Road Safety Project Assessment Criteria
Perth and Kinross Council · 20 September 2023
Back to Environment, Infrastructure and Economic Development Committee — 20 September 2023 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL Environment, Infrastructure and Economic Development Committee 20 September 2023 ROAD SAFETY PROJECT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Report by Head of Environmental & Consumer Services (Report No. 23/257) 1. PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this report is to advise members of a proposal to revise the criteria for managing and prioritising potential road safety projects within the Council’s Road Safety Database. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS (ii) approves the process for all proposals from individuals for new potential projects, as outlined within paragraph 4.10 of this report 3. STRUCTURE OF REPORT 3.1 This report is structured over the following sections: • Section 4: Background/ Main Issues • Section 5: Conclusion 4. BACKGROUND/MAIN ISSUES 4.1 Perth and Kinross Council’s road safety projects assessment criteria provides an agreed method for prioritising traffic management and road safety projects. This assessment criteria and the subsequent priority project list was approved by Environment and Infrastructure Committee in March 2019 (Report No. 19/83 refers). As a result, all potential road safety schemes are assessed by the Traffic & Network Team and, if considered appropriate, scored and ranked. This allows them to be assessed against other projects to ensure those schemes that offer the greatest benefit to local communities are delivered first. With each financial year, projects are assigned to the relevant programme of works and budget, then installed as resources permit. 2.1 It is recommended that the Committee: (i) approves the proposed change to the Council’s road safety projects assessment criteria, which would include the direct input of Community Councils, where they exist, and the introduction of an additional criteria as outlined at paragraph 4.8 of this report; and
Page 2
4.2 The database, and priority list is authority wide. As such, while one ward may have a larger number of road safety priorities, these are assessed and considered alongside priorities identified across the whole of Perth and Kinross. 4.3 Local councils (as the Local Roads Authority) are the main delivery agent of road safety projects. Local roads authorities have a statutory duty under the Road Traffic Act (RTA 1998: Section 39) to keep a record of road traffic collisions, investigate the contributory factors that led to the collisions and to take steps both to reduce and prevent reoccurrence. National government has also set a series of stringent road casualty reduction targets for local authorities to achieve. 4.4 As a result, the Council’s assessment criteria is weighted towards those sites with a collision and casualty history, in a deliberate effort to reduce both the number and the severity of road traffic collisions on the local road network. 4.5 The list of proposed projects is based on a technical assessment of the road usage and road environment. However, one of the key issues is that a number of projects can receive the same score, as the current approved assessment criteria does not take into account community concerns about perceived road safety. As a result, this can make it difficult for officers to establish which projects, with the same score, are the most important for communities. 4.6 In Spring 2022, the Traffic & Network Team began meeting with the Ward Councillors on a three-month cycle to review the projects list, discuss progress and identify local priorities. These discussions have proved useful as, at each meeting, progress on the selected projects is reviewed and, if schemes have been completed, new priorities are identified. 4.7 Although these ward meetings have been successful in determining local priorities, and will continue in the future, there is an opportunity for further community engagement. For example, Community Councils (where they exist) could also have a direct input into the identification of local priorities. In some wards, the elected members already consult with the Community Councils prior to the ward meetings. In others, on occasion, representatives from the Community Councils have attended the ward meetings to feed directly into the discussions. In at least one ward, a road safety sub-group exists, with a representative from each Community Council, which assist with the projects list. The Kinross-shire Local Committee, which includes a representative from each community council, has the responsibility to determine local roads priorities and a local policy on road safety. 4.8 In order to improve the current arrangements, it is recommended that projects for each ward would be shared with the relevant Community Council, on an annual basis, in advance of the new financial year for them to review and feed back to officers. This would help ensure that the relative priority, as assessed by the local community, of all projects is considered, as well as provide the opportunity for low priority schemes to be removed from the list. A scoring system ranging from 1- 5, with 5 being the highest priority is proposed as
Page 3
