Academy Street revamp is ‘poor’ value for money and city centre could take ‘decades’ to recover
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
AN assessment of Highland Council’s ambitions to revamp Academy Street has found it represents poor value for money and could lead to longer car journeys in the city.
The controversial proposals seek to cut traffic movements on Academy Street to just 2000 a day, a drop of around 70 per cent.
Inverness Business Improvement District (Bid) has objected to the process while the owners of the Eastgate Shopping Centre have sought a judicial review of the handling of the scheme.
One of the bones of contention was the lack of an economic impact assessment before council bosses finally ordered one last August from WSP consultants.
The results were revealed to councillors this week, among the headlines of which are the assessment of the project’s providing “poor” value for money and a “negative” return in benefit to cost ratio terms – 51p back for every £1 invested.
Considering the “non-monetised impacts” WSP found that more car kilometres could be travelled due to rerouting and there would be a decrease in air quality and increase in noise elsewhere.
More positively it was stated the wider economic impacts could range from £1.5 million to £4 million – yet even supporters of the scheme said that was a “longer term” consideration, with critics saying it could take “decades” to materialise.
Inverness city leader, Councillor Ian Brown, said the assessment provides the basis for “mitigation”, adding: “It was an important exercise to commission independent economic and traffic impact assessments into the proposed design of Academy Street, which we do acknowledge has caused concerns amongst local businesses and residents.
“The findings present a balanced view and are very much based on the worst case scenario and will now inform mitigation measures already being considered by Highland Council.
“I am encouraged that wider economic impacts of between £1.5 million and £4 million have been identified in the longer term as a result of the proposal for Academy Street, largely driven by an increase in footfall and associated visitor and retail expenditure.
“Equally, in terms of the anticipated impact on traffic, it is important that Academy Street is not taken in isolation. The Traffic Impact Assessment assumes a worst case scenario where existing car users do not change behaviour and choose an alternative mode of transport.
“The Highland Council is working hard to expand the choice for people wishing to visit Inverness city centre as part of the Bus Partnership Fund including bus priority routes and park and ride options in multiple locations on the outskirts of Inverness.”
But opposition leader, Councillor Alasdair Christie, said: “The results of the consultants survey which state that the Academy Street proposals represent poor value for money taking, I believe, decades to show any return and will cause congestion elsewhere in the city, come as no surprise - many of us could see that criticism was inevitable.
“I called for a trial of the scheme followed by an advisory referendum on the outcome that was refused by the Independent/SNP Administration.
“We all want to see improvements in Academy Street and our city centre but not in this reckless way.”
A spokesperson for Bid said: “Policy makers have a fundamental duty to show that the plans which will result in ‘significant disruption’ for some businesses and the public will, on balance, achieve more ‘good’ than ‘harm’, yet the ‘Value for Money’ assessment is unequivocal in its conclusion that the outcome will be ‘poor’ and may take many decades (if ever) to realise.
“The air quality and environmental benefits (which have provided to a not inconsiderable extent the rationale put forward to date) are also deemed ‘negligible’.”
John Davidson, convener of the Highland Cycle Campaign, said: “The EIA provides much needed clarity on a number of aspects of the Academy Street plans, highlighting benefits and shortcomings.
“More emphasis could have been placed on the shift from car to active travel because no one wants to see other areas suffer as vehicles are diverted into other areas.
“While we remain supportive of the scheme, improvements will need to be made for those on both sides of the debate to be content.”
