2024–>2025 : What for Active Travel ?
Edinburgh 2024 saw big highlights for cycling, as major long-term projects came to fruition, and data showed bike use rising alongside new infrastructure. But 2025 may be a disappointing contrast, with no completions on a similar scale, and a general slow-down following the Scottish Government’s 2024 active-travel funding procrastination and eventual cuts.
Meanwhile, both Government and Council continue the failed ‘carrots-only’ approach to meeting their (20% / 30% respectively) ambitions for 2030 car-km reduction, meaning continued climate emissions, congestion and hostile conditions for walking, wheeling and cycling.
Without doubt, the opening of CCWEL and of Roseburn to Dundee Street were active travel highlights not just of 2024 but in the entire history of Edinburgh cycling infrastructure. CCWEL, the City Centre West to East Link, being the Council’s first major segregated onroad cycleroute (and hopefully the start of a continuation to Corstorphine and beyond). Roseburn to Dundee Street (and eventually to the wide inner section of the Union Canal towpath) as an offroad route, is notable for its bridges, taking cyclists and walkers north-south beautifully over a tortuous road environment dominated by east-west road and rail corridors, and linking whole new areas of Edinburgh directly to the fantastic North Edinburgh network.
Meanwhile the new segregated bike lanes on Leith Walk, for all their many faults, show the Council learning the top lesson of the first tramline, separating cyclists from tramlines. Literally hundreds (yes, hundreds) of cyclists have been to A&E due to tramline injuries on the first line (which the courts have stated pose ‘significant risk‘ to cyclists) with a 2017 study already reporting 63 fractures and 29 operations. Yet Spokes has not heard of even one cyclist injury on the new Leith Walk tramlines, apart from one at Foot of the Walk junction where segregation ends. For more on Edinburgh tramline history and developments, see here.
And this leads to our third top picture from 2024, Ed Tissiman‘s graph showing the impact on cycling numbers of the growing Leith Walk / Leith Street / Picardy cycling infrastructure, using data from the automated bike counter.
A big feature of recent years, flourishing further in 2024, was the amazing growth in local community initiatives to encourage bike use, amply illustrated in our November public meeting, addressed by Infrasisters, Critical Mass, Edi.Bike, Edinburgh Bike Buses, and accessibility expert Derek Halden. As we said in the meeting report, we could have invited CityCycling Edinburgh, the Cycling Gardeners, South West 20, Car-Free Holyrood, Traffic Low Corstorphine, Spokes South Edinburgh, the Bike Station, Bridgend Farmhouse, the Wee Spoke Hub, Zedify cargobikes, Living Streets, Cargo Bike Movement, Spokes Porty, Blackford Safe Routes, and many more. And of course, the many Spokes initiatives including our amazing maps, cargobike grants, stalls, competitions and infrastructure lobbying. What a contrast with the early days of Spokes, in 1977, when there was only one other local body interested in cycling for everyday travel (FoE Edinburgh).
2025 Infrastructure …
Community enthusiasm and bike numbers will continue to grow, but infrastructure improvements in 2025 look set to be less dramatic, with no new openings on the scale of 2024.
Foot of Walk to Dock Street will probably top the list – a valuable extension to the cross-city route from Roseburn to Leith Walk, and providing new local opportunities for Leithers, but not really the significance of the 2024 openings. Major projects which might have opened, but have been delayed for years by over-consultation, staff changes, funding changes and uncertainties, and more, include Meadows to Canal (now 2026 at soonest), Meadows to George Street (now an incredible 2028) and Cameron Toll to Bioquarter (2026). Future major projects which should have progressed into planning stages in 2024, but stagnated due to the government funding cuts and uncertainties (see below), include Portobello to Musselburgh and the A8 project extending CCWEL west to Corstorphine and beyond.
In December Cllr Chas Booth asked a question at the full Council meeting, which elicited a full list of current active travel infrastructure projects, their expected completion dates, delays, and reasons for delays. The answer includes a table of projects and a very full and helpful answer on reasons for delays.
