Category Archives: 20 minute neighbourhood

Craigmillar Niddrie Connections: comments by Living Streets Edinburgh

20 minute neighbourhood, Consultation Response, Council Policy

‘Craigmillar Niddrie Connections’: comments by Living Streets Edinburgh

This is the formal response by Living Streets Edinburgh (LSEG), the local campaign for everyday walking and wheeling, to the current consultation on the ‘Craigmillar Niddrie Connections’ proposals: https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/cycling-walking/craigmillar-niddrie-connections.

Our understanding of the proposals

It is often difficult to understand the most significant features of proposals like this from visualisations and drawings. From looking at the plans and from correspondence with council officers, we understand that key features are:

  • a continuous two-way cycleway from Prestonfield Avenue to Fort Kinnaird;
  • space for the cycleway on Peffermill Road to be taken from what is currently the carriageway;
  • space for the cycleway on Niddrie Mill Road Road to be taken from what is currently the northern footway;
  • the southern footway along the route will be largely unchanged;
  • a number of bus stops to be merged and all to have cycle bypasses (floating bus stops);
  • new bus lanes eastbound approaching the junction with Duddingston Road West and westward, for example from Hay Drive;
  • junction treatments to be altered to favour pedestrian movement (corner ‘tightening’,  continuous footways, etc) and more significant re-design to reduce motor traffic priority at key junctions like Greendykes Road and Craigmillar Castle Road;
  • public realm improvements and new paths, for example at Cairntows Park, Castleview school etc.

Overall concept

This project originated as a ’20 minute neighbourhood’ project:

“We want to revitalise the area around Niddrie Mains Road by creating better spaces for recreation and socialising alongside safe, high-quality walking, wheeling, and cycling routes. Our plans also include improving access and amenities around Cairntows Park.”

https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/cycling-walking-projects-1/20-minute-neighbourhood-projects

Responses to the consultation broadly appear to have endorsed the followine objectives:

“When asked about what could improve the experience of spending time on the High Street, most comments were about maintenance, safety, environment, and amenities, such as:

  • Better care and maintenance of public realm around shopfronts, more bins, and upgraded street furniture.
  • More greenery, benches, better pavement, and less traffic.
  • More police presence to deter antisocial behaviour.
  • More local shops, family friendly cafes, pubs, and better leisure facilities.”

https://consultationhub.edinburgh.gov.uk/sfc/craigmillar/

We are therefore disappointed to see little emphasis on many of these issues. What was originally envisaged as a ‘placemaking’ exercise appears to have transformed into an ‘active travel scheme’ on a two mile long travel corridor from Prestonfield Avenue (or Cameron Toll as originally planned) to Kinnaird Park.

We understand that the Council’s 20 Minute Neighbourhood team has been disbanded; the reduced emphasis on ‘place’ is evident in these proposals which appear to prioritise the introduction of a continuous segregated cycleway. An emphasis on place would require not only changes to road design but also economic and social interventions, for example to enhance the commercial viability of local shops, tackle anti-social behaviour, etc.

Pavements

Craigmillar and Niddrie are unusual in that there are several extremely wide footways, as a result of major changes introduced before 2000. Normally, we would object in principle to conversion of pavements to other uses (road, cycleway, etc.) as being contrary to the sustainable travel hierarchy which puts pedestrian movement first. However, we accept that a lot of pavement space in the area is poor quality and in places excessive, adding little to the quality of the area, so consideration of alternative use of some space (e.g. for cycleways or bus lanes) could be justified.

Nevertheless, more new quality space with greenery should be integral to the scheme; as it stands, we understand that sections of the northern High Street pavement will be reduced to narrower than the ‘desirable’ 3 metre standard set out in the Edinburgh Street Design Guidance. Adequate pedestrian space should be the top priority in any scheme prioritising ‘place’ over ‘movement’.

Other comments

We welcome a number of specific features:

  • the junction treatments at side roads giving step-free access and emphasising pedestrian priority. However, many of these (King’s Haugh, Dunkirk Road, Hay Avenue, Blackchapel Close) do not promote the natural direction of travel for pedestrians and also deviate the cycleway.
  • the simplifying of the Duddingston Road West junction; we hope that pedestrian phasing of the signals is optimised.
  • the redevelopment of Cairntows Park, where street trees are proposed along the high street and the Castleview school proposals.

We suggest:

  • consideration is given to enhancing some of the uncontrolled pedestrian crossings over Niddrie Mill Road in particular by adding zebra crossings.
  •  extending the 20mph speed limit from Niddrie Mains Rd (where it currently ends) all the way to Fort Kinnaird.

