Tag Archives: Consultation

Dundee Street Fountainbridge Active Travel Project: briefing by LSEG

News, Road Safety, Spaces for People, , , , ,

https://consultationhub.edinburgh.gov.uk/sfc/dundee-street-fountainbridge-active-travel/

Overview

The chief overall objective is to provide an attractive east-west route for cyclists as an alternative to the increasingly-congested Union Canal towpath. The proposals are in two parts: the main section is on Dundee Street/Fountainbridge from Ardmillan Place in the west (‘Diggers’) to Ponton Street in the east, past Fountain Park, Boroughmuir High School and Tollcross Primary School. The central feature is a new continuous cycleway on both sides of the street with separated kerbs. There are ‘continuous pavements’ installed on side roads, some additional pedestrian crossings, some restrictions to traffic movements and nine ‘floating’ bus stops.  A second section consists of a ‘quiet cycle route’ from from Ashley Drive, Shandon to Fowler Terrace. Polwarth.

Dundee Street/Fountainbridge

Pavements (footways)

Some sections of the carriageway (road) are re-designated as footway: there are continuous pavements across side roads to enhance pedestrian priority; the cycle kerb separators; floating bus stop ‘islands’. There are footway build-outs at some junctions.

There appears to be little if any general widening of the footway along the main road (Dundee Street/Fountainbridge), including  at some of the narrowest sections heavily used by schildren at Boroughmuir High and Tollcross Primary schools.

Some sections of footway will remain less than 2 metres wide – the “absolute minimum” considered acceptable by the Council’s Street Design Guidance (for example, 1.5 metres at Edinburgh Printmakers). There appear to be at least 10 sections of footway which are actually being reduced in width – by as much as 2.4 metres (north side, east of Gilmore Park) – in order to accommodate the cycleway.

Pedestrian /cycle crossings

New or upgraded signalled crossings for both pedestrians and cyclists are proposed at the junctions with Henderson Terrace/West Approach Road, Yeaman Place, Gardners Crescent and Grove Street. A zebra is proposed over Drysdale Road. Continuous footways will affirm and assist pedestrian priority at side roads.

Cycleways

The cycleway mostly operates one way in each direction and is 1.5 meters wide. A hard kerb separator (technically designated as footway) separates it from motor traffic. Cyclops-style crossings (“Cycle Optimised Protected Signals”) which give cyclists priority are introduced at major junctions (Gardners Crescent, Grove Street). The cycleway crosses sections of footway at these junctions and at Lochrin Basin.

Buses

The nine bus stops on the route are being retained, but often moved. They will all have cycle bypasses (‘floating bus stops’) so that the cycle lane passes between the pavement and the bus stop. Shelters are not marked drawings. There appear to be no specific bus priority measures.

Traffic management

Some restrictions to motor vehicle movement are proposed: general traffic (except buses and cyclists) on Dundee Street will not be permitted to turn into Ardmillan Place, Henderson Terrace or Fowler Terrace. The right turn lane eastbound into Viewforth is removed, with Dundee Street becoming a single lane in each direction.

Ashley Drive to Fowler Terrace

This second part of the project proposes a cycle ‘quiet route’ (mostly without segregated cycleways) from the Union Canal at Ashley Drive near the boathouse to Dundee Street via North Merchiston streets.  Some restrictions to motor traffic are proposed, for example a ‘filter’ on Harrison Gardens will stop general through-traffic; there will be no vehicle access to/from Dundee Street from Fowler Terrace). Three zebra crossings are proposed (on Ashley Terrace, Harrison Gardens and Harrison Road) along with several pavement build-outs. Local footways, which are mostly between 1.5 and 2.5 metres wide at present, will not generally be changed.

Key Issues

The most welcome features for pedestrians are additional crossing opportunities, including at the notorious Henderson Terrace (Diggers) junction, and narrowed side roads with continuous footways which calm traffic and enhance walking. The overall volume of motor traffic may be reduced by the traffic management measures.

