Minutes of the Community Councils Together on Trams/Trams Team meeting on Wednesday 9 June 2022 at 5:30pm, at Trams project compound (165 Leith Walk)

Actions and decisions are red italic. ‘TT’ means ‘Trams Team’. Names are mostly abbreviated to initials.

These minutes were not approved for publication until September.

0 Summary of actions

Item	Action
1.1	RA to send Teams links for future meetings to all potential attendees
1.2	Bruce to remove footnotes from May minutes befoe publication
1.2	RA to provide answers to questions about May minutes ASAP (then Bruce to publish version with this information)
1.2.1	RA to provide information on who is in charge of each department (page 2 of current draft)
1.2.1	HT to press G Barwell/TT to answer some follow-up questions, e.g. on numbers of assets to be taken over
2.1.1	RA to provide future period lookaheads as maps
2.1.5	RA to ask Police Scotland to maintain a presence to help with enforcement of box-junctions
2.11	RA to send CCTT a summary of the most recent tram board meeting
2.12	Action: RA to supply details of remaining and removed phone-boxes for Leith Walk
3.1	CW to ascertain if ‘harbour 31’ contributions are in the Trams final business case
3.3	SJ to supply locations of OLE poles outwith central reservation, and the maximum distance possible between OLE poles.
3.4	SJ to supply phasing plan showing when London Road public realm work will be completed
3.4	HT to supply maps of bin-locations
6	RA/TT to engage with relevant CEC team about dangerous road-surfaces on ‘existing carriageway’ at Haddington Place
7	Action: CCTT/TT to confirm mutually suitable date for July meeting

1 Prelims

1.1 Welcome, apologies

• Action: RA to send Teams links for future meetings to all potential attendees

1.1.1 Present

Robert Armstrong*	TT	Jennifer Marlborough*	CCTT/LHNCC
Mike Birch*	CCTT/NTBCC	Bruce Ryan†	CCTT minutes secretary
Angus Hardie	CCTT/LLCC	Harald Tobermann*	CCTT/LCCC
Steve Jackson	TT†	Chris Wilson	TT/CEC
Andrew Mackenzie†	CCTT /LLCC

* = in person; † = via MS teams

1.1.2 Apologies

Charlotte Encombe

CCTT/LCCC

Don Giles

CCTT/LHNCC

Rob Leech

TT

Carol Nimmo

CCTT/NTBCC

1.2 Minutes of May 2022 meeting

In general, content of current draft was approved but, before publication

• Action: Bruce to remove footnote before publication
• Action: RA to provide information on who is in charge of each department (page 2 of current draft)

1.2.1 Matters arising

• RA: there has been some delay to sectional completions but this will not affect the overall project delivery date
• Action: RA to provide asset take-over data, initially data about Baltic St section as an example
• Action: HT to press G Barwell/TT to answer some follow-up questions, e.g. on numbers of assets to be taken over

1.3 Actions from May meeting not included on agenda below

None

2 TT reports and updates

2.1 Latest (dated) progress dashboard with period lookahead and key metrics

2.1.1 Period lookahead

• CCTT requested clarification of ‘stage 1’, ‘stage 2’, and whether individual works on the PL were on schedule
  • Action: RA to provide such information as a map
  • CW: all major construction should be complete by October 2022. A review in the next fortnight will clarify whether the months when individual works are due to be completed. (They are currently allocated to seasons/quarters.)
  • CW: the project is on track to finish in spring 2023. For example, almost all of Morrisons’ work is complete; 80% of track is laid; 27% of OLE poles are installed.

2.1.2 Health and safety

• TT: ‘service damage’ incidents are where utilities are damaged by TT work, e.g. digging up fibre-optic cables. This is nearly unavoidable because their locations are unknown, and these cables are not protected by trunking.

2.1.3 Progress

• TT: the 6 incomplete technical queries include queries about the design process, derogations about utilities, why some work deviates from final design. They include queries about lighting design from contractors.

