Consolidation & Amendment Order 1006
Renfrewshire Council · 18 March 2026
Back to Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board — 18 March 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
PUBLIC ___________________________________________________________________ To: The Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board On: 18th March 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Director of Environment, Housing & Infrastructure ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: The Renfrewshire Council (Prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and parking places) (Consolidation & Amendment Order 1006) Order 202*, Ref TRO 1006 ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 In terms of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, the making of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) is delegated to the Director of Environment, Housing & Infrastructure after consultation with the Convener of the Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board and the local ward Members. 1.2 The proposed TRO allows Renfrewshire Council to complete its proposals to protect the public roads around the Council area, some of which suffer from inconsiderate, congestive and in some cases dangerous parking. 1.3 The proposed Amendment Order is the fourth waiting, loading and parking places consolidation and amendment digital order; the previous order being approved by this Board on 27 August 2025. This order covers requests for revisions and additions received since the cut-off date of that digital order’s consultation. 1.4 TRO 1006 was advertised for comment by 21thJanuary 2026 and proposed to impose restrictions on the roads listed in Section 3.3.
Page 2
PUBLIC 1.5 Of the 42 separate items within the TRO 1006 proposals, there were no objections in relation to 37 items. One objection was requested to be withdrawn by the applicant because they had misunderstood the effect of the proposal. One item that received 3 objections had been included in the proposal by mistake and has been withdrawn. Of the remaining 3 proposals that received objections, one received 2 objections while the other two received one objection each. 1.6 Objections were received in relation to the following items. 472 Greenhill Crescent Elderslie 2 objections 490 Easwald Bank Kilbarchan 1 objection 478 Wallneuk Rd at end and cul-de-sac Paisley 1 objection 1.7 Officers recommend; Greenhill Crescent • implementation of the restrictions as proposed because the status quo is considered an unacceptable risk during the times specified, when multiple young children are using the footways. There is insufficient road space on the carriageway to allow parking on both sides while maintaining a running lane for through traffic. Easwald Bank • Implementation of the proposed restriction to enable local business to operate without undue difficulties with supplies, while keeping goods vehicles out of adjacent residential streets. The objector has perceived this as a safety issue. The proposed addition of restrictions better manages the traffic where there was no parking restriction before. Wallneuk • Implementation of the proposed restriction at the request of adjacent businesses having issues with access and egress for goods vehicles due to inappropriate parking in the vicinity.
Page 3
PUBLIC 1.8 In accordance with the ‘Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedures) (Scotland) Regulations 1999’ and the Council’s procedures, the Board may now decide how to proceed; to either make the order in full, make the order in part, or not make the order. The Board is free to choose to decide on the objections itself, or, to appoint a Reporter to do so. 1.9 A plan of the proposed TRO 1006 can be found at these links. https://ren.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/sidebar/index.html?appid=9a44e32bf3b8428baecf ca954b78bc5d 2. Recommendations It is recommended that the Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board; 2.1 Considers and decides on the objections made and not upheld in relation to The Renfrewshire Council (Prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and parking places) (Consolidation & Amendment Order 1006 Order 202* at the meeting of this Policy Board rather than appointing an independent reporter. 2.2 Subject to recommendation 2.2 and the objections not being upheld, approves the implementation of The Renfrewshire Council (Prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and parking places) (Consolidation & Amendment Order 1006 Order 202*, which includes the roads as listed at Section 3.3, and authorises the Director of Environment, Housing & Infrastructure in conjunction with the Convener of Infrastructure, Land & Environment Policy Board to make the Traffic Regulation Order. 3. Background 3.1 The TRO 1006 proposals went through a single stage consultation process for a 36-day period ending 21 January 2025. 3.2 The purpose of the consultation was to satisfy the statutory consultation process which allows residents of Renfrewshire to provide comment on the proposals at each specific location. 3.3 The locations are shown in the table below and on the maps at https://ren.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/sidebar/index.html?appid=9a44e32bf3b8428baecf ca954b78bc5d
