Edinburgh's George Street: Parking for private cars could be removed well ahead of major revamp

Council officials have been given the go-ahead to investigate options for taking away parking spaces, including all down the middle of the road.  But businesses were not consulted on the proposal and said it had come as "a very unwelcome surprise".

The long-awaited £40 million revamp is set to turn George Street into a pedestrian and cycle zone with limited access for vehicles at certain times.  

Parking income from George Street is over £2 million a year | TSPL

But the earliest date construction work can start is 2027 and there are uncertainties about future funding for the project, so officials were looking to see what improvements could be made in the meantime and hit on removing parking.

A report to the council's transport committee proposed "an investigation of options to remove private vehicle parking from George Street", reporting back in early 2025.  

But William Duncan, chair of the George Street Association, which represents businesses and organisation based in the street, told councillors: "This came as a very unwelcome surprise to many of us.

"While it has been long accepted by George Street Association members that the redevelopment would involve the removal of car parking and very much more restricted access, this was after the completion of the works not before.

The revamped George Street will be a pedestrian and cycle zone | supplied

"I think the implied threat within this proposal, that the council might act in this way, will be very prejudicial to maintaining the goodwill and relationships that have been built up so far."

And Tory group leader Iain Whyte said the proposal seemed to be a late addition to the report.  He said: "I went to my group's briefing [on the report] and asked questions - there was nothing there, at that stage, about removing parking on George Street before the scheme. 

“We've heard from the George Street Association that this came as news to them.   And there's only three paragraphs in report and they all essentially say the same thing. There's no justification given or any indication why it might be a good idea or any indication of costs, or costs for loss of parking income.  Where did this really come from?  And if it's a pre-plan for something we were going to do, should we not have asked businesses first?"   

Gareth Barwell, head of operational services, apologised if the proposal had caused concern among businesses.  He said there had been no intention to "spring a surprise", but the idea had been to consider what the "meanwhile" future of George Street might be.

He said the council had a target of reducing car kilometres by 30 per cent; it was clear disabled parking and loading and services for businesses had to be maintained, and there would be some access for taxis and coaches. "What we haven't done in the interim is say, what is the value of the parking in the middle of George Street?"

He said about 20,000 people a month paid to park in George Street, but the "average parking transaction" was not as high as might be thought.  "It's not long stays, it's generally people coming in for an hour to an hour and a half." Mr Barwell said the revenue from parking in George Street would be over £2 million a year.