“
But ministers have said they were not satisfied with the transport plan filed as part of the far-reaching proposals. A response to the report suggested insufficient account had been taken of the links between land and transport.
“
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
“Scottish government rejects plan to reshape Edinburgh over decade”
(8 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
“
On Thursday, the administrations which form Sesplan, the strategic planning authority for South-East Scotland, were told by chief planner John McNairney their regional masterplan had been rejected, mainly because the proposals for transport were deemed inadequate.
“
Posted 4 years ago # -
Here's a link to the full letter from the Scottish Government.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Here are the relevant paras from Scottish Panning Policy as cited in the letter linked to above:
---
Delivery
Development Planning272. Development plans should take account of the relationship between land use and transport and particularly the capacity of the existing transport network, environmental and operational constraints, and proposed or committed transport projects.
273. The spatial strategies set out in plans should support development in locations that allow walkable access to local amenities and are also accessible by cycling and public transport. Plans should identify active travel networks and promote opportunities for travel by more sustainable modes in the following order of priority: walking, cycling, public transport, cars. The aim is to promote development which maximises the extent to which its travel demands are met first through walking, then cycling, then public transport and finally through use of private cars. Plans should facilitate integration between transport modes.
274. In preparing development plans, planning authorities are expected to appraise the impact of the spatial strategy and its reasonable alternatives on the transport network, in line with Transport Scotland’s DPMTAG guidance. This should include consideration of previously allocated sites, transport opportunities and constraints, current capacity and committed improvements to the transport network. Planning authorities should ensure that a transport appraisal is undertaken at a scale and level of detail proportionate to the nature of the issues and proposals being considered, including funding requirements. Appraisals should be carried out in time to inform the spatial strategy and the strategic environmental assessment. Where there are potential issues for the strategic transport network, the appraisal should be discussed with Transport Scotland at the earliest opportunity.
275. Development plans should identify any required new transport infrastructure or public transport services, including cycle and pedestrian routes, trunk road and rail infrastructure. The deliverability of this infrastructure, and by whom it will be delivered, should be key considerations in identifying the preferred and alternative land use strategies. Plans and associated documents, such as supplementary guidance and the action programme, should indicate how new infrastructure or services are to be delivered and phased, and how and by whom any developer contributions will be made. These should be prepared in consultation with all of the parties responsible for approving and delivering the infrastructure. Development plans should support the provision of infrastructure necessary to support positive changes in transport technologies, such as charging points for electric vehicles.
---
Full document here:
Posted 4 years ago # -
This is politics, not planning. The Scottish Government has made it clear it wants strategic development plans to be abolished - as they rather fancy that power for themselves. The key part of the letter is:
"In considering their position, authorities will wish to be mindful of the implications of the Planning (Scotland) Bill and any future transitional arrangements."
Which should read:
"Don't be bothering us with this s#@+ again, we'll tell you what your plans are."
Posted 4 years ago # -
I'd like a Dutch-style cycle path from Edinburgh to Glasgow. I favour the principle of subsidiarity: that decisions should be taken at the lowest possible level.
What would the correct planning level be? Could the four (five?) local authorities band together to make a Central Belt Authority? They didn't have to for the M8 I presume?
Posted 4 years ago # -
OK. For the uninitiated, is this rejection a good thing or a bad thing for cycling, walking & walkable/cycleable neighbourhoods?
Posted 4 years ago # -
It sure sounds like ‘where are all the roads to all this new housing?‘ to me.
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