2.1.4 Key metrics

• TT: the swept-path work is very nearly complete While only 3 sets of tram-stop civils are complete, a number of others are nearly complete

2.1.5 Stakeholder & communication

• CW: numbers of queries by phone continue to reduce, leading to faster turnaround because TT staff directly handle these.
• CW: TT staff are also dealing with issues of pavement-parking, e.g. asking drivers to use pavement hubs. From 2023, local authorities can act on pavement parking.
• CW: TT is concerned about traffic congestion, e.g. by getting data on effects of rail strikes.
• Concerning congestion at the foot of Leith Walk, Bernard St, Lochend Rd, and whether work here could be speeded up (perhaps at the expense of other work).
  • TT: work in this area is due to finish in Autumn 2022. This scheduling was to allow time for dealing with complex utilities below the junction.
  • TT is prioritising critical path areas, to make the most of limited resources and meet the overall due date, but will consider this. There would be ~£2m cost to delay full completion by 1 month.
  • TT: the current highest priority section is Tower Place to Rennie’s Isle, due to works needed on the bridge. This section has only just been handed over from the swept-path contractor to the infrastructure contractor.
• TT: at fortnightly traffic management reviews, Lothian Buses has brought up no issues despite issues reported here.
  • Action: RA to ask Police Scotland to maintain a presence to help with enforcement of box-junctions

2.2 Latest (dated) route map (May/June 2022) with sectional completion dates

• CW: this map will be updated and republished following the review mentioned in section 2.1.1 above
  • CW: the progress map is updated and published each month; the phasing map (the one with completion dates) is updated approximately quarterly

2.3 Latest (dated) H&S metrics

See section 2.1.2

2.4 Latest (dated) map showing all current temporary pedestrian crossing points along the route and distances, location of temporary bus stops, and diverted or narrowed (below 1.2m) footpaths

• JM: there is still no crossing at North Leith Sands: this section of tram-work is fenced off, so people have to use the main road and the car park.
• TT: this map is updated monthly; it now shows distances.
• HT: more crossings would be welcome.
• MB: the colour key is still inconsistent.

2.5 Separate map or annotation to 2.4 showing any planned changes (one month ahead)

• TT: no significant changes are anticipated, despite work to install cables and upcoming reintroduction of two-way traffic.

2.6 Latest (dated) map showing additional traffic management arrangements to accommodate site investigations works and utility diversions outside the main area of TTN works

• RA: there is some work by Barratt Homes due on Bath Rd, which would affect a nearby junction.
• JM: there is work on Bonnington Rd holding up traffic
• MB: previously it was stated that York Place westbound would be closed until October, but it is currently open. This has improved traffic-flow
  • RA: the CCWEL work has been postponed to September, following a presentation to the city-wide traffic management panel, so TT opened this lane for now. All work apart from on North Bridge and trams is embargoed over the summer.

2.7 Map or list of traffic management measures (locations and brief description, dates) agreed and coming into force in the coming 5 weeks: road traffic diversions and lane closures, bus route diversions

See 2.6

2.8 Ongoing metrics regarding ‘business health’

• CW: I am waiting on data from January to June 2022. This should arrive in July.

2.9 Latest (dated) comms dashboard and latest geographical breakdown of comms

• CW: the number of enquiries about the north section of the work (Newhaven terminus to Queen Charlotte St) has increased slightly; the south equivalent has decreased slightly (QCS to York Place. In May 2022, there were the following numbers of queries (there weren’t queries about other areas):

Area	Number of queries	Main reasons for queries	Area	Number of queries	Main reasons for queries
North section	99		Haddington Place	1
South Section	138		Balfour Street	1
LW Cycle Lane	3		Dalmeny Street	6
Bernard/Baltic Junction, Timber Bush	8		Constitution Place	2
Stevedore Place	16		Croall Place	0
Constitution Street	22		The Shore	1
Leith Walk	47	Support For Business, pavement parking, traffic management	York Place – London Road	13	traffic management
Ocean Drive	13		Montgomery Street	2
Tower Street	14	Waste collection	Melrose Drive	1
Ocean Terminal	6		Annandale Street	4
Antigua Street	4		Albert Street	1
Gayfield Square	2		Brunswick Road	2
Maritime Lane	2		Duke Street	2
McDonald Road	2		Lindsay Road	3
Foot of the Walk	32	Archaeology, traffic management changes	Broughton Road	1
Rennie’s Isle	5		Crichton Place	2
Queen Charlotte Street	4		Brunswick Street	5
Tower Place	1		Manderston Street	4

• CW: there have been 175 applications to the business continuity fund in total so far: 8 to 10 per month. This pace has increased recently, with requests from Leith Walk businesses. A recent meeting with businesses went well. Meetings with Leith Walk businesses are every 2 months. A Leith Walk food outlet is closing due to increased overheads, not because of tram-work.
  • 125 applications have been approved, 15 require further information, 12 have not yet demonstrated hardship, 7 have been recommended for approval.
  • Each successful application nets up to £3000. Originally, businesses could apply twice, but due to the work being extended because of covid, each may now make 3 applications for up to £3000 per application.