Page 4
PUBLIC TRO Item No. Town Location Restriction 464 Paisley Heriot Avenue & Woodstock Avenue, Heriots Primary School Keep Clear 472 Elderslie Greenhill Crescent No stopping during specified times Monday to Friday 8.30am to 9.30am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm 473 Renfrew Fulbar Street Pedestrian Zone. Goods vehicle loading only 474 Paisley St Mirren Street Goods vehicle loading only 511 Renfrew Sandy Road opp no 57 - 61 No waiting at any time 475 Paisley Renfrew Road at retail park Bus lane reduction 476 Paisley Causeyside St at Phelps Butchers Goods vehicle loading and pay and display parking 477 Paisley Whitehaugh Avenue at Barshaw Drive junction No waiting at any time 478 Paisley Wallneuk Rd at end and cul-de-sac No waiting at any time 479 Paisley Well Steet No stopping except buses 480 Paisley Storrie Street extend no waiting to cover bin ramps No waiting at any time 481 Paisley Love Street, lay-bys on west side Parking by motor cars only 482 Paisley Albion St and Blythswood Dr, length running north-south No waiting at any time 483 Renfrew Newmains Rd, both sides on approach to Broadloan No waiting at any time 484 Bishopton The Grove on entrance bend and turning head No waiting at any time 485 Bishopton Hay Avenue at junction of Lamont Avenue No waiting at any time 486 Johnstone Banktop Court at North Place No waiting at any time, Ambulance Bay, Disabled Bays 487 Johnstone Graham St at Thompson St No waiting at any time 488 Johnstone High St at Canal St around west corner No waiting at any time, no loading at any time 489 Johnstone Houston Square No waiting at any time, no loading at any time, limited waiting 490 Kilbarchan Easwald Bank at Tandlehill Rd Goods vehicle loading bay 491 Paisley Arkleston Rd at Barshaw Dr junction No waiting at any time 492 Paisley Arkleston Rd at Whitehaugh Ave junction No waiting at any time 493 Paisley East Lane, access to Bakery No waiting at any time 494 Paisley Gilmour St under rail bridge both sides Limited waiting 10 min no return within 1 hour 498 WITHDRAWN 499 Paisley Penilee Rd at Kilpurnie Rd junction No waiting at any time 500 Renfrew Sandyford Road access No waiting at any time
Page 5
PUBLIC 501 Renfrew Renfrew Rd at Clydesdale Ave junction No waiting at any time 502 Paisley Wallace St at Love St junction No waiting at any time 503 Paisley Lacy Street Replace Bus Stand with School Keep Clear 504 Renfrew Craigielea Rd at Brown St North/Murray St/service lane to Albert Rd No waiting at any time 505 Renfrew Muir Street No waiting at any time, goods vehicle loading bay 506 Renfrew Paisley Road, crescents at 206 – 222 & 224 - 248 No waiting at any time 507 Renfrew Oxford Rd/Cragielea Rd/Paisley Rd staggered signal junction No waiting at any time 510 Kilbarchan Low Barholm at Barrhill Cr junction No waiting at any time 513 Renfrew Kenley Road car park access No waiting at any time 514 Brookfield Victoria Rd /A761 junction No waiting at any time 515 WITHDRAWN 517 Paisley Burnfoot Cr/ Ferenze Dr junction No waiting at any time 518 Paisley Fauldswood Cr / Craigfaulds Ave junction No waiting at any time 519 Paisley Renfrew Rd from Wallneuk Rd to Arkleston Rd/Paisley Rd roundabout, both sides No Stopping at any time 520 Paisley Love Street Lay-by east side Goods Vehicle Loading Only 3.4 The consultation details were published in the local press, on Renfrewshire.gov.uk and via the “Tell me Scotland” website, where information on the proposed items within the order was provided in text format and in map form via Renfrewshire Council’s Geographic Information System (GIS) portal. In addition, notices were placed on lampposts at each of the specific locations where the orders were proposed. 3.5 A total of 16 responses were received with 8 being pertinent, 7 objections and 1 acknowledgement of a request (this one did not proceed as they had misinterpreted the effect of the order and as it primarily only affected their frontage, was considered to be acceptable and the proposal withdrawn). The remaining respondents were either seeking clarification of the proposals or seeking additional measures out-with the scope of the consultation which will be considered in a future amendment.
