legislation
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
As outlined above individual businesses have responsibility for the storage, presentation and collection of their trade waste. Powers to manage and enforce these arrangements rest with the Local Authority. These powers are contained in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA) and the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. The Environmental Protection Act 1990 establishes a duty for producers of commercial waste to make proper and reasonable arrangements for its disposal. Section 33(1) relates to the proper disposal of trade waste. A Fixed Penalty Notice can be issued when the waste was not identified by the business as being trade waste, an appropriate trade waste container was not used or when the waste was presented on the street for disposal out with the time arranged for collection. On average around 82 Fixed Penalty Notices are issued each month across the city under Section 33 of the EPA, with the majority of these issued in or around the city centre. Section 47 of the Act identifies the means by which waste authorities can regulate how producers of commercial or industrial waste can store and present waste. In particular, section 47 allows a waste authority to make requirements around the placing of waste containers on the road for collection.
3.7
3.8
3.9
The Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, Section 59 relates to the control of items placed in a road. The Roads Authority can require such items to be removed or make provision for the item to be placed more appropriately where it is considered to cause an obstruction. In addition the Act makes provision for the granting of permits for the temporary occupation of a specified section of the carriageway, for which the authority can levy a charge. Currently these provisions are applied to tables and chairs, scaffolding, skips etc. There is the potential to make similar provision for waste containers. Approaches in other cities
3.10
3.11
Officers from the city centre and Leith Neighbourhood team visited two English local authorities in February this year (Westminster City Council and Manchester City Council) to look at alternative approaches to maintaining street cleanliness in busy city centre areas. Each authority has adopted a zero tolerance approach to the storage of waste on the streets. In Westminster this has developed over the past 12 years with specified areas coming under the term Bags off Streets; in Manchester this is a more recent development implemented over the past five years, with the final phase just being completed at the time of the visit. The zero tolerance approach requires that all waste is stored within the curtilage of business premises until the stipulated collection time, with presentation limited to a short period around the time of collection. In Westminster this is a maximum of 30 minutes before the time for collection. In each case this has been enforce through the use of Section 47 of the Environmental Protection Act, with businesses fined for allowing waste to be on the streets out with the stipulated period. In both authorities the majority of waste is collected by a single contractor, contracted to the local authority. In Westminster collection frequency is very high, with 3 collections each day in those areas designated as within the Bags off Streets zone. In Manchester trade waste is collected daily in the city centre. In each authority the absence of waste containers on the streets was striking and contributed to a significantly lower sense of clutter on the streets. These examples show that effective management of trade waste can be enforced through existing legislation but this requires a major shift in the requirements made of business and the enforcement of these conditions. At the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee on 21 February 2012 Councillor Buchan called for investigation into the need for a new by-law that would give the Council powers to remove offending trade waste containers if there was the validated support of up to 6 neighbouring residents.
3.12
3.13
3.14 3.15
3.16
3.17
In general terms creation of a new by-law requires formal application to and approval by Ministers. A clear case for the need for the new powers requires to be made and as by-laws have a criminal implication they are generally unlikely to be granted if alternative powers are in existence. The powers outlined in paragraph 3.6 - 3.9 do provide local authorities with a means to enforce trade waste presentation and management. Investigation has found no examples of use of by-laws to manage trade waste in Scotland. It is therefore considered unlikely that the application for such a by-law would be successful. This approach would also have potential cost implications for the Council both in administering the scheme and in collecting the offending waste. There is a clear need to more effectively manage trade waste in the city. Powers are available to the Council which would allow a more robust enforcement approach however this would have the potential for increased costs to business from increased collection frequencies. It is therefore proposed that a detailed study is carried out examining the potential for a zero tolerance based approach to trade waste in Edinburgh, with an initial focus on the city centre. A report on options and implications to be reported back to a future Committee to be the basis for consultation with stakeholders. Financial Implications There are no immediate financial implications of this report as the study can be undertaken within existing resources. There may be financial implications arising from the study outcomes, which will be reported as part of the outcomes of the work. Equalities Impact There is no relationship to the public sector general equality duty to the matters described in this report and no direct equalities impact arising from this report. Environmental Impact Improved management of trade waste will have a general effect to improve the local environment and amenity, particularly where there is a substantial reduction in the amount of waste stored on the roads of the city. Conclusions A range of options is available under existing legislation to deal with poor management of trade waste by businesses. Currently almost all enforcement activity is under Section 33 of the EPA, focussing on issues such as the overfilling of containers, waste deposited around containers and waste placed on the streets on the wrong day or, less frequently, out with collection times. There has been limited use of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 to address waste bins sited in locations so as to cause an obstruction.
3.18
3.19
4 4.1
5 5.1 6 6.1
7 7.1
7.2
7.3
The lessons from other authorities point towards much stricter control of the placement of containers on the street. This can be achieved through using a combination of the powers afforded under the EPA (Section 47) and the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. In the medium term this should make it possible to achieve a substantial reduction on the number of trade waste containers on the streets and to ensure that those that are there are legitimately sited and managed properly. However the introduction of a policy of zero tolerance for trade waste on the street is likely to have a financial implication for businesses that cannot store containers or waste within the curtilage of their premises. In such cases the business would be obliged to make arrangements for frequent uplifts of waste, which would be associated with an increase in costs. It is therefore proposed that a detailed study of the potential for a zero tolerance type approach for Edinburgh be carried out with an initial focus on the city centre. A report on options and implications to be reported back to a future Committee to be the basis for consultation with stakeholders. Recommendations It is recommended that Committee: a) b) c) agree that a report be prepared on options and implications of a more robust approach to trade waste enforcement; discharge remit from Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee on 13 September 2012 to report back on Trade Waste. discharge the Motion from Councillor Buchan from 21 February 2012.
7.4
8 8.1
1 Councillor Buchans Motion Susan Mooney - Head of Service 529 7587 susan.mooney@edinburgh.gov.uk Mike Penny - City Centre Neighbourhood Manager 529 7766 mike.penny@edinburgh.gov.uk Andrew Mitchell - Community Safety Manager 469 4822 andrew.mitchell@edinburgh.gov.uk 5
Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement
All
4. Edinburghs communities are safer and have improved physical and social fabric
Environmental Protection Act 1990: Code of Practice on Litter and Refuse (Scotland) 2006 Part II Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 Environmental Protection Act 1990, Sections 33 and 47
Background Papers
Appendix 1 Restaurant Waste Containers Motion by Councillor Buchan Remitted from the Council of 2 February 2012 Council: i) ii) iii) notes that the issue of waste containers associated with restaurants can be a source for olfactory pollution and disturbance for residents; notes that powers to remove such containers are cumbersome to use and not fit for purpose; and calls for a report into establishing a new by-law that would give the Council powers to remove offending containers if there were the validated support of up to 6 neighbouring residents.
Item no
Report no
10
Plans for Railway Control Period 5 (2014-2019)