shown in Table A below. It is important to note that any input from Community Councils would be for the purposes of differentiating between projects with the same cost/benefit score only. It would not be a means by which lower ranked projects could be prioritised over higher ranked projects and the cost benefit ratio will continue to be used to rank road safety project priorities. This additional approach has been added to the current assessment criteria for illustration purposes and is set out at Appendix 1. Where there are no community councils, the current process of only involving elected members will continue. Table A – Road Safety Projects Database – extract (with “illustrative” community scoring) Ranking Ward Budget Description Location Road No. Speed Limit Collision Casualties Environment Alignment ST Plan Sus Transport Total Cost BCR Community Status 241 11 TRO Waiting restrictions Goodlyburn Terrace, Perth off Rannoch Road 30 0 0 2 0 1 2 5 2 2.50 5 G 241 11 TRO Waiting restrictions Unity Tce between Albany Tce and Unity Cres, Perth 30 0 0 2 0 1 2 5 2 2.50 4 G 241 11 TRO Waiting restrictions Strathtay Road, Letham, Perth at rear of properties 30 0 0 2 0 1 2 5 2 2.50 3 G 241 11 TRO Waiting restrictions Wallace Crescent, Letham at Wallace Court 30 0 0 3 0 1 1 5 2 2.50 2 G 241 11 TRO Waiting restrictions Allison Crescent/Hulbert Court, Tulloch, Perth 30 0 0 2 0 1 2 5 2 2.50 1 G Notes: These five projects in Ward 11 have different locations but similar road environments and links to schools. Each scored five points on their site assessment, and each project will cost approximately £2,000 to implement. As a result, they all have the same Benefit/Cost Ratio and the same Ranking. The column on the right (green) shows that all can be delivered within the road boundary, as part of the green/amber/red Status classification. The second column from the right (blue) shows the Community priority that may be decided by the Community Council or, in the absence of a Community Council, by the Ward Councillors. Even if there are more than five projects in a Ward with a similar Ranking, a maximum of five project will be considered so there is a manageable timescale for delivery. 4.9 In addition to the above, another issue that officers experience involves the creation of new potential projects and priorities put forward by individual members of the community. Under the current arrangements, officers are often unaware of the level of community support for the introduction of such measures, or in fact whether there is community support. This situation can lead to projects being added unnecessarily to the current extensive list and create abortive work by officers who commence a project and receive negative feedback at the consultation stage.
Page 4
4.10 To address this matter, it is recommended that a proposer would contact the Council’s Traffic and Network team with a potential scheme. If a proposal from an individual has merit from a road safety perspective, then this will be considered and prioritised by the elected members at the subsequent ward meetings, as part of the regular road safety projects review process. 5. CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The quarterly meetings with local elected members to identify community road safety project priorities and drive forward progress work well and should be continued. 5.2 The Road Safety Projects Database should be shared with the relevant Community Councils (where they exist), annually, for them to review and feed back to officers. As set out in paragraph 4.8 above, this addition to the current criteria would be used solely as a means of differentiating between projects with the same technical scoring, to try to establish local priorities. 5.3 A “letter of indicative support” should be introduced as outlined above, to ensure that there is sufficient local support and to avoid abortive work. Author Name Designation Contact Details Daryl McKeown Road Safety Officer 01738 475000 ComCommitteeReports@pkc.gov.uk Approved Name Designation Date Barbara Renton Executive Director (Communities) 8 March 2023 APPENDIX • Appendix 1 - Assessment Criteria for Road Safety Requests (As agreed by E&I Committee – 20 March 2019) – with Proposed Amendments (in italics)
Page 5
ANNEX 1. IMPLICATIONS, ASSESSMENTS, CONSULTATION AND COMMUNICATION Strategic Implications Yes/No Community Plan / Single Outcome Agreement Yes Corporate Plan Yes Resource Implications Financial Yes Workforce None Asset Management (land, property, IST) None Assessments Equality Impact Assessment Yes Strategic Environmental Assessment Yes Sustainability (community, economic, environmental) Yes Legal and Governance Yes Risk None Consultation Internal Yes External Yes Communication Communications Plan Yes 1. Strategic Implications Community Plan / Single Outcome Agreement 1.1 The Perth and Kinross Community Planning Partnership (CPP) brings together organisations to plan and deliver services for the people of Perth and Kinross. Together the CPP has developed the Perth and Kinross Community Plan which outlines the key things we think are important for Perth and Kinross. (i) Reducing Poverty (ii) Physical and Mental Wellbeing (iii) Digital Participation (iv) Learning and Development (v) Employability 1.2 It is considered that the actions contained within this report primarily contribute to objective ii – Physical and Mental Wellbeing. Corporate Plan 1.3 The Council’s Corporate Plan outlines five objectives. These objectives provide a clear strategic direction, inform decisions at a corporate and service level and shape resource allocation. It is considered that the actions contained