Page 6
PUBLIC 3.6 One response in support of item 518 requesting additional measures in other locations and 2 responses in general support of proposals in Renfrew requesting additional measures in other locations. 5 other respondents were seeking clarification of proposals only or requests for areas outwith the consultation. Details of the objections and responses in support are given in Appendix 1. 3.7 Sustained objections were received in relation to the following items. Item Road Settlement Restriction Objections 472 Greenhill Crescent Elderslie No stopping Mon-Fri 8.30 to 9,30 & 2.30 to 3.30 2 478 Wallneuk Rd at end of Cul- de-sac Paisley No waiting at any time 1 490 Easwald Bank Kilbarchan “Goods Vehicle Loading Only” 1 498 Loundsdale Road Paisley Withdrawn as erroneous description no decision required 3 515 Woodside Rd Turning head Brookfield Requested withdrawn and has been retracted. No decision required 1 3.8 The roads authority’s duty is to ensure a safe road network for vehicle movement. Its obligation is to keep roads clear and safe. Officers recommend implementation of the restrictions as proposed. 3.9 In respect of Items 506 and 510 respondents suggest that adjacent unused land or grassed areas should be converted to parking allocated to residents. The roads authority is not empowered to provide private parking spaces. 4. Consideration of Objections 4.1 The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 state that before making the order, the Council (in the form of its Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board) must consider all objections made and not withdrawn. In this respect, the terms of the Regulations state that the Board may consider the objections itself in fulfilment of its statutory obligation. Alternatively, the Board may choose to appoint an independent Reporter to hold a hearing to consider the objections.
Page 7
PUBLIC 4.2 If the Board decides to exercise its discretion and not appoint an independent Reporter, then it must consider the objections and either uphold them, in which case the proposal shall be dropped, or consider the objections and then approve the implementation of the restrictions as advertised, as a whole or in part, and authorise the Director of Environment, Housing & Infrastructure to make the Order. 4.3 If the Board decides to choose the public hearing, it should be recognised that the Reporter’s deliberations could take approximately 15 weeks. Thereafter, the Board has an obligation to consider the report and recommendation made by the Reporter and to decide on whether to proceed with the order. 4.4 The cost of arranging an independent Reporter to hold a public hearing is estimated at £5000. Therefore, it is recommended that the Board considers the objections itself. _________________________________________________________ 5. Implementation 5.1 Should the Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board approve the implementation of The Renfrewshire Council (Prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and parking places) (Consolidation & Amendment Order 1006) Order 202*, officers will arrange for the required lining and signing works to make the Order enforceable. ___________________________________________________________________
Page 8
PUBLIC Implications of the Report 1. Financial - the nominal capital and revenue costs of implementing and maintaining the proposed lines and signs can be accommodated within existing budgets. 2. HR & Organisational Development - The restrictions marginally increase the enforcement duties of the Council’s Parking Attendants which will be accommodated within current staffing levels. 3. Community/Council Planning – Our Renfrewshire is thriving / Reshaping our place, our economy and our future – Low speed residential environments improve living conditions for Renfrewshire’s residents. 4. Legal - The relevant legislation is the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 1999. 5. Property/Assets – N/A 6. Information Technology – N/A 7. Equality & Human Rights - The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. Some negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified and not all can be fully mitigated. Despite the potential for adverse impact it is believed that it is reasonable and proportionate to take the action recommended in the report. A full copy of the Equality Impact Assessment undertaken is attached. 8. Health & Safety - The primary reason for the order is to clear congestive parking on roads to maintain general safe access. 9. Procurement –N/A. 10. Risk - no risks have been identified in relation to the proposal. 11. Privacy Impact – N/A. 12. Climate Risk – no risks have been identified in relation to the proposal. 13. Children’s Rights – This report demonstrates compliance with Article 6 (life, survival and development) and Article 24 (health, water, food, environment) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child enter details or not applicable. 14. Cosla Policy Position – N/A. _______________________________________________________ Author: Mark Higginbotham, Transportation and Active Travel Manager Email: mark.higginbotham@renfrewshire.gov.uk
Page 9
PUBLIC Appendix 1 Responses to the proposals. Information which could personally identify the respondents has been removed. Responses objecting to the proposals Item Road Settlement Objection Officers’ Review 472 Greenhill Crescent Elderslie No stopping during specified times Monday to Friday 8.30am to 9.30am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm. There has been an increase in parking issues since pavement exemption order was implemented due to inability to park on both sides of the street causing blockages and difficulty compared to previous ability to park in both sides. (By 2 nos. respondents) Greenhill Crescent has wide pavements with tree lined streets which impacts on parking ability due to encroachment of branches onto the road. It is the responsibility of Renfrewshire Council to maintain these trees. The road’s function under the Road (Scotland) Act 1984 is to act as a way for the transportation of goods and people and should not be considered as a location to park vehicles when not in use. The footway is a section of the road set aside for the use of pedestrians. Pavement parking exception orders are set by standards set in national legislation. The location does not meet that criteria. There is the ability to park without the requirement to park on the footway. Inappropriate parking should not be considered as acceptable and measures should not be taken to allow it. The Council does pollard the trees when requested and required.