Specifically for 2025, the list promises the following …
| Project | Estimated 2025 completion dates |
| Dropped Kerbs Programme (Phase 2) | August |
| Secure On Street Cycle Parking (Phase 2) | August |
| Leith Connections – Foot of the Walk to Ocean Terminal | December |
| *QuietRoute 30 – Holyrood Park to Ratcliffe Terrace | November |
| *QuietRoute 9 – Roseburn to Gyle | October |
| Corstorphine Connections (completion) | March |
| Cultins Road Shared Footway | September |
| Bughtlin Burn Bridge | October |
| Fillyside Crossing | June |
| Reallocation of road space and reprioritisation of corridors (this could be major – see ‘**Corridors’ below) | 2025 |
*Quiet Routes are generally signposted minor roads, linking paths and cut-throughs. See this map. Use the double-arrow at top left to select the Quiet Routes option.
Other 2025 developments (or not!)
**Corridors – The wording of the final entry in the above table is somewhat cryptic but this could become the top highlight of 2025. The Council is in a very lengthy process of consulting (see the ETRO entries here) on the future of the ‘covid’ bollarded cycleroutes along many of the city’s main roads, formerly known as Spaces for People, and now as Travelling Safely. The Council also has a new(ish) ATAP policy that segregated main-road cycleroutes should form the bulk of the city’s primary cycleroute network.
A final report on the ETRO consultation is expected in Autumn 2025. Spokes hopes and expects that this will make permanent most or all of the above ‘Travelling Safely’ segregated routes, along with a program of enhancement including junction safety, filling missing links, replacing the bollards with kerbing, and so on, in line with the above new Primary Cycle Network policy.
Infrastructure as maintenance – Meanwhile dotted across the city are new active travel facilities which are often built-in when major road-resurfacing projects are undertaken, recent examples being parts of Lasswade Road and of London Road. Gradually these raise local-area cycling safety, form future network links – and increase cycling awareness by motorists.
George Street – Of all delays, George Street takes the biscuit, first coming to attention in 2010 – see timeline in this article and many other documents here. Originally, CCWEL was to include segregated bike lanes in George Street, but some years ago the George Street and First New Town project took over responsibility, including for the high quality cycle connection between the western and eastern sections of CCWEL. The project decided to replace the planned segregated lanes by a European-style ‘Cycle Street,’ with strictly controlled motor access allowed.
Unsurprisingly, there has been continuing and partially-successful pressure from taxis and others to water down the restrictions. However the continual delays, compromises and payments to consultants have resulted in a proposal so costly that the funding almost certainly cannot be raised – and many councillors feel such expenditure would anyway be out of proportion to other needs in the city. As a result, officers are to bring forward a low-cost interim solution to remove car parking and provide safer and welcoming conditions for walkers and cyclists. Whether councillors go for this or leave the present free-for-all indefinitely, and CCWEL bisected, will be a big test for the Transport Committee, probably early in 2025!
Local areas – Apart from the city centre, plans are underway for local town centre projects, to enhance walking and cycling conditions, and reduce car dominance, in Dalry, Portobello and Craigmillar/Niddrie – but none are likely to reach fruition in 2025. Elsewhere, a Low Traffic Neighbourhood is already successfully in place in Leith, whilst in Corstorphine vociferous opposition from a section of the population persuaded the newbie TRO subcommittee (after 45 minutes discussion, and with no previous involvement in the project) to scrap the bus-gate which limited traffic at school times.
And in Braid Estate, opposition from a section of the community has resulted in a forthcoming crazy £80k-£100k experiment, also consuming huge amounts of precious active-travel officer time, to remove two traffic filters and deal with the expected traffic increase by a complex segregated north-south cycle lane through what is currently a quiet residential area (and even then will expose east-west cycling to rat-run traffic).