11 October 2012
1 1.1
Purpose of report To inform the Committee of the contents of the Scottish and UK Governments High Level Output Statements (HLOS) covering 2014-19. Summary The Scottish and UK Governments have published new HLOSs for the railways. The Scottish Government has also set out the parameters of the next Scotrail franchise. However, the subsequent announcement of cuts in the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP) is more directly significant. The HLOSs specify what the Governments require of the rail industry during the next Control Period, 20142019 (CP5). They also outline the public funds likely to be available to support that activity, Statement of Funds Available (SOFA). They do not apply to the High Speed 2 (HS2) project. Main report On 21 June 2012 the Transport Minister published the Scottish Governments new HLOS for Scotlands railways. He also set out the parameters of the next Scotrail franchise (starting in 2014). On 16 July 2012 the Secretary of State for Transport published the new HLOS for England and Wales. The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) will now determine whether the outputs that ministers require can be met within the budgets set out by the SOFAs. If that is the case, the HLOSs and associated SOFAs become the railways work programme for CP5. The following paragraphs set out the contents that particularly affect Edinburgh, firstly of the Scottish HLOS and franchising statement, followed by the UK Governments HLOS.
2 2.1
2.2
3 3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
The Scottish HLOS includes: a) New targeted budgets (Strategic Rail Freight Investment Fund 30m, Network Improvement Fund 60m, Future Network Development Fund 10m, Level Crossings Fund 10m) A minimum performance level every month and Key Performance Indicators. Each franchise to achieve a Public Performance Measure (punctuality) of 92.5 per cent by 2019, and at least 92 per cent across each year of CP5; Developing a process to explore and implement journey-time improvements; Continuous carbon reduction per train/km and freight tonne/km; Complete Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP) and the Borders Railway; Highland Main Line Rail Improvements Phase 2, supporting an hourly service between Inverness and Perth, extended to Glasgow/Edinburgh, and achieving an average journey time reduction of around 10 minutes. However, Phase 3 (with further time savings) has evidently been delayed into the next Control Period; A rolling electrification programme after completion of EGIP; expected to include the Shotts route; and A number of longer-term strategic projects to be developed sufficiently to inform future decisions.
b)
c) d) e) f)
g) h)
This was described by the Scottish Government as cumulatively over 3 billion investment in rail infrastructure, as follows: Public funding (likely) to be available to support the HLOS 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 639m 664m 664m 672m 684m 3.5 3.6
Total 3,323m
In cash terms, the total of 3,323m set out above is similar to that for the previous Control Period. Key points of the Scotrail franchising statement include: a) b) The franchise operator is encouraged to enter a deep alliance with track operator Network Rail; A single 10-year contract for the next ScotRail franchise, with an option for a break after five years;
c) d) e) f) g) 3.7
Separate Sleeper service franchise for up to 15 years. Sleeper service to receive 100 million+ government investment (previously announced); Regulated fares to protect commuters and those in rural areas; Fares promotions encouraged; Integration with other travel modes and smart ticketing; and Enhanced digital communications for passengers eg wi-fi.
However, a further Scottish Government announcement on 4 July 2012 was more immediately significant. Whilst presented as Full steam ahead for Rail Project, it comprised a significant reduction in the scale of EGIP; notwithstanding references to EGIP in the HLOS which had given no forewarning. The announcement stated The phased delivery of EGIP will enable a more affordable and achievable implementation plan which will still deliver the programmes aims and ensure the best value for the public purse. In fact, the extensive EGIP programme, which had already been subject to public consultation, was scaled back from the original six trains per hour to continue the current four trains per hour on the Edinburgh-Glasgow via Falkirk High line, albeit with longer trains and electrification. It includes Edinburgh Gateway Station, served by Fife services only. EGIP is now a 650m project, effectively a 300m+ reduction on the previous plan. Elements deleted include: electrification of Dunblane/Alloa services (with ten minutes faster journey to/from Edinburgh); Glasgow connectivity with Edinburgh Gateway; and the proposed six trains per hour via Falkirk (the two fast services, taking 37 minutes are deleted, leaving four trains per hour, all taking 42 minutes). The scope of EGIP has effectively been scaled back to electrification of the Edinburgh-Glasgow via Falkirk High route, plus the redevelopment of Edinburgh Gateway and Haymarket Station. It is not clear where this leaves the rolling electrification programme, as electrification to Dunblane and Alloa was a logical component of the EdinburghGlasgow via Falkirk High route. On a UK level, the UK Governments strategy for CP5 is built around a programme of electrification and four priorities; two of which directly affect Scotland: a) increase capacity and accelerate journey times between key cities, investing in faster trains (Intercity Express Programme) and route improvements; and improve railway links to major ports and airports.
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
b)
3.13
By the end of CP5, the UK Governments HLOS requires at least 92.5 per cent overall punctuality (measured as a moving annual average); and no more than 2.2 per cent of trains cancelled/arriving at final destination significantly late. The HLOS includes 5.2 billon of enhancements already committed for CP5, including implementation of the Intercity Express Programme on the East Coast Main Line (ECML); a capacity and a power supply upgrade on the West Coast Main Line; and electrification which includes Scotland-Manchester and YorkLeeds. A further 4.2 billion is confirmed for new commitments, including: a) introduction of the European Rail Traffic Management System, with efficiency and potential capacity benefits on the south end of the ECML (the north end is not due for resignalling). development of the Strategic Freight Network and 200 million during CP5 to fund improvements (to be identified). 240 million for further ECML capacity and journey-time improvements. up to 300 million across England and Wales during CP5 for journey time, performance improvements and other discretionary investment (evidently a different fund to the ECML 240 million). 140 million for innovation and developing enhancements that would take place during CP6 (202025), including work on developing the linkage of HS2 and the existing railway. 2017-18 3,516 2018-19 3,394 Total 16,842
3.14
b) c) d)
e)
Statement of funds available 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 3,165m 3,382 3,385 4 4.1 5 5.1 6 6.1 6.2 7 7.1 Financial Implications None. Equalities Impact
There are no equalities impacts arising from this report. Environmental Impact This report incurs negligible environmental impacts. This report does not directly impinge on the Active Travel Action Plan. Conclusions The EGIP announcement comprised a substantial reduction in Scotlands flagship rail project. In cash terms, the 3,323m set aside for rail infrastructure investment is similar to that for the previous Control Period. 4
7.2 7.3
The UK Governments HLOS announcement represents a higher rate of investment than has characterised recent decades. The scale of UK Government investment shows that concerns that HS2 would draw investment from the existing network are unfounded. The Government has committed itself to funding both HS2 and the existing network at high levels. Recommendations It is recommended that the Committee notes this report.
8 8.1
Appendices Contact/tel/Email Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers
None Chris Day - 0131 469 3568 - chris.day@edinburgh.gov.uk All Contributes to SOA Outcome 1. Edinburghs economy delivers increased investment, jobs, and opportunities for all None *
Item no
Report no
11
Local Transport Strategy: Proposed Extension and Timetable for Renewal