Page 10
PUBLIC The trees provide a natural pavement line in excess of that which is place for pavement exemption order for Glenpatrick Road. ( By 2 nos. respondents) There are extensive puddles on Greenhill Crescent during wet weather due to lack of drains which impacts on safe parking which has been raised previously with Renfrewshire Council including when the road was resurfaced without replacing previous drain in this location. The proposal will increase issues in surrounding streets which are already at capacity through parking pavement exemption order measures i.e. Glenpatrick Road exemption and Lexwell Avenue. Detrimental impact on parents and carers dropping off at nursery and primary school who have multiple children and buggies. School and nursery currently have different bell times to assist with this. Impact on school and nursery staff and visitors parking given the small on site school parking provision and proposed prevention of parking between 08.30-09.30 and 2.30/3.30. Greenhill Crescent is currently used by staff and visitors including those for pre-school and aftercare clubs which will not be permitted. Impact on residents on street parking as you will not be able to leave vehicles on the street during the day. This will also greatly impact on deliveries and building contractors working The road is designated as a “safe route to school”. At school entry and exit times the footway width is required to accommodate this group of vulnerable road users and as such there is no potential for the consideration of additional footway parking. Glenpatrick Road meets the requirements set out in the national criteria for pavement parking exemption orders. The perceived drainage issue is out- with the context of the consultation It is appropriate that the adjacent local infrastructure should absorb some of the excess demand experienced by Greenhill Crescent and dilute the overall impact. It is considered that it is the parents and carers who are responsible for the inappropriate parking being experienced at Greenhill Crescent and it is this issue that the proposal is endeavouring to resolve. Staff should be accommodated within the grounds of the premises, outwith the school premises, but, parked in accordance
Page 11
PUBLIC within Greenhill Crescent. The street already has signage stating Access for Residents and Services Only which is not enforced. I hope you will consider these points alongside previous concerns made by residents of Greenhill Crescent as part of the consultation for Parking Exemption Order in May 2025 which has increased issues rather than avoiding danger to persons or other traffic. " with the highway code or consider alternative modal choices. The duty of the Roads Authority is to provide clear, safe roads for travel. Parking on the road is allowed only where it is safe and does not congest the road. The choice of where to park a car is down to the individual. Residents will still be able to leave their vehicles on the southern side of Greenhill Crescent without limit of time. There will be no net detriment to Deliveries or contractors as access is not possible at present during these times, whereas prior to, or outwith these times, access will be more readily available The current signage is advisory only , however, the proposed restriction will be enforceable. There is no signage stating access for residents and services only. The pavement parking exemption relies on legislation out-with the scope of this consultation Pedestrians are also road users albeit specifically more vulnerable and specifically in such a location where visibility is obscured by trees and as such is considered to be the prevailing concern in this case.