We have concerns at:

  •  the closure/merger of several bus stops, which is likely to make it harder for people with limited mobility to use local bus services.
  • the routine installation of ‘floating’ bus stops; we receive regular feedback that these are a problem for older and disabled people, especially visually impaired. We consider that the description of these stops in the consultation is misleading (“creating a safe place for people to wait for the bus whilst also providing continuous safe cycling.”)

Conclusion

While there are certainly aspects of the proposals which would improve the Craigmillar/Niddrie area and its travel links, we would like to see the Council sponsor fewer big expensively-engineered active travel schemes like this. Instead, there should be greater emphasis on smaller, local schemes especially to enhance pedestrian spaces, neighbourhood shopping centres, schools, health centres, etc. These interventions would benefit more people at reduced public expense.

Living Streets Edinburgh

June 2026

Dalry Living Well – LSE Comments

20 minute neighbourhood, Consultation Response, News,

Introduction

Living Streets Edinburgh Group welcomes the opportunity to respond to the consultation on ’Dalry Living Well Locally’. [1] We strongly support the concept of the ’20 minute neighbourhood’ – with the philosophy that most everyday services and needs are located on your doorstep and reached within a c.20 minute round trip walk. We recognise that the idea is in its infancy and that quite what a 20 minute neighbourhood looks like is still subject to debate.

To be successful, a “20 minute neighbourhood” needs to provide high quality infrastructure for pedestrians. We are thinking here not just of the fit and able, but the mother wheeling a pushchair and leading a toddler; the elderly who are finding walking more difficult and maybe using a wheeled aid; the users of wheelchairs and powered mobility chairs. A major concern with the proposed scheme is that a high-quality pedestrian infrastructure is not provided consistently throughout the area.

In this context, we do have serious misgivings about the approach proposed by the City of Edinburgh Council both with regard to the overall concept, and to design details, which we outline below. We hope that these comments will help the council to develop an improved vision of a ’20 minute neighbourhood’, and what features should be included in the Dalry scheme.

Overall concept

We are surprised at the scale of the project – from Haymarket to the Westfield area of Gorgie. This is over a mile long and is in our view far too large to be considered as a local neighbourhood, even accepting that this is proposed in separate ‘chunks’ (this section being from Haymarket to Tynecastle High). We would prefer to see designs based on much smaller neighbourhoods, such as the ‘town centre section’ in this scheme (from Caledonian Road to Dalry Place).

The scale of the proposal suggests that the project is envisaged more as a travel corridor than a neighbourhood improvement. If the mantra of ‘place not movement’ is to have any meaning, surely it must be for a neighbourhood placemaking scheme? The Council commissioned a ‘Public Life Assessment’ of Gorgie Dalry in 2016, presumably at significant expense, which includes a lot of useful, detailed observations and suggestions for placemaking. [2]  We see little or no influence of these suggestions on the scheme and recommend that it should be revisited.

One consequence of the ‘travel corridor approach’ is that, apart from the small ‘town centre’ section, there appears to be a perceived need to include segregated cycle ways along the whole route (because it is conceived more as a ‘route’, than a ‘place’). While we of course want to see more and better facilities to encourage cycling, this is problematic in that it forces compromises to be made in all other uses of the street and modes – including walking and wheeling. This contradicts the ‘sustainable travel hierarchy’ and in some respects, mirrors the widely-discredited approach taken in Leith Walk.

Another consequence is the bus gate at Haymarket, which will stop motor traffic other than buses and taxis using Dalry Road in the daytime. We certainly want to see less traffic on Dalry Road and other busy residential streets, and agree with the strategy to divert as much traffic as possible onto the Western Approach Road. We recognise that there is a case for a bus gate to achieve this. However, we would want to understand much more about how much traffic will be diverted to other streets, and where. The closing of such major road artery to general traffic will have significant consequences for traffic across western Edinburgh, especially given the 1.5 ton weight restriction on the WAR.

Requiring general traffic from the east, as well as the west, to access Dalry Road at the Ardmillan Terrace junction will put enormous pressure on this junction and we are sceptical that it will be able to cope. There is also the issue that traffic entering Dalry Road from the west will need to do U-turns and exit the same way, putting further pressure on this junction. And of course, where will traffic including HGVs, bin lorries, etc.perform these U-turns safely during the restricted hours?

Finally with regard the bus gate, we know that the ’15 minute city’ concept has been subject to numerous conspiracy theories claiming that it is designed to stop people travelling outwith their neighbourhood. These concerns have broadly been dismissed, emphasising that the concept is rather about providing better access locally, The restrictions at Haymarket will affect all drivers (those who need to drive equally as much as those who have other options) and is likely to add weight to those conspiracy theories rather than dispel them.