11 October 2012
Purpose of report 1 To ask Committee to approve an extension of the lifespan of Local Transport Strategy (LTS) 20072012 until the end of 2013.
Main report 2 3 The LTS is a detailed statement of the Councils transport policies and objectives published in 2007. While not a statutory document, it is important to the Transport and Planning services to prioritise and steer transport projects and service delivery, and enable planning decisions. It is also a document of central importance in the event of any public or fatal accident inquiry because of the policies it contains. Preliminary work began in November 2011 to start designing a new LTS to take effect from early 2013. This work included meetings with the transport spokespersons across political parties, and a series of workshops involving staff from the Transport, Planning, Economic Development, Finance, and Community Safety functions. This work will be used as part of the development process. Following a change of Administration in the City of Edinburgh Council in May 2012, the development of the LTS was put on hold; and the original timetable to prepare a revised LTS by early 2013 is now unachievable. Steps have recently been taken to establish a new city-wide Transport Forum as one of the commitments set out in the Coalition Agreement. It is intended that the Transport Forum be key in the formulation of the new LTS. It is therefore recommended that the current LTS have its lifespan formally extended until the end of 2013. This timeframe contains ample contingency time in case of delay. This would allow time for a new LTS to be developed in consultation with the Transport Forum and other stakeholders. 1
The new draft LTS development timetable is as follows:

Date 11/2012 01/2013 06/2013 11/2013
Activity Presentation/workshop of the Main Issues Report (MIR) to TIE Committee MIR to the TIE Committee (or equivalent) for approval for consultation Report on the MIR consultation and draft LTS presented to the TIE Committee (or equivalent) Local Transport Strategy 2013 presented to TIE Committee (or equivalent) for approval
The LTS would be designed in accordance with the Transport 2030 vision document and an Equalities Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Appraisal would be embedded into the process. If the Committee approves an extension to the lifespan of the LTS, a letter would be sent to advise the relevant stakeholders (developers, operators, SEStran, etc), and a note would be added to the online version of the document.
10
Financial Implications 11 The costs of producing and consulting on the LTS will be met from the Transport Revenue budget.
Equalities Impact 12 There are no new direct equalities impacts arising from this report. The existing LTS underwent an extensive public and stakeholder consultation exercise as part of its development and no new impacts are expected to arise from extending it until the end of 2013.
Environmental Impact 13 There are no new environmental impacts arising from this report.
Recommendations 14 It is recommended that the Committee: a) b) approve an extension of the existing LTS up to the end of 2013; agree that a Committee workshop is held to discuss preparation of an updated Local Transport Strategy; the workshop to cover the scope of the strategy review, major issues for the updated strategy, and programme. Following this a report detailing proposals will be brought to a future Committee; note that the Transport Forum will be closely involved in the development of the new LTS.
c)
Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities 2
Appendices Contact/tel/E mail Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers
None Lynda Haughney; 0131 469 3633; Lynda. Haughney@edinburgh. gov. uk All An effective, accessible urban transport network underpins all four priorities in the current Single Outcome Agreement Local Transport Strategy 20072012; Transport Vision 2030; *
Item no
Report no
12
Duddingston Village - Traffic

11 October 2012
1 1.1
Purpose of report The purpose of this report is to update Committee on the outcome of the public consultation on proposed traffic calming measures within Duddingston Village, and of the agreed recommendation reached by the Duddingston Village Traffic Working Group (DVTWG). Summary The TIE Committee meeting of 29 November 2011 asked the Director of Services for Communities to undertake a public consultation on traffic calming measures within Duddingston Village. The Duddingston Village Traffic Working Group (DVTWG) was formed two years ago to find solutions to reduce the volume of traffic passing through The Causeway and Old Church Lane, especially at peak times. The Working Group aimed to find a solution that would not involve closing off roads. Membership of the Group, chaired by Councillor Stefan Tymkewycz, consists of Ward Councillors, Duddingston Village Conservation Society, Police, Historic Scotland and Council officers. The DVTWG has considered the outcomes of the consultation and has agreed the measures it recommends to be put in place. Main Report A public consultation event was held in the Millar Hall in Duddingston Village on Wednesday 21 March 2012. The event was promoted through poster displays around the village; leafleting of 1800 homes in the Duddingston Village, Meadowfield and Lady Nairne areas; and through the East Neighbourhoods social media account and web pages. In total, 84 people attended the event. Participants were asked to submit their views/comments using a proforma to record their preference by 30 March 2012 outlined in Appendix 1. 1
2 2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3 3.1
3.2
3.3
Four traffic management proposals were presented at the consultation event; one of these options allowed for the existing traffic management arrangements to remain unchanged. Details of each of the traffic management options are provided in Appendix 2. The results of the consultation are as follows: Results TOTAL (excludes anonymous votes and those with multiple choices) Option 1 32 Option 2 43 Option 3 19 Option 4 14 None Chosen 5
3.4
3.5
Options 1 and 2 were the most popular options and are very similar, both involving the installation of additional 2 speed bumps at The Causeway, implementation of parking restrictions on the north east and north west corners of The Causeway and further parking restrictions on Old Church Lane. Option 2 includes further parking restrictions on The Causeway in the form of staggered double yellow lines. In considering the outcome of the public consultation the DVTWG noted that the response rate from residents within Duddingston Village had been low and could not be considered a reliable sample. The Group therefore agreed that the proposal was to proceed with option 1 rather than option 2.
3.6
The East Neighbourhood Team will aim to complete works on the speed bumps before the end of 2012 whilst the installation of parking restrictions will follow the usual process through the promotion of a traffic regulation order. Lothian and Borders Police have reported through the DVTWG that no complaints had been received recently about traffic levels in the village. The Police are actively taking enforcement action against drivers of commercial vehicles illegally accessing Holyrood Park. In response to a remit from the Committee, Historic Scotland had been asked to consider the implementation of 20mph speed limits within Holyrood Park. These would assist the development of the Councils Active Travel Action Plan, by making walking and cycling more attractive in Holyrood Park. It is understood that Historic Scotland considers its current Holyrood Park Management Plan to be in need of replacement. In addition, the Holyrood Park Regulations need to be reviewed. Historic Scotland has been informed that Services for Communities staff would be happy to assist them in the development of proposals for introducing a 20mph speed limit throughout Holyrood Park and in the development of their Park Management Plan.
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
At its meeting of July 2011 the Craigentinny & Duddingston Neighbourhood Partnership approved the installation of two vehicle activated speed signs on Duddingston Road West to be sited on each approach to the bends near Holyrood High School. Details of this initiative and proposals on the exact location of these signs will be presented at the next Craigentinny & Duddingston Neighbourhood Partnership Environment Forum meeting. Financial Implications Financial implications include the cost of providing yellow lines and the two speed bumps; these costs can be met from the East Neighbourhood revenue budget. Equalities Impact Consideration has been given to the relevance of the Equalities Act 2010. A pre-assessment has been carried out in relation to this report and a full Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) is not required. The proposal will improve safety for all by reducing the volume of traffic through the village. Environmental Impact It is anticipated that this proposal will improve the living environment for local residents by reducing traffic speeds and volumes through the village. . Recommendations Committee is asked to; a) agree to promote a Traffic Regulation Order to progress the traffic management solutions recommended by the Duddingston Village Traffic Working Group; note the installation of two vehicle activated speed signs at Duddingston Road by December 2012 and; ask the Duddingston Village Traffic Working Group to monitor the impact of the proposals and report progress through the Craigentinny and Duddingston Neighbourhood Partnership.
4 4.1
5 5.1
5.2
6 6.1
7 7.1
b) c)
Appendices
1. Consultation Preference Form 2. Traffic Management Proposals Jim Hunter - East Neighbourhood Manager 469 5342 jim.hunter@edinburgh.gov.uk Ward 14 - Duddingston Craigentinny 4. N/A * Edinburghs communities are safer and have improved physical and social fabric
Contact/ Tel /Email
Wards affected Single outcome agreement Background papers
Appendix 1
Duddingston Village Traffic Consultation

