Ambitious George Street redevelopment backed despite concern over funding
An ambitious £35m redevelopment plan for George Street has been supported by councillors, as concerns were raised that securing funding for it might not be possible.
Edinburgh's transport convener said 'vast benefits', including improved safety, sustainability and accessibility, would result from the street's transformation.
A decision on the project was made in May of this year. But at a meeting on Thursday, councillors reaffirmed that support, and agreed on a preference for the most expansive – and expensive – version.
Coming in at an estimated £35 million, the project will see George Street transformed, with the street being completely closed to traffic for most of the day.
Planters, natural stone setts and eight trees will be installed, as will benches, in hopes of making the street a better place to congregate.
In addition, 'hostile vehicle mitigation' – in the case of George Street, retractable bollards – will be installed to help prevent vehicle attacks on the space.
They will also be used to close off the roadway to most traffic, with a small subset of vehicles only being allowed in at certain times.
Six of the 11 councillors in the Transport and Environment Committee voted to pursue the most ambitious plan.
The two Conservative members of the committee voted against funding any redevelopment, and instead wanted to see £10m put towards road maintenance on George Street, funded by road parking charges.
Earlier in the meeting, Conservative councillor for the City Centre ward Joanna Mowat addressed the committee, expressing concerns over the scheme's practicality.
Currently, the plan is to fund the bulk of the project's price tag through grants from various public bodies, and possibly use some money from the city's upcoming visitor levy.
She said: 'Here we are again, talking about George Street. We've been talking for nearly 11 years now.
'The elephant in the room is that we still don't have any money, and are reliant on applying to third parties and having this money granted to us before we can put a shovel in the ground.
'I think the position we've got to, looking at the wider financial situation across the council, Scotland, and the UK, is we've no money, and we need to look at what money we have, and what we can do.'
The committee's SNP group wanted to see more detailed information about the costs of the project presented to councillors, but their amendment was not supported.
Details of their amendment that asked for more frequent updates and for the committee to be provided with several options for traffic restrictions along the street were included in the final version of the motion.
In addition, the Green group's amendment, which requires that a two-way cycle route be included along the street during construction, and a Liberal Democrat amendment which asked councillors to ensure the hostile vehicle mitigation portion of the project was retained, were both passed.
If adequate external funding for the project cannot be found, councillors will be able to scale back to one of several less ambitious options for the project.
With the decision on Thursday, city officers will now start seeking the necessary traffic regulation orders required to enable construction to start.
If funding is found, work is set to begin in autumn 2027.
Labour councillor and Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'I'm really pleased that we've taken the decision today to move forward with the George Street and First New Town project.
'The project is rooted in making the area safer, more sustainable and accessible for all.
'This is a unique opportunity to bring one of Edinburgh's most important streets into the modern world whilst still maintaining its unique history and features.
'The wider potential improvements are vast, from benefits to local residents and businesses to enhancing Edinburgh as a visitor destination, and beyond – we're on our way to delivering a bold new vision for George Street and our city centre.
'Whilst we're committed to this important project, we're also committed to making broader improvements across the city for the benefit of all our residents.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
How many asylum seekers are in UK hotels and why are they being housed there?
On Tuesday, Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary injunction blocking asylum seekers from being housed at the Bell Hotel in the Essex town. Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the latest overall data. – How many asylum seekers are in hotels across the UK? Police officers stand by barricades at a hotel housing asylum seekers (Jordan Pettitt/PA) The most recent Home Office data showed there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079. New figures – published among the usual quarterly immigration data release – are expected on Thursday, showing numbers in hotels at the end of June. Figures for hotels published by the Home Office date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023 when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. – How many hotels are in use for asylum seekers? It is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210. – Why are asylum seekers being housed in hotels? A court ruled asylum seekers should be removed from the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex (Jordan Pettitt/PA) Asylum seekers and their families can be housed in temporary accommodation, known as contingency accommodation, if they are awaiting assessment of their claim or have had a claim approved and there is not enough longer-term accommodation available. The Home Office provides accommodation to asylum seekers who have no other way of supporting themselves on a 'no choice' basis, so they cannot choose where they live. When there is not enough housing, the Home Office can move people to accommodation such as hotels and large sites, like former military bases. In May, the National Audit Office said those temporarily living in hotels accounted for 35% of all people in asylum accommodation. – Is this likely to be a permanent arrangement? Labour has