The issue, a matter of extensive debate in the past year, came before a community development committee yesterday.
Councillors' views were varied, but Mayor Peter Chin argued a permanent barrier to traffic should be put in place.
That was despite a 311-signature petition he had received on Sunday calling for the road to be reopened.
A report to the committee included options for two types of security fence, and a third option for a permanent gate which would prevent vehicles using the road.
The meeting heard the issue would require public consultation for the road closure, and resource consent - with more public input - for the fence.
Mr Chin said he hoped there was a greater awareness of why the council had made the decisions it had.
Whatever decision was made would gain "approval from some sectors of the community, and huge disapproval from others".
Closing the road would address the problem of public safety at Lawyers Head.
Cr Michael Guest disagreed, and said under no circumstances would he vote to close the road.
Instead, he would prefer to spend as much money as required to build a security fence at Lawyers Head.
The road was a significant asset for Dunedin, that would be taken away if a permanent gate was built.
Other councillors hoped the public consultation process would allow the public to air its views, and Cr Fliss Butcher said the location of the fence would be part of that.
Cr Neil Collins said he had heard from police and parents for years something needed to be done in the area, and he agreed with the idea of a security fence to allow the drive to be open at all times.
But Cr Dave Cull disagreed.
"We know that the gates have worked. That's why I support this option."
Crs Syd Brown, Chris Staynes, Teresa Stevenson, Paul Hudson, Cull, Butcher and Mr Chin supported the closure, while Crs John Bezett, Andrew Noone, Richard Walls, Colin Weatherall, Collins and Guest voted against.
Editor: Correspondence on this issue is closed and no comments will be published. We apologise to those who have commented today that this footnote was left off this story in error this morning.