The chief design concern is the lack of footway widening on Dundee St/Fountainbridge, including several sections which are heavily used by children fromBoroughmuir HS and Tollcross PS school children. Indeed, there are several sections of footway made significantly narrower.*

Pedestrians/passengers will have to cross a cycle lane at every (’floating’) bus stop, a known problem especially for blind and disabled people, and in sections of footway where cycle lanes go through footway areas (like Lochrin Basin).

The scheme is very heavily engineered and expensive at £10million. The main objectives – for both cyclists and pedestrians – could surely be met by a much simpler, cheaper design?

Construction is estimated during 2026-28 but this seems unlikely given that there is no funding in place and the current public consultation on the concept design continues into 2026.

A presentation was held via Zoom on 3rd November to discuss the changes. You can see the recording here – https://youtu.be/5uz__Os0vZs

* The City of Edinburgh Council consultants have provided a table summarising changes in footway widths

Dundee-Street-Fountainbridge-Active-Travel-Project-consultants-summary-of-changes-to-footway-widthsDownload

Living Streets Edinburgh Group: our asks for Holyrood 2026 elections

News, Press Release, , ,

Living Streets Edinburgh campaigns to make walking and wheeling better, safer and more accessible in Edinburgh. We support national calls for the Scottish Parliament to give more priority to active travel and have four specific changes we want parties and candidates for the elections to commit to:

  1. Engine idling

The penalty for breaking the law against engine idling hasn’t increased since 2003 – still standing at £20. This means that it’s not economic for councils to enforce compliance and it is no surprise that there is effectively zero enforcement. This is absurd given the time money and effort spent in recent years on raising awareness of air quality issues in Scotland and introducing Low Emission Zones.  We want to see the penalty raised to an effective level, and index-linked to future inflation.

  • ‘Continental-style’ zebras

We want to see cheap, simple zebra crossings (i.e. ‘paint-only’, without Belisha Beacons) permitted on Scottish streets. This is a quick and cost-effective way to give pedestrians priority, especially on side roads where pedestrian priority is now confirmed in the Highway Code. Evaluations of the design by Edinburgh Napier University and Transform Scotland have demonstrate their potential (https://transform.scot/2023/12/04/new-research-would-european-style-zebra-crossings-work-in-scotland/). The Scottish Government says that it has no devolved powers to even trial these zebras – in which case, the Scottish Government must press immediately for such powers.

  • Roadworks

While roadworks are inevitable both for maintenance of streets and to maintain and improve public utilities, they cause severe and often unnecessary problems for all modes of travel – including pedestrians. The Scottish Road Works Commissioner has stated that 2/3 of works are on footways.  This not only disrupts pedestrians (especially disabled people) but also often results in long-lasting damage to roads. We want to see a ‘lane rental’ system introduced, as permitted in England, where the works undertaker pays for the occupation of the road on a daily basis. This will encourage works to be completed as quickly as possible, minimising disruption, and also increase resources available for inspection of works, improving the standard of reinstatements.

  • Safety Cameras

Two thirds of safety cameras (for speeding and red light jumping) in Edinburgh are ‘bagged’ (out of commission);  8 cameras were bagged in 2025 alone. https://www.livingstreetsedinburgh.org.uk/2025/08/25/bagged-speed-and-red-light-cameras-in-edinburgh-result-from-our-foi-request-august-2025/   This sends a green light to motorists that there are no consequences for speeding and jumping lights. Police Scotland, which operates the cameras, bears the cost of maintaining and upgrading them – but receives no income from penalties, which ultimately goes to the UK Treasury. So Police Scotland currently has a financial incentive to minimise the use of cameras, which are an essential tool to encourage safe and legal driving. We want MSPs to lobby for change on a UK basis so that the revenue generated by safety cameras is retained by the enforcement agency – normally Police Scotland.

Living Streets Edinburgh Group

October 2025.