2.10 Call centre stats and support for business update

See section 2.9 above

2.11 Summary of the most recent Tram Project Board meeting on a confidential basis

• Action: RA to send summary

2.12 Summary of TT meetings with Active Travel and business groups

• RA: the active travel group has reported an issue about signage on Maritime Lane. Poles and signage need to be visible, but TT is looking to minimise clutter to meet legislative and CEC policy requirements. Signage can’t be flat on building walls on one-way streets.
• RA: all but BT boxes will soon be removed from Leith Walk.
  • MB: BT is applying to put in information points, but CEC is refusing these.
  • RA: this won’t happen on Leith Walk. Phone boxes will be around 700m apart.
  • Action: RA to supply details of remaining and removed phone-boxes

3 Queries and issues identified by CCTT

3.1 LHNCC

• CW: a new information board has been ordered for Ocean Terminal.
• JM: fencing is hiding heritage views near Victoria Quay. There is no information on this on the TT website.
  • CW (later, via email): The fence has to be installed as a safety feature. As the bridge goes over water, the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) requires us to assess potential impact from users of the bridge, and because of the tram line and use of the road by freight the loads that we have to consider are a fully loaded HGV and a tram. Separately, as the footway is classed as a shared footway/cycleway and a cyclist may use the footway the minimum height requirement is 1·4 m. Mesh is required to stop people climbing on the fence and potentially falling into the water. To install a different barrier would be a departure from standards.
  • In terms of permissions, the Council has its planning permission under the Tram Acts and we have a duty to comply with the DMRB.
  • We have installed the bridge to be the same as the barrier at Tower Bridge installed by the last project. While it is pretty bright at the moment it will dull down over time.
• HT: There is a new application nearby called ‘Harbour 31’. Was its tram contribution included in the final business case?
  • Action: CW to ascertain
  • JM: some developers asking to avoid ‘section 75’ contributions
• RA: The trams project has engaged with the ‘Leith Connections’ consultation: this project is at concept design stage, but its very recently published proposed design, particularly to Bernard St, is different to TT’s approved designs.

3.2 LLCC

• AM: there are problems around poles and excessive signage at Constitution St.

3.3 LCCC

• HT: why are the OLE posts at the Pilrig St/Leith Walk junction not on the central reservation, but in unwelcome locations?
  One of the Pilrig poles doesn’t have a section for lighting.
  • SJ: lighting sections will be installed on all poles
  • SJ: while there are no side-poles on Princess St, OLE equipment is attached to roadside buildings, e.g. at the Mound, at Pilrig, the Foot of the Walk, London Rd, OLE equipment side-poles are needed to bridge junctions.
  • Action: SJ to supply exact locations of such poles, and the maximum distance possible between OLE poles.

3.4 NTBCC

• RA: road-markings about the ban on left turns from Leith Walk to London Rd are in place but aren’t being observed. TT is acting on this.
• RA: public realm work on the south of London Rd will start at the end of July
  • Action: SJ to supply phasing plan showing when this work will be completed
• MB: marking of split-level pavements needs to be improved. When will this happen?
  • RA: TT can ensure that cafes do not have tables and chairs on pavements during such works.
• MB: who decides locations of bins: CEC bin-review or TT
  • Action: HT to share maps of forthcoming bin-locations

4 Final design/landscape

4.1 Pilrig cable wheels

• HT: I’ve now seen concept designs etc. 2 options will be produced.

5 Register of post project measures

• HT: CCTT needs to engage with the new CEC administration on this.

6 AOB

• HT: concerning an accident involving a cyclist at Haddington Place, how will such poor surfaces – with potholes and poor cambers – be fixed? These factors distract attention from other dangers.
  • RA: this is ‘existing carriageway’, so is the responsibility of a CEC team. TT will engage with this team about this area.

7 Date of next meeting and guests

• Provisionally 21 July:
  • Action: CCTT/TT to confirm mutually suitable date