Call to axe Sheriffhall Roundabout support beaten

Edinburgh Reporter

a day ago

A push to axe the council's support for a controversial upgrade to a congested city roundabout has been snuffed out by the city's transport boss.
Plans to upgrade the busy Sheriffhall Roundabout, the only flat junction on the bypass, have been in the works since 2018, but work has not yet started on the project.
At a committee meeting yesterday, the city's Green group made a bid to cut the council's support for the flyover, saying money could be better spent elsewhere.
It was rebuffed by the city's transport leader, although he admitted building new infrastructure on the city bypass was not 'ultimately' the solution to increased traffic caused by population growth in the Lothians.
While the bypass is Transport Scotland's responsibility, cutting the council's support would have sent a strong message of dissatisfaction with the project to Holyrood.
Greens, both at the council and in the Scottish Parliament, have long opposed the flyover on the grounds that it could cause induced demand – the phenomenon by which adding more road infrastructure in an area can cause more people to start driving.
They say that money should instead be spent on improving public transport links and building infrastructure to allow for more walking and cycling.
Councillor Kayleigh Kinross-O'Neill, the Greens co-leader, said: 'Congestion is a human issue, no matter where and what it is, that unfortunately needs human-led behaviour change.
'We note the issues faced, and think we should be moving away from the conversation of the roads and staying on the path – no pun intended – of priortising walking, wheeling and cycling, and reducing car dependency.
'Totally appreciate that Sheriffhall is above all of us, and we're still awaiting the results of the public local inquiry. However we're all pretty tired of waiting, and we know there are better ways money could be spent across the region.'
Cllr Kinross-O'Neill said some possible options could be putting money towards the trams, more park and rides and expanded bus lanes in the capital.
She continued to say: 'We request that we withdraw the favour and support of the scheme, [or] any sort of waste of time road improvements that would cause congestion, not tackle it.'
The exchange came as part of a debate over a motion by Conservative councillor Neil Cuthbert calling for action on congestion on the city bypass, as well as modelling on what future traffic could look like on the road.
Edinburgh's Green group added their request to scrap support for the flyover as an amendment to the motion.
Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson moved no action on Cllr Cuthbert's motion, which also eliminated the Green amendment.
He said: 'One of the main reasons that there are times where the bypass does get congested – and it does get congested, from time to time I am stuck on it – It's as much to do with population growth, not only in Edinburgh, but predominantly in East Lothian, which has increased the traffic on the bypass.
'So how do you tackle it? I don't think that building a flyover is ultimately the solution. What you have to do is actually do things to do what you can to remove the traffic, to get it back to norms.
'So public transport solutions, like tram, potentially bus rapid transport links to East Lothian and Midlothian, are the long term solutions in regards to giving the people using the bypass an alternative option.'
The debate over the flyover comes amid wider questions over the future of the project.
A need for it was identified 17 years ago, and in 2018 it was included in the Edinburgh and South East Scotland city region deal, which put £120 million towards the project.
But it has lumbered along slowly through the planning process, with more than 2,700 objections to its construction leading to an inquiry.
Though it was submitted in October of 2023, the Scottish Government is still reviewing the inquiry's report.
Earlier this month, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop told MSPs that she is waiting on advice from senior Scottish Government officials on the next steps for the project.
She added that she was unable to provide a timeline for when action would be taken.
By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter
Like this:
Like

Related