***

Two-way cycling on Rose Street: Objection to TRO24/27

Consultation Response, Council Policy, Cycle Routes, , ,

We object to the advertised Traffic Regulation Order (TRO/24/27 bit.ly/3IFOQQ6) allowing two-way cycling on Rose Street. The idea of promoting two-way cycling on the street was raised in a report to the Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) on 30 January 2025, as a means to facilitate cycling across the city while the CCWEL route through George Street is not yet in place.  We made our objection to this proposal at that time.

The Council’s own report recognised that “integrating cyclists into a space primarily designed for pedestrians presents challenges. The narrow width of Rose Street, combined with the high footfall at certain times, could lead to safety concerns between cycling and walking/wheeling. With no dedicated cycling infrastructure, conflict could be created between users.”

It is not appropriate in our view to encourage Rose Street – the closest thing Edinburgh currently has to a pedestrianised street – as a major cycle route. The proposal does not respect the Council’s agreed travel hierarchy which places walking and wheeling first. The TRO is especially inappropriate given that the TEC recently decided that two way cycle access should be maintained on George Street itself during any redevelopment works. 

“We are all pedestrians”: Transport convener addresses Living Streets Edinburgh AGM

Council Policy, Public Event, , , ,

Following criticism about “vanity prestige projects” being prioritised over pedestrian access, Stephen Jenkinson addressed our AGM

Edinburgh Council’s Transport Convener has sought to reassure Living Streets Edinburgh Group supporters that pedestrian access is a top priority for his committee.

“We need to ensure that we keep [pedestrians] front of our minds and decision-making when we implement projects and developments across the city,” Stephen Jenkinson, Convener of the Transport and Environment Committee at Edinburgh Council, told the volunteer group.

The comments at our AGM on 29 May follow concerns that the committee has given the go-ahead to what our convener David Hunter named “vanity prestige projects”, rather than focus on less expensive but more beneficial, pedestrian-focused projects.

Jenkinson acknowledged the concerns and added: “I would challenge that in a little way. I think the City Mobility Plan, in a grand sense, is about delivering big projects. The scope of a lot of those projects will include pedestrian and public realm benefits.”

The convener said that when he took over from his predecessor, Scott Arthur, now MP for Edinburgh South West, he discovered a large list of proposed projects listed under the 10-year City Mobility Plan, and tasked council officers to prioritise them.

He explained that many schemes have to compete with other local authorities for external funding, and the funding framework has moved from multi-year to single-year.

“I want to reassure you that pedestrian priority is a priority not only for me but many members of the committee and the council. It isn’t a zero-sum game when it comes to moving people and vehicles around the city,” he added.

Helping everyone to get around the city

The need for pedestrian priority is urgent. Two disabled person’s rights advocates from the Lothian Centre for Inclusive Learning – Ashleigh and Kirin – told the AGM that floating bus stops, incorrectly placed dropped kerbs, a lack of space around disabled parking bays, and cycle lanes in the middle of pavements, all hinder those with sight and mobility issues.

Kirin, who has sight issues, praised the banning of advertising boards – a campaign led by Living Streets – but said there is still a lot of street furniture to navigate.

“I just want to get around the streets, just like you, but it’s trickier because I can’t see as well,” she said.

Kirin also joked about using her cane: “The pavement parking ban has been very helpful which has stopped us from scraping your cars!”

Positive noises from the TEC?

Jenkinson pointed out:

  • £4-6 million funding will be invested in the Granton Liveable Neighbourhood scheme, which will bring pedestrian benefits.
  • the 2025/26 budget for dropped kerbs has doubled to £400,000, thanks to Transport Scotland funding.
  • in response to concern that the council has frozen the footway budget this year, Jenkinson said the budget has increased 25% since 2022.
  • the success of the pavement parking ban means footways will generally see less wear and tear from vehicles.

Engine idling: Will the council act?