pledged to end the 'costly use of hotels to house asylum seekers in this Parliament' – which would be 2029, if not earlier. Campaigners and charities have long argued that hotels are not suitable environments to house asylum seekers. The Refugee Council said they 'cost the taxpayer billions, trap people in limbo and are flashpoints in communities' and urged the Government to 'partner with local councils to provide safe, cost-effective accommodation within communities'. – What is the Government saying since the legal ruling? Government minister Dan Jarvis said they are exploring options after the legal ruling (James Manning/PA) Ministers are 'looking at a range of different contingency options' following Tuesday's ruling, according to security minister Dan Jarvis In the immediate aftermath of the judgment, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle repeated criticism of the previous Conservative government, saying Labour had 'inherited a broken asylum system'. She said the Government would 'continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns' around asylum hotels. – What options does the Home Office have now? The Government scrapped the Bibby Stockholm as a site to house asylum seekers (Matt Keeble/PA) Last month, amid protests outside the Bell Hotel and more migrants crossing the Channel, an extra 400 spaces were being prepared to house male asylum seekers at RAF Wethersfield in Essex. The former military site, which has a usual capacity of 800 beds, is expected to house more adult men on a short-term basis. The Labour Government scrapped the large site of the Bibby Stockholm barge in Portland, Dorset, earlier this year, while Napier Barracks in Folkestone, Kent, is also due to end housing asylum seekers and be returned to the Ministry of Defence in September. – Why were there protests outside the Bell Hotel? Counter-protesters have also gathered outside hotels to defend asylum seekers (Jordan Pettitt/PA) The hotel in Epping has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl – something he has denied and he is due to stand trial later in August. After the High Court's ruling, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage wrote in the Telegraph calling for Epping protests to inspire further action wherever there are concerns about the 'threat posed by young undocumented males' living in hotels. But on Tuesday more than 100 women's organisations wrote to ministers warning that vital conversations about violence against women and girls are being 'hijacked by an anti-migrant agenda' that fuels divisions and harms survivors. The joint statement, including from Rape Crisis England & Wales and Refuge, said: 'We have been alarmed in recent weeks by an increase in unfounded claims made by people in power, and repeated in the media, that hold particular groups as primarily responsible for sexual violence. 'This not only undermines genuine concerns about women's safety, but also reinforces the damaging myth that the greatest risk of gender-based violence comes from strangers.'
STV News
36 minutes ago
- STV News
Congestion charge could force businesses to leave city, council warned
The introduction of a congestion charge in Glasgow could lead to businesses moving out of the city, the Chamber of Commerce has warned. Glasgow City Council has been considering a number of charging options for road users and, while plans for a workplace parking tax have now been shelved, an 'at-city-boundary' congestion charge and tolling of the Clyde Tunnel remain on the table. The city's SNP group has said it would seek to exempt Glasgow residents from any new charge, which would be paid by those entering the city from other council areas. The options are being investigated as part of efforts to reduce car use and increase revenue. But Stuart Patrick, chief executive of Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, said: 'We cannot support a city-wide congestion charge until public transport improvements have been made in line with the conclusions of the Connectivity Commission. 'We are very concerned about the possible displacement of business out of Glasgow. We believe the city council needs support from the Scottish Government to deliver priority transport projects such as the Clyde Metro and the Glasgow City Region Bus Partnership improvement plan.' The Connectivity Commission, chaired by Professor David Begg, proposed a range of measures to upgrade the city's transport capacity, including a Metro system. The city's Labour group also opposes the proposed congestion charge and Clyde Tunnel toll. It has said residents from Ayrshire, Lanarkshire, East Renfrewshire, East Dunbartonshire and beyond would be forced to pay to visit Glasgow for work, family or social reasons. Cllr Angus Millar, SNP, the council's convener for climate, transport and city centre recovery, said: 'I think it is important that we as a council fully explore any and all opportunities we have to utilise powers and to raise revenues to support the sustainable transport transition that we are undertaking.' He was 'a little bit confused around some of the statements from Labour colleagues' as the group had previously supported proposals for congestion charging and it had been included in the council's strategic plan, which passed unanimously. Cllr Millar said it was 'a chicken and egg discussion', adding: 'If we want to see significant improvements on public transport then we need to be able to identify where the investment is coming from to make those investments.' He was speaking at the city's economy, housing, transport and regeneration city policy committee,which received an update on potential charging options today. They were asked to note progress, including the decision to halt work on a workplace parking levy, rather than approve any plans. Bailie Anthony Carroll, Greens, proposed an amendment which would have seen a possible workplace parking charge revisited once controlled parking zones are in place across the city. A parking scheme would have required businesses and workplaces to hold a licence for spaces they provide to staff and visitors, with licence charges based on the number of places available. It was estimated it could have raised over £8m per year. But officials reported there is 'limited commercial and public appetite' for the scheme and they will direct resources towards other options. Bailie Carroll said funds raised through a levy could help to 'actually improve our public transport systems' as the council has not received the same UK Government support as regions in England. Cllr John Carson, Glasgow Labour's deputy leader, said: 'We are against a workplace parking levy. 