Page 6
in the report make a contribution to all of the five objectives, which are set out below. (i) Children and young people grow up safe, respected, well-educated, and confident in their ability to realise their full potential; (ii) People and businesses are increasingly able to prosper in a local economy which support low carbon ambitions and offers opportunities for all; (iii) People can achieve their best physical and mental health and have access to quality care and support when they need it; (iv) Communities are resilient and physically, digital and socially connected; (v) Perth and Kinross is a safe and vibrant place, mitigating the impact of climate and environmental change for this and future generations. 2. Resource Implications 2.1 There are no financial implications from this report. Once schemes have been assessed and ranked according to the assessment criteria and community prioritisation, funding from both the future Capital and Revenue budgets will have to be identified to enable implementation and ongoing maintenance. Workforce 2.2 There are no workforce implications arising from this report. Asset Management (land, property, IT) 2.3 There are no land and property, or information technology implications arising from the contents of this report. 3. Assessments Equality Impact Assessment 1.1 An equality impact assessment needs to be carried out for functions, policies, procedures or strategies in relation to race, gender and disability and other relevant protected characteristics. This supports the Council’s legal requirement to comply with the duty to assess and consult on relevant new and existing policies. 3.2 The function, policy, procedure or strategy presented in this report was considered under the Corporate Equalities Impact Assessment process (EqIA) with the following outcome: • Assessed as relevant and the following positive outcomes are expected following implementation: • The measures, for example improved crossing facilities, footways and traffic calming features, will provide improved access for communities, and will particularly improve travel opportunities for disabled people with
Page 7
mobility issues, sight or hearing impairment, children, elderly people & parent/carers walking with children in pushchairs/buggies. • The measures will provide improvements for road users of all ages, but particularly for children and elderly people. This will include facilities to enable them to cross roads safely. • The measures will also encourage children to walk or cycle to school, thus bringing health benefits. • The measures will provide opportunities for increased travel by foot and cycle for all age groups. Strategic Environmental Assessment 3.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a legal requirement under the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 that applies to all qualifying plans, programmes and strategies, including policies (PPS). 3.4 The matters presented in this report were considered under the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 and no further action is required as it does not qualify as a PPS as defined by the Act and is therefore exempt. Sustainability 3.5 Under the provisions of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, the Council has to discharge its duties in a way which contributes to the achievement of sustainable development. In terms of the Climate Change Act, the Council has a general duty to demonstrate its commitment to sustainability and the community, environmental and economic impacts of its actions. Legal and Governance 3.6 Relevant Traffic Regulation Orders will be promoted in accordance with The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 1999. Risk 3.7 There are no significant risks associated with the implementation of this project. 4. Consultation 4.1 The Head of Legal and Governance, the Head of Finance and Police Scotland have been consulted in the preparation of this report. 4.2 As part of the scheme design, consultation will be carried out with the relevant parties where appropriate, including the local elected members. 5. Communication 5.1 For some projects, approval will allow a start to be made to the formal procedure to vary the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). This procedure will
Page 8
involve statutory consultation, preparation of a draft TRO and advertising in the press. This will provide an opportunity for additional comments to be made or objections to be raised. If objections are raised, these will be reported back to Committee, with appropriate recommendations. 2. BACKGROUND PAPERS 2.1 The following background papers, as defined by Section 50D of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 (and not containing confidential or exempt information) were relied on to a material extent in preparing the above Report; (list papers concerned): • Report to Enterprise and Infrastructure Committee 20 March 2019 Road Safety Projects Assessment Criteria (19/83).