Confusion on Hope Street
This release highlights a situation that shows why residents have become so cynical about Council pronouncements on the tram project, it's effects, and their committment to addressing these.
- Hope Street can either be a possible escape valve for congested traffic, or it can have a tyraffic ban imposed upon it---but it cannot have both.
Not only did the UN's Aarhus commission, investigating, not Edinburgh Council's Tram; but Edinburgh Council's committment to openness in dealing with it's citizens, specifically mention this possible 'escape valve' role for Hope Street in their draft report--the Council did not 'correct' this understanding for the Final report either.
However the TRO dealing with the traffic ban WAS withdrawn from the agenda of the TI&E Council committee hastily and at the last minute when THAT discussion would have co-incided exactly with the release of the Final version of the Aarhus Convention Complaint Commission's Findings and Reccomendations.
- Of course one cannot possibly say that this TRO was pulled in the way that it was, because Edinburgh Council suddenly realised that voting through an order to block a street, massively widen pavements, reduce it's capacity to carry any traffic volume, and specifically ban everything over 7.5 tonnes, would tend to throw into doubt, if not utterly contradict, the offer made to residents --- and given by CEC to the UK Government to use in their attempt to answer to a case brought before the Complaints Commission at the United Nations HQ in Geneva, that the Council do not deal plainly and openly with their own residents and voters.
ON the other hand....