Tram extension – No decisions are expected any time soon on the Granton to Bioquarter tram route. A Spring consultation is expected, and even if decisions are subsequently taken in autumn 2025, there seems little prospect of the necessary funding for several years, leaving the prospect of further changes to the plans in future. For the controversial Granton-Roseburn section, the options appear likely to be..
- Onroad via Orchard Brae – if this is chosen, we would argue for some form of mitigation to try and minimise tramline injuries similar to those which remain all too frequent in parts of the first tramline (see above), and Dean Bridge would be a particular nightmare
- Using the railway path – if this is chosen we would argue for single-track in the narrower sections, and for the project to include a pedestrian/cycle bridge over the mainline railway
Wider Edinburgh transport policy
Year 2024 started positively for sustainable transport, with the Council approving its Future Streets policy, including removing through motor traffic from the city centre, bus and cycle priority on main arterial routes into the centre, and 20-minute neighbourhoods and people-friendly local town centres across the city.
And, despite scepticism from some, the then Transport Convener Scott Arthur (now MP) took a determined and Scotland-leading role in fully implementing the new legislation to ban pavement parking and double parking (see ‘legacy’ here) – an action which has brought major benefits to pedestrians, and to some extent cycling.
Sadly, thereafter, as seems so common in Edinburgh, progress on ‘Future Streets’ has been agonisingly slow. Even the seemingly comparatively small step of making Cowgate traffic-free, or even one-way, failed to make it, and tragically, as the year moved into autumn, a pedestrian was killed in that street.
Whilst Councillor Arthur had said that closure of the City Centre to through traffic could happen in 2025, this feels increasingly unlikely given the inability to implement the first step, Cowgate, in 2024.
Nor is there significant progress towards the Council’s super-ambitious target to cut car-km 30% by 2030, adopted following the Scottish Government’s 20% car-km reduction commitment (see below). With a solely carrots-based approach, Edinburgh car-km is on an upward trend and nearing pre-covid levels.
Research is clear that significant traffic reduction is unlikely without some form of charging, and the one approach which the Council had started to investigate in depth – a Workplace Parking Levy – has been put on indefinite hold. We are therefore unlikely to see meaningful progress in 2025 towards the rapidly approaching 2030 traffic-reduction deadline.
Scottish Government – active travel funding
Scottish Government active travel cash uncertainties and procrastination have plagued Edinburgh and other councils throughout 2024. The 24/25 Scottish budget, agreed in early 2024, allocated £220m to active travel, 5.6% of total transport spending. Whilst this was way below the £320m or 10% which the government had promised, it was nonetheless easily the highest figure yet seen, representing some £40 per head of the population. Councils such as Edinburgh had been gearing up to expect this kind of substantially increased funding level, with additional specialist staffing and project planning so as to use the expected cash effectively.
But from the very outset there was uncertainty how the cash would be distributed to councils, with a shadowy ‘Transformation Project’ to move responsibility for allocating funding away from the existing Sustrans mechanisms (such as Places for Everyone), with future allocations to be direct from Transport Scotland. Whilst there are arguments to support this, the transition was a nightmare, particularly for those many projects which (including design and planning) stretch over more than one year, with councils not knowing until late in the day where to bid for what elements of which projects.
Even now, with things settling down, there is a complexity of funds, and there are crazy new rules, notably that councils can now only bid year-by-year, even for major multi-year projects (see 4.10/4.11 here).
As if the Transformation uncertainty was not enough, the Scottish Government in September announced in-year cuts to revenue spending, with the entire transport reduction (£23.7m) falling on active travel. This cut (largely for behaviour change projects) was at least clear in the announcement; but on capital spending (for infrastructure) there was merely a statement that (unspecified) cuts would need to be made.
Infrastructure funding comes mainly from two funds. ‘Tier 1’ (£35m in 24/25) does not require bids and had already been allocated. However, although council ‘Tier 2’ project funding bids (around £60m expected?) had been provisionally approved, they were halted by the government preparation for, then the reality of, in-year cuts. Councils waited literally months, holding back on ‘ready-to-go’ projects, until finally just £10m of the expected ~£60m Tier-2 money was approved (including, for Edinburgh, a partial contribution in late autumn towards Foot of Walk to Ocean Terminal).