Jenkinson said he had also written to the Scottish Government to advocate for higher fixed penalty notices for engine idling, which currently stands at £20 and would not cover the cost of enforcing the fine.

In contrast, fixed penalty notices for pavement parking stand at £100 and have generated more than £244,000 in revenue for the 12 months ending February 2025 alone.

Living Streets Edinburgh convener David Hunter thanked Jenkinson for standing strong on no exemptions for pavement parking and for attempting to answer audience questions:

  • Will the Council monitor pedestrian movement, and use that data?
  • Will the Council follow other countries like the Netherlands and re-design junctions like Toll Cross before resurfacing them?
  • Will the Council re-consider removing the Braidswoods modal filters, which have successfully reduced daily vehicles from 10,000 to 6,000?
  • Will the Gorgie Liveable Neighbourhood retract its proposal to include floating bus stops?

Watch this space.

LSEG calls (again) for more investment in everyday walking

Council Policy, News, Press Release, , , ,

The Council’s Transport and Environment Committee on 22 May will consider a report recommending priorities to deliver the City Mobility Plan. We’re surprised, and very disappointed, to see no mention of some key initiatives which we were able to get included in the CMP delivery plan. Especially disappointing after the committee decided to freeze footway maintenance while increasing spending on roads, only last month. We’ve therefore sent councillors this message.

Dear Councillor

I’m writing in connection with the report on City Mobility Plan priorities, Item 7.5 on the TEC agenda for 22 May bit.ly/43ktlep  The recommendations do not adequately reflect the CMP’s ambition to effect “a transformational change in walking and wheeling in Edinburgh”.

Over two years ago, two new initiatives were introduced into the Active Travel component of the City Mobility Plan: ‘Action for Better Crossings” (ABC) and the “Edinburgh Accessible Streets Initiative” EASI). These programmes (both proposed by us) finally offered the prospect of a strategic, rather than piecemeal, approach to addressing some of the most fundamental problems with getting around the city as a pedestrian – for example:

  • the time that you have to wait for the green man at traffic lights,
  • the thousands of missing dropped kerbs on pavements,
  • narrow footways, 
  • pavement clutter, etc.

As we understand it, effectively nothing has been done yet to implement either initiative as a coherent programme. We had hoped that they would form a key part of this report. However, there is no mention whatsoever in the report of either ABC or EASI, despite Council having confirmed them as at the heart of CMP policy only last year (see attached).

Instead, some elements of ABC and EASI are simply noted as part of the ‘rolling programme’ in Appendix 4b. Paragraph 4.14 of the report states an expectation that these will be funded at “an overall level roughly equal to recent overall investment”. This isn’t good enough: there is no indication of how much money is budgeted for these schemes; certainly there has been no systematic investment at all in recent years in widening footways. Many of the other aspects like the pedestrian crossing programme and the crucial school streets reviews have huge backlogs owing to lack of resourcing.

These vital programmes need to be considered alongside, and on the same level playing field, as the active travel and public transport listed in Appendix 1. Councillors should be able to consider whether investment in school streets, road safety, ABC or EASI is more or less worthy than these projects, whether they be George Street, Hawthornvale-Salamander Street, the Lindsey Bridge or Dalry 20 Minute Neighbourhood. Otherwise the opportunity to consider where best to invest both staff time and capital funding is lost and a ‘silo’ approach is entrenched.

We also have serious concerns with the overly-complex methodology for assessing projects in Appendix 1. It gives no weighting to walking and wheeling (“top of the travel hierarchy”) and doesn’t sufficiently value schemes relatively modest but important to pedestrians such as Calton Road and the Causey. These projects fail to score highly enough only because work on them has already been “paused’ for years.

However, the fundamental weakness of the report is to take too narrow an approach to evaluating a limited set of projects. We would therefore like to see the report deferred perhaps for two cycles, and a new report brought forward with a more strategic approach to future investment, including the programmes mentioned above.

David Hunter

Convener