Please let us know your preferred option by ticking the relevant box: Option One
Install two more speed bumps on The Causeway. Implement parking restrictions on the north-east and north-west corners of The Causeway. Implement further parking restrictions on Old Church Lane
Option Two
This is similar to Option One, but proposes additional parking restrictions on The Causeway (in the form of staggered double yellow lines).
Option Three
It is proposed that there will be no left turn opposite Duddingston Kirk when heading eastbound on Old Church Lane. When heading westbound on Duddingston Road West, it is proposed that there will be no right turn into The Causeway (opposite the War Memorial).
Option Four
Keep the existing traffic system with no changes to traffic management. Please drop off this sheet in our suggestion box today, afterwards at Portobello, Piershill or Craigmillar Libraries, or return to: East Neighbourhood Office, 86 Niddrie Mains Road, EH16 4DT. In order for your preferred option to be counted, please provide your contact details below:
Name: Address/ Email: Comments:
Please submit your comments by Friday 30 March 2012. Alternatively you can email us at eastteam@edinburgh.gov.uk or send us a message via twitter @east_team Thank You
Item no
Report no
13
Proposed Waiting Restrictions - Belhaven Place

11 October 2012
Purpose of report 1 To request approval from the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee to set aside objections to the introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in Belhaven Place and permit the Order to be progressed.
Main report 2 Over the past few years the number of vehicles parking outwith the designated parking areas in Belhaven Place has increased significantly. This increase in parked vehicles has reduced the available carriageway width. This reduced width makes it difficult for vehicles to access/egress the public parking spaces, access the west end of the street and allow refuse vehicles to service the communal waste bins. Following a request from the Belhaven Place Residents Association an order to introduce double yellow line waiting restrictions on the south side of Belhaven Place was advertised on site from 9 March 2012 to 3 April 2012. An objection was received from Mr D R Lewis. His main objection was that the use of double yellow lines would be excessive and that the possibility of introducing single yellow lines should be investigated. Single lines would only introduce restrictions during the day and, as the problem with parked vehicles causing an obstruction also occurs at evenings and weekends, it is considered that double lines are necessary. The Neighbourhood Roads Team responded to Mr Lewis explaining why the waiting restrictions were deemed necessary in these locations and requesting that he consider withdrawing his objection. Mr Lewis has advised that unless the proposal is amended he is unwilling to withdraw his objection. It is not considered that this objection to the proposed TRO is sufficient to override the safety concerns addressed by the proposed Order. The local elected members have been consulted on the contents of this report.
8 9 10
Financial Implications 11 The cost of making the Order and installing double yellow lines at the location described can be met from within existing budgets.
Equalities Impact 12 Consideration has been given to the relevance of the Equalities Act 2010. A pre-assessment has been carried out in relation to this report and a full Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA) is not required. This proposed scheme increases road safety and access for all, especially for emergency vehicle response.
13
Environmental Impact 14 It is anticipated that this proposal will improve the living environment for local residents by reducing the likelihood of conflict between vehicles and improving access.
Recommendations 15 It is recommended that the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee repels the objection outlined in paragraph 5 and implements the waiting restrictions as per the Order.
Appendix 1 Drawing No RS/S/10/DYL Derek Roden Tel: 529 3720 e-mail: derek.roden@edinburgh.gov.uk Ward 10 Meadows/Morningside Edinburghs communities are safer and have improved physical and social fabric 1. e-mail from Mr D R Lewis dated 2 April 2012 2. e-mail from Neighbourhood Roads Team to Mr D R Lewis dated 18 April 2012 3. e-mail from Mr D R Lewis dated 18 April 2012 *
Item no
14
Silverknowes Eastway- Potential closure of access routes linking Muirhouse and Silverknowes
11 October 2012
1 1.1
Purpose of report To advise Committee of community concerns about antisocial behaviour in the Silverknowes area, present and discuss a number of options to address these concerns, and seek endorsement for the way forward. Summary Following a recorded higher level of incidents of antisocial behaviour in Silverknowes (specifically in the Silverknowes Eastway) in the autumn of 2011, and at a public meeting of some 250 residents and elected members, including local councillors, MSP and MP for the Almond ward; Council officers were requested to consider closing off access ways between Silverknowes and Muirhouse. Residents from this and the wider Silverknowes area were extremely concerned that young people were using these access routes and causing significant difficulties for householders, including broken windows, stone throwing and general anti-social behaviour. A number of joint meetings with elected members, community representatives, Police officers and Council staff from both and Almond and Forth wards have been held to discuss community concerns, however it has not been possible to achieve consensus on the way forward. It was therefore agreed by the cross neighbourhood group that a report should be presented to the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee for a decision on what action should be taken. Various options are considered in the body of the report, ranging from doing nothing to blocking off the accesses, and Committee are requested to consider which, if any, of these should be taken forward. Main report
Background
2 2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
In October/November 2011 there were a number of incidents of youth disturbance in Silverknowes, including gangs of youths blocking streets, broken windows, vandalism to cars and attempted break ins. 1
3.2