In total, after the cuts, active travel in 24/25 received £155m from the Scottish Government, approximately 4% of total transport spending, compared to the originally budgeted £220m (5.6%). The mess, the time wasting and the project delays caused by the combination of the Transformation Project and the budget cuts, can be seen in the complexity of this depressing 12.12.24 Council Transport Committee report.
For 25/26, at least the new system should be settling in, so councils will be better able to put in valid funding bids. As regards the total available, the Scottish Government’s draft 25/26 budget provides around £179m for active travel, some 4.6% of the total transport budget – roughly £40m less than last year’s budgeted £220m, though £24m or so higher than the £155m that was actually provided following the in-year cuts. In order to get the 25/26 budget through, the minority SNP government needs the support of at least one other party, so has to make concessions. We urge readers to contact your MSPs, using some of the ‘What You Can Do’ suggestions in our budget article, to seek improvements before the budget is voted on in early 2025.
Scottish Government – traffic reduction commitment
Edinburgh’s 30% traffic reduction target was adopted following the Scottish Government’s commitment to a 20% car-km reduction by 2030. This commitment too is way off track, as in this Transform Scotland graph (the big dip being the covid years).
From the moment the 20% traffic-reduction commitment was announced by the government in December 2020, Spokes has emphasised how tough this will be to achieve, and how essential was urgent action on car restraint, not solely relying on boosting alternative modes. A draft ‘route map’ on implementing the commitment was belatedly published in Jan 2022, but it postponed any decisions on car demand management until at least 2025. Now, 3 years later, January 2025, the final route map has still not been published.
However, with no fanfare, the government did in late 2024 publish commissioned research (from AECOM) which suggests that meeeting the 20% commitment is still feasible – but only if tough road-user charging policies are implemented rapidly.
The government responded to the research, accepting that “incentivising desirable behaviours is unlikely to be sufficient” and demand management would be required. However, it then effectively leaves it up to Councils and to the UK government to take the necessary, but politically difficult, actions. Meanwhile the 3-year-delayed final ‘route map,’ under which the Scottish Government itself might have to take politically difficult actions, will be published “on completion of” further discussions!
The Earth in 2025
In November “The World Meteorological Organisation issued a Red Alert at the sheer pace of climate change in a single generation, turbo-charged by ever-increasing greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere. 2015-2024 will be the warmest ten years on record; the loss of ice from glaciers, sea-level rise and ocean heating are accelerating; and extreme weather is wreaking havoc on communities and economies across the world.“
In his New Year message, UN Secretary-General António Guterres, said..
“This is climate breakdown — in real time. We must exit this road to ruin — and we have no time to lose. … In 2025, countries must put the world on a safer path by dramatically slashing emissions, and supporting the transition to a renewable future. It is essential — and it is possible.”
Yet the climate crisis does not crop up often in everyday conversation – is it too scary? Under the surface, however, research for the Scottish Household Survey says 74% of adults agree that ‘climate change is an immediate and urgent problem’. Transport policies need to be seen in this light.
Traffic reduction, and the encouragement of active and sustainable travel, are all part of our own contributions, our governments’ contributions, and that of other communities worldwide, to tackling the climate crisis – on top of their many other benefits, not least public (and our own) health.
What you can do
- Contact your councillors and/or MSPs about issues in this article. Find them at www.writetothem.com. Or: Edinburgh Council / Scottish Government. Send us any useful replies. Meeting your representative(s) in person or online when you feel strongly about something can be even more useful than email – try it!
- Join Spokes – it is certainly not necessary to be an ‘activist’ though we particularly need members with the time and interest to help in our responses to local and/or national consultations etc
- Retweet our Bluesky post of this article.