Page 12
PUBLIC If there are concerns that the parking on Greenhill Cresent at school times is ""an accident waiting to happen"", then I would only counter that to say that it hasn't (to my knowledge) happened and I've been a resident there for 14 years. Yes it is a bit congested at these times during school terms, however we are used to this and quite happy to accept this is the norm for living near to a school. Whilst there is the occasional inconsiderate driver, by far the majority of drivers are courteous and considerate. This proposal arises from complaints received from local residents who are discontent with the amount of vehicles at the start end and of the school day and inappropriate parking should not be accepted as normal. Recommend Implement the restrictions 490 Easwald Bank at Tandelhill Rd Kilbarchan I am writing to object to the proposal TRO 1006, proposal 490 (Easwaldbank and Tandlehill Road) on a number of grounds. 1 - I am objecting as there is already a restricted waiting on Tandlehill Road, which is better placed and suited to serve the businesses in the area, particularly the local shop and butchers. This is a limited waiting Mon – Friday 9am to 5pm, 30 mins max. This is currently not enforced. If it were, this would allow goods vehicles to deliver to the local businesses, while still allowing customers to stop and shop. My suggestion is to enforce these existing regulations or to make the area outside the shop on Tandlehill Road goods loading only, which would be more appropriate and better serve the businesses. 2 – Having goods loading on Easwaldbank would actually reduce visibility at the junction, for those approaching the Tandlehill junction from further up Easwaldbank or for those exiting the junction from Tandlehill Road and would provide more of a hazard than there is currently. The only current issue is when trucks are doing deliveries to the shops and park on the double yellow lines, which is irresponsible/illegal parking by delivery drivers. Existing car parking at the proposed location allows clearer visibility at this junction. There have been a number of accidents at the junction of Easwaldbank and Tandlehill however, from what I have observed, these are caused by people exiting the roundabout and not taking their left indicators off. They continue to travel straight up Easwaldbank and people at junction think they are turning left The respondent erroneously describes the location as Easwald Bank and Tandelhill Rd. The proposal is for Easwald Bank at the Junction of Tandelhill Rd. As such they go on to expand on other issues within Tandelhill Road outwith the scope of this consultation. Therefore item 1 cannot be considered The location of the proposed ‘Goods Vehicle Loading bay’ is in a location that is currently unrestricted and available for parking. it does not encroach on the designed visibility splay of the junction as there is a ‘no waiting and no loading’ restriction currently in place.
Page 13
PUBLIC into Tandlehill. These accidents are NOT caused by visibility up towards Easwaldbank and the proposed restrictions would not alleviate this issue. 3- Implementing these proposals would come at the expense to taxpayers, when existing regulations are not being enforced by Renfrewshire Council. Renfrewshire Council fail to enforce existing restrictions (at Tandlehill Road and also at Milliken Road Car Park). I would prefer to see the Council enforce existing regulations rather than introduce new ones, at a cost. These proposals feel like Renfrewshire Council throwing more restrictions at a problem, in effort to fix a problem, without addressing the root cause of the problem. Car parking is an issue in this part of Kilbarchan however, the council repeatedly fail to address the root cause. For example, the Council went to the trouble and expense of updating signage at the Milliken Road car park, prohibiting business use however a vehicle with a trade place has been parked there for several weeks with no apparent action being taken, in addition to all 6 spaces being blocked by business use. Renfrewshire Council’s failure to enforce its own existing regulations at Tandlehill Road (30 mins waiting) and Milliken Road car park (prohibition of business use) should be addressed before introducing any new restrictions." Loading and unloading is permitted on a ‘No waiting at any time’ restriction (double yellow lines) The Council has no powers to determine how or when vehicle indicators are used or otherwise. Drivers are licenced following testing to determine their road safety proficiency. Enforcement is not within the remit of this consultation nor are areas outwith the identified locations as per Item numbers within TRO 1006. However, it is understood that signing in the car park has recently been provided in accordance with the traffic Signs Regulation & General Directions 2016 and is now enforceable. Recommend Implement the restrictions
Page 14
PUBLIC 478 Walneuk Paisley These notices, as far as I can tell, have only appeared very recently and there has not been any communication with the business affected. I find this very strange given the small amount of good neighbourly practice this would have taken within a Renfrewshire Council trading estate and also my unit From a personal point of view I have staff and customer who use this road (despite the shocking condition of it) to park to attend their work and for the customers to use our business. I wish to make an objection specifically against TRO Item 478 until such times that there is a reasonable cause for the dead end cul-de-sac to be considered necessary for road safety and traffic management. There are also other businesses within the Wallneuk Road Estate that will also be affected. I see from the notice that objections had to be submitted in writing by Wednesday 21st January however with the short advertising of the notice locally, the poor siting of the notices, and I suspect the deliberate use of dark faded paper suggesting these had been there for a while, to be completely inappropriate. The consultation complies with The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 The duty of the Roads Authority is to provide clear, safe roads for travel. Parking on the road is allowed only where it is safe and does not congest the road. The choice of where to park a car is down to the individual. This proposal was proposed following complaints from local businesses that they were unable to receive deliveries from goods vehicles due to inappropriate parking. The proposals only seek to maintain access and egress in accordance with the Roads Scotland Act 1984 Notices and timescales comply with above Regulations Recommend Implement the restrictions