A public meeting attended by over 250 people was chaired, at the request of local Councillors, by Davidson Mains and Silverknowes Residents Association on 17 November 2011. This was attended by the West Chief Inspector and Neighbourhood Manager and Council officers from both West and North teams. Residents and elected members called for a number of actions to be pursued, including increased Police and Council presence in the area, improved street lighting and the presence of CCTV. The greatest public demand was to close off access between Silverknowes Eastway and Muirhouse as residents believed the youths causing the disturbances were coming into Silverknowes by these routes. This was reinforced by a vote at the public meeting, which was overwhelmingly supported. There are three access routes between Silverknowes Eastway and Muirhouse, all of which were agreed as part of the planning conditions for this site (previously the site of a primary school) as this was developed for housing. The access routes are for cycling and walking only, north south adjacent to the former janitors house between Silverknowes Eastway and Muirhouse Gardens, east west between Silverknowes Eastway and Muirhouse Drive, and a locked gate between Silverknowes Eastway and Muirhouse Millenium Park. This area was previously the perimeter fence for the primary school with no through route. (Appendix 1 Site Map.) A range of actions were put in place by the West Neighbourhood teams responding to public concerns, these included: a) installing temporary CCTV cameras in the Silverknowes area, alongside the deployment of CCTV cameras in two residential homes and the use of the CCTV vehicle at during the evening at weekends; over 100,000 invested in lighting improvements (lighting bulb replacements for white lighting work completed); a significant police and Council high visibility patrolling resource, and active cross neighbourhood management of actions relating to ASB and youth disorder; and West neighbourhood Chief Inspector and Neighbourhood Manager newsletters, distribution supported by the Davidson Mains Residents Association (Appendix 2 example newsletter, 1 of 3).
3.3
3.4
3.5
b) c)
d)
3.6
In addition, a joint meeting (cross neighbourhood summit) comprising elected members, Lothian and Borders Police Sector Inspectors, and community representatives from both Almond and Forth wards was convened in December 2011. This was supported by Neighbourhood Managers from both West and North, Planning and Transport officers. While Almond residents very strongly favoured pursuing the option of closing off the access routes, Forth residents equally strongly argued that these should remain open. A number of actions were agreed, including:2
3.7
a) b)
Surveying how many people used the publicly open access routes. Surveying a wider cross section of residents in Silverknowes and Muirhouse to establish their views on closing off the access routes (views were only sought on the publicly accessible routes). Researching the efficacy of closed or gated access in other locations. Clarifying the due process if access routes were to be closed off. Considering the effects of continued Police and Council action. Considering alternative approaches, such as diversionary activities and youth work.
c) d) e) f) 3.8
Appendix 3 shows the breakdown of public usage of the access routes. Although restricted to observations at different times of the day over a period of 11 days this shows the breakdown of footfall by a variety of users during the times observed. From this it can be extrapolated that closing the access routes would affect those members of the public as described who are already using this route. Primary school catchment information also showed that a number of pupils went to out of catchment placements, with 10 pupils living in Muirhouse but attending Davidsons Mains primary and one pupil living in Silverknowes Eastway attending Craigroyston primary. For school traffic in both directions the walkways provide a direct safe route to school. Appendix 4 show the results of a survey distributed to around 1,000 households in Silverknowes and Muirhouse in the immediate vicinity of the access routes, with residents also having the opportunity to complete the survey on line. This survey was designed by the councils Customer Research team. Summary finding are; a) b) The results show a high return from Silverknowes (235 responses), but low from Muirhouse (44). The majority of respondents in Silverknowes wanted both accesses completely closed off, with 68% voting for closure of Location A the pedestrian access between Muirhouse Gardens and Silverknowes Eastway, and 65% voting for closure of Location B the pedestrian and cycleway access between Muirhouse Drive and Silverknowes Eastway. The responses from residents in Silverknowes Eastway demonstrated that they were in favour of the closure of both accesses with 83% voting for closure of Location A and 77% for closer of Location B. Residents in Muirhouse wanted both accesses kept open, with 54.5% voting for no change to Location A and 48% voting for no change to Location B. There was a relatively high proportion of dont knows/no answers from Muirhouse (16% and 25% respectively). Given the higher return from Silverknowes this led to a majority of respondents overall (58.5% and 56%) wanting both accesses closed off completely. 3
3.9
c) d)
e) 3.10
Support for gating the accesses was significantly lower (14% and 15.5% respectively).
Comments from Silverknowes respondents highlighted the desire for closure to prevent antisocial behaviour and vandalism problems, whereas comments from Muirhouse respondents against closure highlighted the negative effects of separating communities and practical difficulties in visiting friends and family or attending schools. One respondent from Silverknowes and 10 from Muirhouse specifically mentioned the difficulties in walking to schools if the accesses were closed. Finally, a number of respondents commented on the potential difficulties in closing off the public accesses but leaving the currently gated access at Muirhouse Millenium Park open. A petition circulated by Muirhouse Salvesen Community Council demanded that accesses remain open. This was signed by around 260 signatories, the majority (190) giving a Muirhouse address and only three giving a Silverknowes address. It should be noted, however, that the wording of the petition mistakenly gave the impression that the Council was actively considering closing the walkways, and analysis of the signatories showed evidence of some signing it more than once and some giving no address. Representatives from Silverknowes feel that this survey should not therefore be considered valid. Strongly held views from community representatives present at the follow up joint meetings echoed the results of the survey, with those from Silverknowes confirming that blocking the access was the only acceptable solution for their community, whereas those from Muirhouse emphasised the practical difficulties and barriers to community links it would create. A number of community organisations from both Almond and Forth wards have expressed a desire to attend Committee as deputations to present their views and 8 written representations have been received (Appendix 5). Appendix 6 details the results of research carried out by Planning officials into blocked access and gated communities in Edinburgh and elsewhere, within the context of national and local planning policy. In summary, this concludes that not only is dividing communities contrary to national and local policy and guidelines, but there was also no hard evidence to suggest that there would be a beneficial effect on crime rates or displacement of crime. Although the Council has powers under Planning and Roads legislation to stop up roads and footpaths it would take time to achieve (approximately 18 months if objections were received) and difficult to practically achieve given the likelihood of objections to loss of amenity, this means that confirmation from Scottish Ministers would be required. In Edinburgh the only experience of blocking up public access was at High School Yards and the Scotsman steps, both of these were more restricted than what was being considered here and therefore may not provide a direct comparison. The view from planning officials was therefore that physically dividing the communities would be unlikely to resolve the problems being experienced in Silverknowes. The Police confirmed that joint action by the Safer Neighbourhood Team and West Community Safety team had resulted in a decrease in incidents of 4