'People can dress it up in various narratives, but ultimately we see it very clearly as the Scottish Government passing the buck onto local authorities rather than giving us the money that we need to run and enhance our city.' The amendment only received two votes as SNP councillors supported the initial recommendations to note the update and Labour members chose to abstain. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Glasgow Times
39 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
HMRC 'looking at' new tax on homes worth £500,000 and over
Government officials are looking at a potential national property tax, which would replace stamp duty on owner-occupied homes to start with, and Council Tax in the medium term. No final decision has been made, but it is thought this national tax could help build a model for taxation, and the threshold discussed is believed to be £500,000. How would it replace Stamp Duty? Buyers pay stamp duty under the existing framework, if they purchase property worth more than £125,000. The new levy would be paid by owner-occupiers on houses worth more than £500,000 when they sell their home, with the amount due determined by the value of the property and a rate set by the Government. A Treasury spokesperson said: 'As set out in the plan for change, the best way to strengthen public finances is by growing the economy – which is our focus. 'Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms, which are expected to grow the economy by £6.8 billion and cut borrowing by £3.4 billion. 'We are committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible, which is why at last autumn's budget, we protected working people's payslips and kept our promise not to raise the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax, employee national insurance, or VAT.' Chancellor Rachel Reeves will unveil any changes to the Government's tax policy at a fiscal event, such as a budget. Sir Mel Stride, Conservative shadow chancellor, said: 'The Conservatives have warned that more taxes are coming and now reports are emerging that the family home is next in the firing line. 'This tax grab would punish families for aspiring to own their own home.' When will Rachel Reeves start talking about saving money not just finding more & more ways of taking money away from people who themselves have bothered to save and work hard? — Kirstie Allsopp (@KirstieMAllsopp) August 19, 2025 Any moves to increase taxation have also been criticised by property presenter Kirstie Allsopp, who tweeted: "When will Rachel Reeves start talking about saving money not just finding more & more ways of taking money away from people who themselves have bothered to save and work hard?" Michelle Lawson, Director at Fareham-based Lawson Financial, admitted an overhaul to stamp duty is needed - but 'this is not it'. She added: "Everyone or nobody pays otherwise you create another division and another cliff edge, namely the £500k mark. Short-sighted tax grabs will be a disaster and will end up generating less rather than more. 'To increase the tax coffers, Reeves needs to charge less, charge everyone and scrap or reduce the crippling Section 24 additional property tax. An ignition of the property market will spark the economy, generate jobs and further increase tax receipts.' Chris Barry, Director at London-based Thomas Legal, agreed, adding: "Stamp duty 100% needs reform, I don't think there is a debate to be had on that front. It was originally introduced as a tax on high value homes and now impacts most people. "Tax incentives throughout history have moved the market more than Brexit, war, Covid and interest rates so this has to be the answer to give the market some life. Stamp duty breaks in recent years have been shown to bring in far more by way of tax receipts through VAT and wider economic growth as market volumes shoot up. 'It makes sense to remove stamp duty to a level that will provide a much-needed incentive for buyers. The alternative solutions are unclear but the Chancellor needs to be careful when taxing investment properties and second homes as this makes up approximately one third of the overall market and renters are already experiencing strain on rising prices.' Mumsnet posters have also expressed their concerns, especially those living in the south east, where property prices are higher. "Surely this will force people either to never move, or move away from the South East and London," said one poster. "I'm glad that there is finally something that isn't negatively affecting areas outside the South East but does she (Rachel Reeves) actually understand that £500k isn't much down here - a 3 bed terrace, at best." Recommended reading: Another added: "I was thinking it would need to be something that takes into account regional differences in house prices, then I realised we already have something like that - Council Tax."Others agreed that Council tax should be replaced: "Council Tax is a joke - in my village two new builds opposite each other 4 bed sold £850k put in band F and other 5 bed worth sold £750k put in band G, bungalow turned into a house recently sold for 1.25 million still in Band E. All should be band G." Some have embraced the idea, saying: "As someone who would be impacted by this, I don't think it's terrible. They have property taxes in lots of other countries and our Council Tax is based on completely outdated values." Another London-based poster said: "It's a pretty good idea. Wealth is under taxed, Council Tax is now regressive and the government need ££. I just hope it happens and isn't watered down to be ineffective. I live in London, by the way."