Apart from the bus gate, the other particularly challenging aspect of the scheme will be parking. We strongly support the removal of all general parking from Dalry Road itself – this space is too valuable to be occupied by private car parking – although there will of course, need to be appropriate provision for loading and for blue badge holders. However, densely populated, tenemented streets have very little off-street parking available, in contrast to other areas of the city where many houses have driveways and garages.  Parking spaces are at a premium in Dalry. The local community may accept reduced parking capacity on Dalry Road more easily if some additional off-street parking – for example at the under-used Lidl car park? – can be found.

Details

We are pleased to see the plan feature a number of wider footways, especially in the central ‘town centre’ section. Adequate pavements should be the absolute priority of a ’20 minute neighbourhood’.  Similarly, we like the provision of seating, trees and sustainable drainage facilities, all of which will greatly enhance the town centre. The use of continuous pavements giving pedestrians priority at side roads is also very welcome as are numerous opportunities to cross Dalry Road, including the welcome use of zebras.

This ‘town centre’ section is the part of the scheme which in our view works best. If the scheme is to broadly remain in its current form, we suggest that it should be extended at least to include Dalry Primary School in the west and eastwards to Haymarket.

We are however, very disappointed that other sections of pavement do not meet these standards. There are long sections of pavement which are currently well below the council’s own ‘absolute minimum width’ of 2 metres as specified in the council’s own street design guidance. This is most obvious on the south side of Dalry Road at the cemetery. It is frankly inconceivable that these plans do not intend to address this: if inadequate pavements are not going to be improved in a scheme like this, they will never be. We have seen this failure to meet minimum standards in several other ‘sustainable travel schemes and this undermines the Council’s professed commitment to the sustainable transport hierarchy. We also understand that there is no widening of the extremely busy pavements towards Haymarket.

There are ten bus stops along the route, five on each side and of these eight will be of the ‘floating’ design, requiring passengers to cross a cycle way immediately when boarding or alighting. This design is known to present significant difficulties for blind and disabled people especially.  The explanation that “Bus stop bypasses will mean that bus users will not have to wait on the main pavement and allow pedestrians and cyclists to safely pass” is misleading at best: they offer no advantage whatsoever for pedestrians. The space at some of the bus stops is so constrained that we understand they do not conform to the Council\s own Design Guidance and have no shelters. We would like to see normal bus stops which do not require pedestrians to cross a cycle way throughout.

We have significant concerns at the suitability of the Ardmillan Terrace junction design, although we completely agree that it is dysfunctional at present. These concerns relate not just to the capacity as noted above, but also we query why a ‘CyclOps’ (‘cycle-optimised’) design is appropriate here, rather than one which gives pedestrians priority. Again, we believe that many pedestrians, including older people and those with visual impairments will find this junction hard to cross, as they will have to cross not only the road but also cycle lanes, sometime several times, in order to get to the other side. It is also not clear what pedestrian ‘wait times’ will be.

It must also be acknowledged that disabled people’s parking opportunities will be limited by the extensive use of segregated cycle ways. The Council has just established an Accessibility Commission, designed to “ensure the city’s streets are as accessible as possible to disabled people”. It is paramount that these concerns about the ability of disabled pedestrians to use the proposed streets are addressed.

Finally, we are very disappointed that our suggestion to develop a new western access point to Haymarket Station, probably from Distillery Lane, does not form part of the proposals. This would bring the station much closer to the Dalry community and encourage its use by pedestrians and cyclists. We understand that this has been explored and is supported by the Scottish Government, Network Rail and Scotrail in principle. We recognise that there are challenges (ownership of Distillery Lane, funding, etc.) but we believe that this is feasible if there is the will to bring partners together. We urge the Council to pursue this unique opportunity which will not come around again.

Conclusion

We support the broad aims behind the proposals – to enable the local community to access their needs and service easily and sustainably and to reduce the dominance of Dalry Road by traffic. However we think that there are very significant problems with what is being proposed; some of these are matters of detail, but others fundamentally stemming from a flawed vision of what a ’20 minute neighbourhood’ should be.

We would therefore encourage a fundamental re-think of the scheme, to direct resources to more local, tangible improvements especially to the pedestrian environment. We are open to the concept of the bus gate at Haymarket if the significant questions about the impact on both displaced traffic, and local access can be satisfactorily answered. If these can’t be, then we would like to see a more modest, cheaper but practical alternative based on bus lanes – which as well as providing much needed priority for bus passengers would also improve safety for cyclists.

June 2024

[1] https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/news/article/13951/consultation-opens-on-future-dalry-town-centre-proposals

[2] https://planningedinburgh.files.wordpress.com/2024/03/gorgie-dalry-r.pdf