Inverness BID details 'significant concerns' over Academy Street plans
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
Inverness BID has questioned both the rationale and process behind plans to limit traffic access to Academy Street.
The business organisation, which this week was elected by members to serve another five-year term as their representative, has submitted what it says is an interim response to the council's current plans.
Unveiled as so-called "Option B" last November the plans were slightly altered recently to include bus lane elements that will force drivers of private vehicles to skirt round the thoroughfare by way of Union Street and Queensgate, ending its use as a throughway.
The aim is to reduce the amount of traffic on Academy Street, one of the most polluted routes in the city.
While BID insists its position on the proposals remains "reserved" at this time its 35-page response as seen by the Courier questions much of the rationale behind the plans as well as the process by which it has so far been executed.
The board, it says, has "significant concerns" that the views and needs of many businesses, their staff, clients and customers are still not fully understood "due to not being sufficiently quantified" and that the current proposals "designed again without prior formal, meaningful consultation or co-design" are not "sufficiently context and evidence-led."
Summarising the issues it has BID says it is still "unclear" what the full proposal is, including the "wider context" such as dispersal routes for traffic that will no longer be able to use Academy Street; that the current proposal was "unveiled without prior formal consultation"; and that consultation has to date been unsatisfactorily "informal and ad hoc".
It says that while it has been stated that "essential business access" will be maintained for the street the term has never been properly defined "making it difficult for many our members to understand what the changes will specifically mean for them and their business."
It adds: "Through traffic is deemed to have no economic benefit, but as traffic purpose has, to the best of our knowledge, not been quantified in terms of where people are travelling from/ to this assertion, we suggest, is unsubstantiated."
Citing its own survey carried out last August it says then that 72.5 per cent of BID members supported the idea of a "cleaner and greener" city centre; and that members very much support "in general terms" investment to enhance the area.
However it also says that 71.52 per cent believe the removal of private vehicles from Academy Street would have a negative effect on businesses.
Also highlighting what it sees as defects in the consultation process, the report states that in July last year, at a business breakfast event as part of a consultation on alternative "Option A" proposals for the street members, were told Academy Street would remain open to two-way traffic – with any additional cycling provision to be made on the "more appropriate" High Street.
They say that it was at a meeting on November 14 that it was told for the first time of an "aspiration" to reduce vehicle numbers on Academy Street by 75 per cent – to 2000 vehicles a day – and that that they were not told at that point that those proposals were to be presented to members of Highland Council's Inverness area committee just10 days later.
This became the "Option B" proposal, which councillors were recommended to progress.
BID says that at the council meeting on November 24 some elected members noted an "abundance" of correspondence in favour of the proposals and suggests that on October 27 on Twitter "some groups" – BID does not specify which – circulated messages online stating Academy Street was to be discussed by the committee on November 24.
Individuals were encouraged, it says, to contact councillors voicing their support.
BID says it did not know about "Option B" until November 20, leading it to suggest that: "Some stakeholders appear therefore to have been give more information than other groups in advance of the IAC meeting and, indeed, earlier than, potentially, elected members themselves prior to the next stage progress vote."
It also contrasts a council survey appearing to show support for the plans with its own questionnaire.
Council papers, it says, contained details of a survey that garnered 30 responses , of which 72 per cent stated through traffic had either a detrimental or negligible effect on trade and business.
BID says the survey actually received just 29 responses, with 12 of those providing a response as above, eight stating through traffic had a positive effect and nine taking a neutral stance.
It calls the sample too low to be statistically representative and also criticises it for not questioning owners of businesses in surrounding streets too.
It also says the 72 per cent figure was only arrived at by lumping negative and neutral viewpoints together, making it "potentially misleading".
It contrasts it with its own survey covering the period December 2022 to February this year which it says attracted over 150 responses, covering all areas of the city centre.
There just 14 per cent were in favour of Option B proposals and just over 71 per cent said removing private vehicle access would have a negative impact on trade.
The Courier recently reported a call from Visit Inverness Loch Ness chairwoman Jo De Sylva that the proposals in their current form be trialled before full implementation, with the chairwoman of Crown and City Centre Community Council, Fiona MacBeath, later saying that had been "bombed out" at a prior Highland Council committee meeting as too expensive.
BID, however, claims Places for Everyone funding criteria specifically states it can provide funding for such trials.
BID chairman Peter Strachan said: "Our overall position remains reserved until such time as we have quantified the most up to date views of our businesses via a further survey and BID Breakfast event which are planned for next month.
"We are not anti-change. We have noted that some businesses favour the proposals but also that many others have raised a number of concerns with us including in regard to the lack of meaningful consultation to date and not having an opportunity to co-design the plans at the formative and influential stages.
"BID remains concerned that councillors may not have been fully aware of the wider factors or technical points which could affect many of our businesses and we consider that it is important to ensure that all of the relevant information is available to elected members who are making decisions, which can fundamentally affect the way the city centre operates.
"We remain hopeful that our efforts in the round will provide points for discussion and further consideration."
"Any business who would like to discuss or who would like further details please contact the BID Team in the first instance via: info@inverness.uk.com"
Highland Council was approached for comment.
