Final decision on Braid estate traffic measures a step closer as committee says it wants to provide 'clarity'
A decision on the future of one of Edinburgh's most controversial traffic schemes has moved a step closer with councillors saying they wanted to bring "clarity" to the situation.
The row over traffic filters on Morningside's Braid estate dates back six years to the Covid pandemic. And the city's transport committee heard on Thursday that opinion in the community remained divided on whether the filters should stay or go.
Two years ago the committee voted to remove them and install a segregated cycle lane along with traffic calming measures, but the decision was not implemented and its validity has now been challenged after the Standards Commission censured two councillors for taking part in the vote despite living nearby.
On Thursday the committee was presented with three options - abandoning the scheme and returning to the pre-Covid situation; taking forward the decision made two years ago to remove the filters and put in a cycleway; or referring the issue to the council's Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) sub-committee to consider objections to the current scheme and whether it should be made permanent.
It voted 7-4 to go for the last option, which means a decision will be made when the TRO sub-committee meets on June 2, less than two weeks before the order under which the existing scheme operates is due to expire.
A report to the committee said there had been a total of 161 objections, 143 expressions of support and seven neutral comments. And the report said: "Depending on the sub-committee’s decision all, part or none of the current trial scheme would be retained."
Lib Dem transport spokesman Kevin Lang argued the revised scheme agreed two years ago should be taken forward. He said the decision in March 2024 to adopt the revised scheme had been based on a consultation in which that emerged as the most popular option.
"I don't know what has fundamentally changed today compared with two years ago and I'm not sure why I would advocate a different position. I get the desire just to get this finished and make a decision but I think it's important to be consistent and reflect what we hear back from a public consultation."
Morningside Green councillor Ben Parker backed keeping the existing scheme. He said: "This has not been a good experience for anybody involved. I am hopeful that at least our decision and that of the TRO sub-committee will hopefully give us some clarity about what is happening I think that's where lots of people are wanting to be at with this."
Transport convener Stephen Jenkinson also said he wanted to give "some clarity and certainty" to the community.
“I'm conscious that one side of the street might be unhappy and the other side of the street might be very happy indeed, but I do think taking more time to consider things we've been considering for over five years is not appropriate for a community which is split.
"I think we're getting to the end of this process - I think we're getting to the point where we're going to start making a decision. And I think it will be good if we can make a decision, whatever the TRO sub-committee choose to do.
"We pass the details onto the TRO sub-committee, we trust the members on there to make an assessment of the officers' recommendations and choose the appropriate course of action - and hopefully that will bring this item to a close once and for all and provide some clarity for the community."
Ahead of its discussion, the transport committee heard a series of deputations.
Ed Hawkins from Blackford Safe Routes argued for the current scheme to be made permanent, saying it had proved a success with a 40 per cent reduction in traffic in the estate.
He said: "Removal of the filters would result in the loss of safe routes for pupils walking and cycling to many schools in the area. There is now an entire generation of primary age children who have never known the space outside the school without the filter. These children are unaware of how dangerous the road could be without the filters.
"Voting to remove modal filters is knowingly putting the interests of motorists ahead of children's right to life."
A written submission from cycling group Spokes also called for the current filters to be made legally permanent and the physical barriers upgraded to permanent materials in due course. It backed the issue being referred to the sub-committee as "the best and safest solution".
And it added: "It will bring to an end the tortuous process which has caused such protraction and confusion for all parties."
And a deputation representing residents of Braid Avenue urged retention of the current scheme too. They said a residents' survey in 2023 had found 90 per cent of Braid Avenue residents wanted to retain the measures and a petition in 2023 saw over 900 signatures supporting the scheme.
But another residents group, representing Midmar Gardens, Midmar Drive and Hermitage Gardens, said opinion on the estate was divided and some narrower streets had become rat runs.
Their submission was said to have arrived too late to be circulated, but it argued: "In the absence of a unanimously preferred option amongst Braid Estate residents, we would suggest that it is now appropriate to consider reverting to the pre-pandemic layout for a period to allow proper consideration of the longer term, rather than rushing through a hard-wiring of the temporary layout."