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
antisocial behaviour or disturbance compared to those experienced in October and November 2011. They also noted that where they had been able to identify youths involved in antisocial behaviour they had been resident in other areas of Edinburgh as well as Muirhouse. The results of a West TAC (Joint Council and Police Tasking and Co-ordinating Group) commissioned Police Crime Prevention survey nonetheless suggested that blocking off access would make the area easier to police. The Silverknowes area remains one of the priority ward beats in the Almond sector as evidenced by the July 2012 TAC, report produced by the TAC Analyst and reviewed by the Chief Inspector and Neighbourhood Manager. No cross border analysis of calls for respective areas has been carried out. 3.16 In discussion of the Police findings Silverknowes residents recognised that the level of attention currently given on the ground by the Police and Council would not be sustainable in the long term, and that therefore the blocking of accesses was still their preferred option to respond to the continued levels of ASB. Residents from Muirhouse commented on the relatively higher levels of antisocial behaviour and youth disturbances in Forth ward compared to those experienced in Silveknowes. In terms of diversionary activities it was noted that Muirhouse Youth Development Group (MYDG) offered a regular programme of activities up until 9.15pm and during the day on Saturdays, and also have a drop in club at Muirhouse shopping centre open on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. Spartans, in conjunction with MYDG, also provide a portable football pitch at Muirhouse Millennium Park from 5-7pm on Fridays which mainly attracts under 12s. Anecdotally, MYDG have noticed congregations of youths in Silverknowes Eastway, but do not have information which links these young people to their area, and have indicated that they would generally be in favour of keeping the walkways open.
Options
3.17
3.18
The following table summarises the advantages and disadvantages of various options to address the concerns of Silverknowes residents:Option Do nothing Advantages Maintains safe routes to school Maintains through access for work, social and family activities Maintains social permeability between neighbourhoods In keeping with local and national planning policy Disadvantages Fails to address Silverknowes residents concerns Doesnt reflect residents wishes as expressed in survey, particularly those in Silverknowes Doesnt aid policing in the area
Reflects wishes of majority of Muirhouse residents No cost Install lockable gates Allows through access at legitimate times of day Provides security to Silverknowes residents at night Least supported option in residents survey Practical issues of closing/opening gates responsibilities and cost Ongoing maintenance difficulties experienced in gated access at Silverknowes Eastway/Muirhouse Millenium Park repeated broken locks, access managed by local residents Unlikely to be effective unless substantial gates and fence/wall erected Capital cost of installation and ongoing revenue repair costs Close off one access but Through access allowed keep one open May aid policing on the ground by restricting escape routes Support for closing each access similar in residents survey no obvious advantage in closing one rather than the other Fails to address Silverknowes residents concerns as access still allowed Capital cost of installing barrier Close off both accesses Reflects wishes of majority of Silverknowes residents Policing facilitated and reduction in youth call Safe routes to school compromised Access denied to wider public who currently use 6
and ASB in the Silverknowes Eastway area
it Increased travel time to local amenities Contrary to national and local planning policy Lack of hard evidence that crime rates/antisocial behaviour will be improved Capital cost of installing barriers
Increase youth provision/diversionary activity
Maintains safe routes to school Maintains through access Maintains links between neighbourhoods In keeping with local and national planning policy Reflects wishes of majority of Muirhouse residents
Fails to address Silverknowes residents concerns Identified youths come from wider area than Muirhouse Cost of providing service
4 4.1
Financial Implications Costs for barriers are not yet determined as these would be influenced by the design and planning processes. Diversionary activities in the area could be provided with additional revenue funding. No current budget allocation has been identified for any of the options. It is anticipated that any cost of work to install and maintain any form of closure or providing additional diversionary activities would require to be found within the appropriate Departmental budgets. Equalities Impact If Committee are minded to support the recommendation then no Equalities Assessment would be required. Should an alternative decision be taken then an equalities pre-assessment would be completed to indicate whether a full Equalities Impact Assessment would be required. 7
5 5.1
6 6.1
Environmental Impact The construction of a wall or gate may be considered intrusive and will likely require planning permission to consider visual amenity. Closure of access routes could be argued to discourage active travel as usage survey indicates pedestrian and cycle use. Conclusions In conclusion, there are widely divergent but strongly held views within the community, split by Council ward, on the best course of action to take. Officer recommendations based on existing policy is that the blocking of access would be unacceptable given the adverse effect on safe routes to school used by a number of children in the area, in addition to the other policy and social concerns. The root cause of this problem is the anti-social behaviour of the individuals concerned and it is this which requires to be addressed. Such behaviour in unacceptable, regardless of where it occurs. Recommendations It is recommended that the Committee a) notes and agrees that closure of the access routes should not be supported as this would impact on safe routes to schools.
7 7.1 7.2
7.3
8 8.1

