What we know so far …
Council officials yesterday closed Powderhall Bridge – crossing the Water of Leith between St Mark’s Path and St Mark's Park – indefinitely and without prior notice.
The Council action came in response to the structure failing a recent inspection.
According to Cllr Jack Caldwell (Ward 12) on Bluesky, ‘The department are currently reviewing the details of the report to understand the viability of bridge repairs.’
The wording here is ominous: ‘viability of bridge repairs’ not ‘timing of bridge repairs’. Caldwell regrets that no timescale is available at present.
Splits
Spurtle has not seen the latest report, but we understand that severe diagonal splitting in outward- and inward-facing top chord nodes has caused concern.
A report by Mott MacDonald Ltd in July 2022 noted timber splitting and minor surface weathering of the timber parapet. It recommended further attention because ‘none of the elevations, underside or substructure was visible and the inspection was only of the topside elements’.
Locals maintain access, but is it safe?
The 19m x 3.28m bridge is an important north–south link for this part of Spurtleshire and beyond, as became obvious when developers tried closing the route earlier this year.
The suggested steep diversion via the bridge at Powderhall Rigg and the Dunedin Street Cresta Run is not suitable for all wheelers and pedestrians with mobility challenges.
However, unknown members of the public have repositioned Heras fencing and signage to maintain access along the original route.
It is unclear whether closure of the bridge is to allow remedial work or because of fears for user safety. If it’s about safety, far more robust barriers and explicit warning signs are urgently required.
Background
Powderhall Bridge was completed in 2008–09 (Issues 161, 163) to replace an enjoyably rumbling and bouncy Bailey Bridge built by Royal Engineers in 1948.
When it opened, Council officers boasted that the structure, built out of ekki, a West African tropical hardwood, would require no preservative and be practically maintenance-free.
It had, they claimed, a design-life of 120 years (Issue 155). We hope they kept the warranty paperwork.
The bridge was temporarily closed in March 2014 for replacement of its plywood surface, which had disintegrated dangerously in the structure’s first 6 years (Issue 226).
Spurtle has approached the Council with a long list of questions. We’ll report back as soon as we have answers.
UPDATE (30 June 2026)
In an email seen by the Spurtle, Edinburgh Council's Steven Cuthill (Parks, Openspace & Visitor Services Manager) contacted Stakeholders earlier today. He wrote:
'I am writing to advise that we have had to close [the 'Powderhall Bailey Bridge'] with immediate effect in the interests of public safety.
'We received a report following an inspection of the above bridge (along St Mark’s Path between St Mark’s Park and Powderhall in Broughton) highlighting issues with the bridge, which has resulted in it being condemned. We have temporarily placed barriers and signs at the entrance and exit to the bridge to advise of the closure.
'We are currently reviewing the details of the report to understand whether it is viable to repair the bridge.
'I am aware that the closure of this popular route will cause disruption to pedestrian and cycle access and that you may receive enquiries about it.
'We will provide further updates in due course.'
Mr Cuthill's email raises 4 immediate issues:
Powderhall Bailey Bridge no longer exists. It was dismantled and replaced in 2008/2009.
The term 'condemned' is remarkably strong and concerning.
If the bridge has indeed been closed with immediate effect 'in the interests of public safety', why has the Council not made this clear to the public and installed barriers which effectively prevent people from crossing the dangerous structure?
Why has the Council not tried harder to inform the public? Local media, for example the Spurtle, would be a good way to do this. We contacted officers on Thursday 25 June and have yet to receive any briefing or answers to our questions.
******
UPDATE (1 JULY 2026)
Spurtle sent 11 questions to the Council on 25 June. This morning we got answers. They appear in bold below.
1) When was the bridge last inspected? 21 June 2026.
2) What defects caused it to fail? Can we please see a copy of the report? Splitting along the grain of the timber in the top chord at the connections.
3) Does the bridge’s current condition pose a danger to users? Yes, the bridge is closed pending further investigation, due to the condition of the connections.
4) If so, when will more robust fencing and more explicit warning signs be installed? The current fencing and warning signs are temporary. They were implemented as a temporary measure following the recommendation of closing the bridge to prevent access whilst a more permanent solution was prepared. A more robust measure will be provided, along with permanent signage as soon as possible.
5) If not, why has the bridge been closed? NA.
6) How long will the bridge be closed? The bridge will be closed until suitable repairs or replacement have been implemented.
7) If officials don’t yet know how long the bridge will be closed, when will they know how long the bridge will be closed? We’re unable to confirm at this time. This will only become clear following further assessments of the bridge.
8) How often has the bridge been inspected (and by whom) since it was installed? Prior to the last inspection (see answer to question 1), formal engineering inspections were undertaken on 23rd May 2013, 12th May 2015, 17th June 2017, 13th November 2019 and 6th July 2022. Additionally, ad-hoc inspections were undertaken on 15th November 2022 and 14th October 2025. The bridge has also been visually inspected annually as part of the Parks Quality Assessment on 17th July 2022, 21st July 2023, 12th July 2024, and 11th April 2025.
9) Is the cost of any repairs covered by manufacturer’s warranty or Edinburgh Council insurance? The Council does not insure its bridges. We are currently exploring the nature of these defects and whether these will be covered by any warranties.
10) Councillor Caldwell has spoken on Bluesky about officers considering the ‘feasibility of repairs’ rather than a schedule of repairs. Can officers please clarify? We will need to undertake a cost analysis after investigations to understand whether it is more economical to repair or to replace the bridge.
11) Do officers have any idea yet of how much it will cost to repair the bridge? No. To be determined following further investigation/design work.
In addition, we received the following statement from Transport & Environment Convener Cllr Stephen Jenkinson: ‘As soon as we received the latest report on the bridge’s condition, we closed it to ensure the safety of the public. We'll now carry out a full assessment and consider the options available to us.’
*****
UPDATE (2 JULY 2026)
This morning, Spurtle received the following statement from Cllr Jack Caldwell (Ward 12): 'It's a frustrating situation. The bridge’s importance was highlighted vigorously by the community late last year when the Council proposed shutting the connecting path for nearby construction. So this is a bit of a knock after access was reinstated then.
'The bridge not only serves as a key link to the north Edinburgh path network, but is the main artery to a wide green space in an area with limited garden access.
'I believe Council officers are aware of the vital role of the bridge and I have no doubt they're trying their best to find a timely solution. What we need to ensure is that both we as a Council and as individual Councillors are transparent on next steps.'
Got a view? Tell us at spurtle@hotmail.co.uk
*****
