The story of the Quiet Route is far from over. Many of you will have read about the previous decision of the Transport and Environment committee to refer the existing experimental traffic order (ETRO) to the Council’s traffic regulation order (TRO) sub-committee in May. This was to consider whether or not to make the scheme permanent. I covered my views on this topic in my previous blog post (TLDR; I support the scheme’s permanent retention).
Whilst the referral to the subcommittee (and subsequent decision) should have been the end of the decision process for the scheme in its current format, you may have seen extensive media coverage about the various errors which were found within the traffic orders when they were referred to the subcommittee. The consequence of these errors is that, whilst large parts of scheme were able to be voted on for permanent retention (including the filters outside James Gillespie’s school, pictured above), some modal filters (including those on Braid Avenue, Hermitage Gardens and Canaan Lane) were not. I was extremely disappointed in this revelation which I set out in various quotes to the press prior to the TRO subcommittee meeting:
“I’ve been contacted by many constituents who are very angry that the measures which keep their children safe on their walk to school will apparently need to be ripped out because of a council error. I share their anger and frustration at this situation, and I have asked council officers to urgently explain how this error happened, and what is being done to rectify it. It isn’t right that the safer streets which have benefited children and other vulnerable road users over the past 3 years will simply be removed because of a mistake.”
and
“The latest revelation that, because of a further Council blunder, another modal filter on the Quiet Route is not going to be made permanent at TRO subcommittee this week absolutely beggars belief. The filter at Canaan Lane, right outside the Royal Blind school, is an important feature which reduces traffic and keeps vulnerable road users safe.
At the centre of the Quiet Route, this filter is of key strategic importance and for it to be removed is to effectively cut the Quiet Route in two. There is no safe active travel route from the south of Morningside ward to the city centre and it is a travesty that this popular, inexpensive and important filter is set to be removed.
Green Councillors will continue to press Council officers and other political parties to put right what has gone so very badly wrong here.”
At the TRO subcommittee meeting on 12th May, I was pleased to see Councillors vote to make all aspects of the scheme permanent (with the exception of the modal filters which had been drafted incorrectly) and I have been pushing the Council to schedule an extraordinary Transport and Environment committee meeting to put in place the legal measures required to retain these filters:
“The outcome of this committee was as good as it could be in the circumstances, but it is still completely unacceptable that the safety of vulnerable road users in Morningside will be compromised by a litany of Council blunders.
Whilst today’s committee did not have the power to put in place legal measures to correct the TROs for 3 of the modal filters which make up the Quiet Route, the Council’s Transport and Environment committee does have this power.
I am calling on senior officers and the Convenor of the Transport and Environment committee to schedule an urgent committee meeting to begin the process of putting in place new TROs to reintroduce the modal filters which have been removed. This is an urgent and necessary first step in putting right what has gone so badly wrong here and ensuring that the current road safety protections are not removed.”
Unfortunately, the Convener of the Transport and Environment committee has refused to convene an extraordinary committee meeting but a further report will be heard at the regular Transport and Environment committee on 18th June. At that meeting I will be working with Green representatives on the committee to try and correct the errors which have been made. I will be sure to issue a further update after this meeting.
As has been my position from the start of this process, I am fully supportive of the Quiet Route. Whilst I recognise that not everybody shares this position, I believe that any further modifications to be made to the route should be about strengthening the scheme through the introduction of further modal filters and not be about ripping out existing filters which have been shown to reduce traffic and make the area safer.