@chdot - very easy to miss the change. It was never formally announced and is so arcane that only a handful of folk know (or care) that it happened.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Trams to Granton
(254 posts)-
Posted 6 months ago #
-
Thanks
Has it made any difference?
Hard to detect in political rhetoric (and action).
Posted 6 months ago # -
Surprisingly, yes!
This is quite convoluted, but here goes. Every planning authority (local authority and national park authority) has to produce a Local Development Plan (LDP) setting out both policies and proposed development sites. Each LDP had to include sites that provide an 'effective five year land supply' for new housing. In effect enough sites to build the number of homes required in the area over that five years as predicted through a process known as the Housing Needs and Demand Assessment (HNDA - usually pronounced Honda).
It takes ages to draft an LDP and many fell out of date, or sites identified in the plan turned out to be undeliverable. When this happened house builders would propose development on sites not identified for housing in the LDP. They would argue that permission should be granted as these were 'sustainable developments' - expensive consultants only too happy to provide documents explaining why this was the case. Such developments were often refused by the planning authority and then granted on appeal by Scottish Ministers, citing this policy.
Removing this policy cut off this option for house builders, making it far harder to gain permission for developments not identified for housing in an LDP.
It's hard to notice the impact of the change, as it is in the number of speculative housing developments not built. Needless to say, the house builders hate this. They challenged the change in court [Miller Homes vs. Scottish Ministers, 2024] and lost.
This is just a super quick summary - there is quite a bit more to it. I doubt there are more than a handful of politicians in the country who understand this - so you won't hear about it from them.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Interesting
So is ‘recent’ house building a legacy of old rules/permissions - and numbers completed will slow down or will developers come to terms with new rules, or find ways round them?
Posted 6 months ago # -
It will probably slow house building down a bit, preventing some housing from being built in inappropriate locations. However, the Scottish Government is so desperate to boost house building numbers that I imagine we will see a whole host of developer friendly suggestions in manifestos for next year's Scottish Parliament elections.
Posted 6 months ago # -
“
By Councillor Lang for answer by the Convener of the Transport and Environment Committee at a meeting of the Council on 30 October
2025 The tram extension consultation states “it is estimated that approximately 30% of the trees currently in place would need to be removed” if the Roseburn path route was chosen.
“
Posted 6 months ago # -
If anyone believes that a heavy engineering project can be built in an extremely narrow, extremely access-constrained location while retaining 70% of the current trees, I have a bridge to sell them. It will be scorched earth, a la Roseburn to Canal.
Posted 6 months ago # -
“
After completing a robust internal process, it is our charity’s position that, from the two options presented within the consultation, expansion of the tram network along the Orchard Brae alignment would represent the best outcome for the National Cycle Network.
Our position on the proposed Roseburn alignment is that we neither support nor oppose this at this stage. As we have outlined within our response, Walk Wheel Cycle Trust considers that further improvements can be made to the proposed designs, and additional measures can be taken with respect to protecting biodiversity.
“
(Aka Sustrans)
Posted 4 months ago # -
“
Councillors are being urged to avoid potential major costs of strengthening Edinburgh's historic Dean Bridge for a new tramline by adopting single track operation over the A-listed structure.
…
Transport convener Stephen Jenkinson rejected the suggestion made in the letter.
“
Posted 4 months ago # -
“
Ministers confirm no funding for “standalone” extension of network“
Posted 4 months ago # -
“
Officials are still analysing the 11,000-plus responses to the public consultation on the plans and any decision on going ahead with the project is not expected until June at the earliest.
It is not yet clear exactly what stance all the parties on the council will take, though the Labour administration is keen to see the new line built.
Posted 4 months ago # -
“
The proposed £2bn tram extension has been a huge talking point in the city, garnering over 11,000 responses to the council’s public consultation. The debate so far has focussed on the city’s transport needs, and the proposed routes. But there is evidence that public transport improvements can impact far more than just how busy the roads are. The North South tram will pass through some of Edinburgh’s most deprived neighbourhoods; what impact could it have on their residents?
The tram is not appearing in a vacuum; in Granton, for example, the £1.3bn waterfront development is promising 3500 net zero homes, commercial and cultural spaces, and greenspace. The area already has a pioneering community support network, with four key organisations offering unprecedented support to the area through the North Edinburgh Support Service (NESSie). The scale of change in this coastal pocket of Edinburgh over the next decade will be monumental - could this help existing residents be less “left behind”?
“
https://www.edinburghinquirer.co.uk/p/why-citys-2bn-tram-plan-is-about?
Posted 1 month ago # -
“
Edinburgh's SNP group has today said it would back a North-South tramline for the Capital, but did not believe either of the options for the northern section – Roseburn Path or Orchard Brae – offered the right solution.
…
As the largest group on the council, the SNP's stance will be crucial in deciding what happens about the planned new tramline, estimated to cost between £2bn and £2.9bn.
The group argues that the council's "travel hierarchy" prioritises walking and cycling over public transport, so taking a large section of a well-used active travel route for the trams would be a breach of that principle.
“
Posted 3 weeks ago # -
“
21:47
Save The Roseburn Path
Rachel Paige •
https://issuu.com/hinksbrandwise/docs/snp_manifesto_the_scottish_parliament_election_2
Page 66 of the SNP manifesto:
We support efforts in Edinburgh to retain the Roseburn Corridor as a route for pedestrians and cyclists and believe that any tram proposals brought forward and funded by the city council should use an alternative route.
SNP Manifesto - The Scottish Parliament
Election 2026“
https://www.facebook.com/groups/914482190342598/permalink/1488822949575183/
Posted 1 week ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