Appendices
1 2 3 4 5
Site Map. Silverknowes newsletter Access Routes Usage Survey Residents Survey Results Table of representations from stakeholders - further details available from Jemma Blackwood, West Business Manager, tel 469 5124 email jemma.blackwood@edinburgh.gov.uk 6 Research on closed access and gated communities Silverknowes
Contact/tel/Email
Peter Strong, North Neighbourhood Manager, tel 529 5005 email peter.strong@edinburgh.gov.uk Natalie Hoy, West Neighbourhood Manager, tel 469 5198 email natalie.hoy@edinburgh.gov.uk Ward 1 Almond; Ward 4 Forth
Wards affected
Single Outcome Agreement
1 2 3 4
Edinburghs economy delivers increased investment, jobs, and opportunities for all Edinburghs citizens experience improved health and wellbeing, with reduced inequalities in health Edinburghs children and young people enjoy their childhood and fulfil their potential Edinburghs communities are safer and have improved physical and social fabric
Background Papers
None *
Appendix 2 You SaidWe Did

The community has raised several issues which the Council and the Police are responding to, this leaflet is to let you know about some of the things we have been doing. Public Information and Feedback The problems in the Silverknowes area have been nominated as a priority at the Almond Ward Community Safety Forum, a sub group of your Neighbourhood Partnership. We have delivered leaflets to over 200 homes to let you know who to contact if you have concerns and asked that you keep a diary of incidents to let us know when you experience problems. Regular face to face and telephone contact between Community Safety Officers and residents who have been directly affected by recent events. Council and Police colleagues in both Neighbourhoods are meeting regularly to take action against identified individuals.
You Said - Block off access routes on Silverknowes Eastway We are currently looking at your request and the purposes that the accesses provide for the communities in the West and North area. We would like to hear more about your views at the public meeting on Thursday 17th November 2011.
You Said - Install CCTV The Council have installed two new portable CCTV cameras in your area. The Councils mobile CCTV unit was present in your area on Friday 12 and Saturday 13 November 2011. Further use of the mobile Unit has been requested for Friday 18 and Saturday 19 November 2011. Identification images are being gathered to inform policing in West and North. The Council monitoring facility is gathering these. Residents have been offered internal CCTV in their homes by the Council. We have spoken with residents who have their own CCTV to improve the usefulness of their systems. Council Environmental Wardens have patrolled in your area last weekend and will do so next weekend.
You Said - Improve Street Lighting We have installed lighting to the CCTV column in Muirhouse Millennium Park
You Said Increase Police Presence Operation Cerecloth 2 is ongoing, this means you will see high visibility Police and Council patrols in your area at times of reported problems. Individuals identified and reported for offences in the local area. Additional patrols from the Specialist Operations Branch. The introduction of the youth tracking system and Acceptable Behaviour Contracts. Liaising with the local High Schools and youths at the Parent Support Groups.
We appreciate that many of these actions are short term measures, and we are looking forward to working in partnership with you to develop a longer term approach to resolving the issues you are experiencing.
You SaidWe Did

Further to the cross neighbourhood summit held on the 15th December 2011 and follow up summit on the 12th March, we write to provide you with an update on progress. Public Information and Feedback The problems in the Silverknowes are still noted as a priority at the Almond Ward Community Safety Forum, a sub group of your Neighbourhood Partnership. Regular face to face and telephone contact is on-going between Community Safety Officers and residents who have been directly affected by recent events, thank you to those residents who are keeping evidence diaries. Council and Police colleagues in both Neighbourhoods meet regularly to take action against identified individuals, based on police and council intelligence. Feedback from the public and agencies is there has been a reduction in vandalism and anti social behaviour in the areas with only small numbers of reports since the public meeting in November 2011. Block off access routes on Silverknowes Eastway We have delivered up to 1000 Survey Consultation papers to residents on either side of the access routes, and residents could also complete this on-line. The results of the paper based and online survey responses have been received with around 300 residents expressing their views. Analysis of the responses and the detailed feedback is underway, with results from Silverknowes residents showing strong support for closure of both access routes. Surveys of the use of the access routes have been carried out over different days and times, these started on 7 February 2012 and ended 15 March 2012. Observations have shown that both routes are used by a variety of individuals at differing times of the day, including parents walking to school. You Said - Install CCTV The Council still have two portable CCTV cameras in your area. The Councils mobile CCTV unit and Night Time Wardens have been in the area on 25 and 26 November, 9 and 10 December, 13 and 14 December with additional ad-hoc patrols where resources allowed. 2 Residents took up the offer of having CCTV installed in their homes. Request for images have been made by the police and where appropriate these images have been used as part of on-going investigations. You Said - Improve Street Lighting Approximately 100,000 of street lighting improvements have been made in your area, work will be completed in the next few weeks. You Said Increase Police Presence Operation Cerecloth 2 is still on-going, this means you will see high visibility Police and Council patrols in your area at times of reported problems. Please do contact the council or police should you have any concerns. Next Steps Elected members and community representatives from both the Almond and Forth wards have met to consider the information collated from the surveys and to hear from council and police representatives. It is intended that a report will be prepared for the Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee to be presented at the next meeting on the 18th June 2012 to set out recommendations for the formal council Committee to consider.
Appendix 3
Day/Date
Time
Muirhouse Gardens a)
6 primary children 5 secondary children 07/02/2012 15.00 - 16.00 16 adults 1 primary children 2 teenagers/youths 3 adults 08/02/2012 08.15 - 09.15 1 cyclist 08/02/2012 13.30 - 14.30 8 adults 7 primary children 3 secondary children 3 teenagers/youths 16 adults 1 buggy 08/02/2012 14.30 - 16.00 1 cyclist 4 primary children 3 secondary children 6 adults 09/02/2012 07.00 - 08.15 1 cyclist 09/02/2012 14.30 - 15.30 12 adults 2 primary children 3 teenagers 7 adults 10/02/2012 10.40 - 12.40 1 cyclist 13/02/2012 08.05 - 09.35 4 adults 13 primary children 12 teenagers/youths 14 adults 13/02/2012 16.00 - 18.00 2 cyclists
Muirhouse Drive b) 14 primary children 3 secondary children 19 adults 1 cyclists 8 primary children 1 teenagers/youths 17 adults (inc 2 dog walkers) 2 buggies 2 teenagers 11 adults 9 primary children 5 secondary children 4 teenagers 16 adults 1 buggy 3 cyclists 2 primary children 6 secondary children 7 adults 3 primary children 4 teenagers 3 primary children 4 teenagers/youths 15 adults 1 primary children 2 teenagers/youths 6 primary children 7 teenagers 22 adults 2 cyclists
Comments
4 joggers On arrival, while driving down S'Knowes Gdns numerous schoolchildren heading up S'Knowes Gdns
Lots of teenagers walking along S'Knowes Eastway as we left (secondary school pupils)
1 cyclist 2 dogs 4 prams 5 toddler School holidays School holidays 4 prams 1 toddler
Appendix 3 2 teenagers/youths 3 dog walkers, 2 adults walking 14/02/2012 07.25 - 08.25 2 cyclists 6 primary children 8 adults 14/02/2012 12.00 - 13.00 1 cyclist 8 primary children 4 teenagers 14/02/2012 14.40 - 16.10 16 adults 2 primary children 15/02/2012 09.00 - 10.00 9 adults 16/02/2012 08.30 - 09.30 1 secondary children 2 teenagers/youths 16/02/2012 12.00 - 12.30 5 adults 11 primary children 2 teenagers 17/02/2012 12.00 - 13.30 14 adults 1 primary children 3 teenagers/youths 10 adults 1 cyclist 01/03/2012 19.00 - 22.00 1 dog walker 8 Primary Children 1Secondary Child, 12 Adults,
2 teenagers / youths 1 dog walker, 4 adults walking 8 primary children 3 teenagers/youths 9 adults 1 cyclist 13 primary children 2 teenagers 24 adults 16 adults 1 cyclist 8 adults 3 teenagers / youths 12 adults 6 primary children 2 teenagers/youths 22 adults 1 primary children 2 teenagers 8 adults 2 dog walkers 5 Primary Children, 3 Secondary Children, 27 Adults,
Half-term week - no schools
3 prams 3 dogs
1 pushchair 3 dogs
cyclists School holidays 3 prams 2 dog walkers 5 toddlers
0800 02/03/2012 9.30am
3 Adult Cyclists, 6 Dog Walkers
Appendix 3 2 secondary children 3 teenagers/youths 38 adults 3 buggys 9 dog walkers 5 toddlers 5 teenagers/adults 9 adults 7 dog walkers 2 cyclists 73 primary children 19 secondary children 266 adults 10 cyclists 46 teenagers/youths 6 buggys 21 dog walkers 5 toddlers
1 toddler 20 adults 1 pram 05/03/2012 11.30 - 13.30 1 dog walker 6 teenagers/youths 12 Adults 08/03/2012 19:00 - 22:00 1 Cyclist 69 primary children 13 secondary children 194 adults 11 cyclists 36 teenagers/youths 2 buggys 4 dog walkers 1 toddler
Totals
4 joggers 4 cyclists 16 dog walkers 15 buggys 11 toddlers
Appendix 4
Silverknowes Survey 2012

