An Update From Councillor Jim Campbell Since the publication of the last Trinity Spotlight one topic has dominated my mailbag like no other since my election in May 2017: the proposed Priority Parking Controls in Trinity. Spotlight readers may remember I strongly supported the informal consultation of local residents in Trinity and South Newhaven on these proposal. The consultation has now closed and we await the results. As a local Councillor, I will be attaching very high importance to the views expressed by local residents, and will not support the introduction of Priority Parking without evidence that that was what a clear majority want. This may seem an uncontroversial position. But such views have been described pejoratively as “populist” in recent Council meetings: I don’t think that serves our local democracy well at all. I regret that other City Councillors would think that representing what local people want for the neighbourhoods they live in is a bad thing, just because they don’t agree with it. It is not how Council has approached Resident Parking Controls in the past either: for as long as anyone can remember, such controls have been gradually extended outwards from the City Centre as areas have come to see them as necessary. All Groups in the Council until very recently supported the concept of introducing controls with consent. Not only did this serve local democracy, it also minimised the risk of protracted challenges to Traffic Regulation Orders as individual residents were less inclined to fight restrictions street by street in the knowledge the restrictions had the support of their neighbours. My group has not and will not change our approach – we will be “populist” in a good way even if that makes us unpopular!
It seems that our transport gurus want to reimagine our centre not as the node through which we can pass to reach other parts, but as a playground for visitors. These plans ignore the vision of previous generations, with all the bridges and mounds they built to bring our City together, and conjure up theoretical ideals like “traffic evaporation” and “LTNs” or “LEZs” and “modal shift”. To be clear, none of these outcomes would be undesirable. The question is the extent to which citizens will retain any choice or face a fait accompli imposed by a knowbest Council. If, for example, local buses are subject to the “to not through” concept (as has been mooted), a trip from Trinity to Morningside won’t be a single direct journey on a 23, but would involve bus changes or detours as yet unknown. The recent closure of Starbank Road will have confirmed locals’ worst fears about all the east west traffic that traverses north Edinburgh. East Trinity Road, Craighall Road and Ferry Road were all overwhelmed at times. Quite what the impact of closing the City Centre to through traffic, with the potential displacement onto orbital routes including the east west roads already at capacity in our area, remains unaddressed. Beyond transport, many report the cleanliness of Edinburgh comparers unfavourably with other major Cities. There has been much comment on poor performance of litter / waste collection services; lack of control of weeds and other overgrowing greenery; the unloved state of our pavements with dog dirt, chewing gum and graffiti all add to the apparent lack of pride.
So, perhaps no shortage of day to day service improvement the Council could be But it’s not just parking controls where the focusing on, looking for incremental imCouncil seems to be having a tough time provement, if it could overcome its aversion responding to what Edinburgh citizens are to populism. asking for. The whole Space for People Although the City Chambers remains programme has alienated many. I fear closed, I can still be contacted on the City Mobility Plan, with the concept of 0131 529 4235, or better still, by email: journeys “to, not through” the City Centre, will jim.campbell@edinburgh.gov.uk. be another source of growing dissatisfaction. 20