Living in: Forth NP (Muirhouse / Pilton etc) Almond NP (Silverknowes) Inverleith NP No address given Total Total responses: 44 235 2 10 291 No
Have you personally been affected by youth related disturbances: Yes Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, reported reported reported reported to CEC to LBP to Cllr to other Forth NP 19 4 13 1 2 (Muirhouse / Pilton etc) Almond NP 154 6 99 10 6 (Silverknowes) Outwith 6 0 3 0 0 area/No address given 179 10 115 11 8 Total Location A - pedestrian access between Muirhouse Gardens / Silverknowes Eastway: Forth NP (Muirhouse / Pilton etc) Almond NP (Silverknowes) Total Outwith area/No address given Overall Total Location B - Pedestrian and cycleway access between Muirhouse Drive and Silverknowes Eastway: Forth NP (Muirhouse / Pilton etc) Almond NP (Silverknowes) Total Outwith area/No address given Overall Total No change Gated access (locked after dark) 9 (20.5%) 31 (13%) 40 (14%) 0 40 (13.5%) Gated access (locked after dark) 8 (18%) 35 (15%) 43 (15.5%) 0 43 (15%) Close off access completely 4 (9%) 159 (68%) 163 (58.5%) 10 (83%) 173 (59.5%) Close off access completely 4 (9%) 153 (65%) 157 (56%) 10 (83%) 167 (57.5%) Dont know/no answer 7 (16%) 13 (5.5%) 20 (7.5%) 1 (8.5%) 21 (7.5%) Dont know
24
78 5
107 Total
24 (54.5%) 32 (13.5%) 56 (20%) 1 57 (19.5%) No change
44 (100%) 235 (100%) 279 (100%) 12 (100%) 291 (100%) Total
21 (48%) 34 (14.5%) 55 (20%) 1 (8.5%) 56 (19%)
11 (25%) 13 (5.5%) 24 (8.5%) 1 (8.5%) 25 (8.5%)
44 (100%) 235 (100%) 279 (100%) 12 (100%) 291 (100%)
Appendix 5 Table of representations from Stakeholders Letter from West Neighbourhood re Silverknowes/ Muirhouse access issues dated 2 July 2012 St Andrews Muirhouse Parish Church dated 23 July 2012 Service Request from resident in Silverknowes received 16 July 2012 Letter from Muirhouse Housing Association dated 16 July 2012 Note from Councillor Paterson dated 16 July 2012 Letter from Muirhouse & Salvesen Community Council dated 23 July 2010 Letter from Muirhouse Youth Development Group dated 26 July 2012 Tenants and Residents in Pilton submission dated 27 July 2012 Davidsons Mains & Silverknowes Association dated 27 July 2012

TIE Committee - 11.10.12

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

TIE Committee - 11.10.12

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Notice of Meeting and Agenda

Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee

Please recycle this paper

Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee

2 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

(References report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)

Cleanliness of the City

4 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

5 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

7 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

To discharge the motion by Councillor Orr.

8 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

Waste and Recycling Strategy

10 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

12 InterCity East Coast Franchise Consultation

11 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

13 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Performance Report April/May 2012

14 Edinburgh Tram Network Variation to Implementation Date of Traffic Regulation Orders

15 Parking in Central Edinburgh during Summer and Winter Festivals

16 Double Yellow Lines in South Morningside

17 Blue Badge Administration Arrangements for Mobility Assessments

18 Objections to Nine Hour Parking Places Traffic Regulation Order

14 Transport, Infrastructure and Environment Committee 13 September 2012

19 Priority Parking Area B1 Proposed Amendments

(Reference report by the Director of Services for Communities, submitted)

The Transport Forum

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers

Appendix 1: Transport Forum: Terms of Reference

Appendix 2: Proposed structure

Council Transport Policy

Technical support and recommendations from officers

Transport and Environment Executive Committee

Roads & pavements

Policy Review and Development Committee

Changes to Waste Collection Progress Report

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

None David Lyon Head of Environment - 529 7047 david.lyon@edinburgh.gov.uk

Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers

South-West Edinburgh Legionnaires Disease Outbreak, June to July 2012

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers

1.2 1.3 1.4

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement

Plans for Railway Control Period 5 (2014-2019)

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Appendices Contact/tel/Email Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers

Local Transport Strategy: Proposed Extension and Timetable for Renewal

The new draft LTS development timetable is as follows:

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities 2

Duddingston Village - Traffic

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Contact/ Tel /Email

Wards affected Single outcome agreement Background papers

Duddingston Village Traffic Consultation

Name: Address/ Email: Comments:

Proposed Waiting Restrictions - Belhaven Place

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities

Wards affected Single Outcome Agreement Background Papers

and ASB in the Silverknowes Eastway area

Increase youth provision/diversionary activity

Mark Turley Director of Services for Communities