Agenda Document Pack - Petitions Board - 29/08/2022
Renfrewshire Council · 29 August 2022
Back to Petitions Board — 29 August 2022 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
24/08/2022 Notice of Meeting and Agenda Petitions Board Date Time Venue Monday, 29 August 2022 14:00 Remotely by MS Teams, Membership Councillor Stephen Burns (Convener): Councillor Michelle Campbell (Depute Convener): Councillor Jennifer Adam: Councillor Edward Grady: Councillor Neill Graham: Councillor Lisa- Marie Hughes: Councillor David McGonigle: Councillor Jim Paterson: Councillor Ben Smith: Webcasting of Meeting This meeting will be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site – at the start of the meeting the Convener will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed. To find the webcast please navigate to https://renfrewshire.public-i.tv/core/portal/home Apologies Apologies from members. Declarations of Interest Members are asked to declare an interest in any item(s) on the agenda and to provide a brief explanation of the nature of the interest. MARK CONAGHAN Head of Corporate Governance
Page 2
24/08/2022 Items of business 1 Petition: Traffic Calming Measures - Kilmacolm Road, Bridge of Weir Report by Director of Finance & Resources 1 - 6
Page 3
To: Petitions Board On: 29 August 2022 Report by: Director of Finance and Resources Heading: Traffic Calming Measures – Kilmacolm Road, Bridge of Weir 1. Summary 1.1 The Council has agreed procedures in relation to the submission of petitions including parameters for determining valid petitions and those areas where petitions would not be valid. 1.2 All valid petitions are to be submitted to the Board for consideration and a summary report is to be prepared on any petitions which are not considered to be valid in terms of the procedures. It is for the Board to determine the validity of such petitions. 1.3 A petition accompanied by emails from 21 households has been received from Ms J Fulton in the following terms: - “Kilmacolm Road residents are petitioning to Renfrewshire Council for urgent consideration and implementation of new speed restrictions and safety measures. Our request covers the area from the traffic lights at the Houston Road junction, through to Strathgryffe Crescent upon leaving the village towards Kilmacolm. As you will read in my email, 21 households are asking the council for action, in addition to the GPs and Practice Manager at Ranfurly Drs Surgery who also represent approximately 6,500 patients and the Manager at Morar Care Home which houses 30 elderly residents. Why? In addition to the fact that there are many families with small children and pets who live along Kilmacolm Road, this is also a well-used school and nursery route, we have Morar Care Home for the elderly, Ranfurly Drs Surgery, bus stops — the list goes on. The central issue is acceleration — vehicles coming into the village from Kilmacolm are accelerating to get through the lights and in the opposite direction vehicles are accelerating through the lights to exit the village and travel at the national speed limit. Either way, the issue is very clearly excessive acceleration. Item 1 Page 1 of 6
Page 4
With the exception of the 30mph sign on entering from this side of the village, we have absolutely no other signage. Nothing to communicate to drivers that there are children playing; that there is a nursery and primary school around the corner; that this area also houses vulnerable people such as elderly people and those with disabilities. Let alone any traffic calming measures which forcibly slow vehicles down. What you will read from the residents includes the devastating loss of many beloved pets killed on the road; serious damage to several properties from cars crashing at speed; severe noise pollution; countless near misses — and overall, a real sense of fear. Fear that if this is not addressed fully and urgently then it is only a matter of time before there is a human life lost on this road. What is needed? 1. Signage 2. Traffic Calming Measures (driver feedback systems, speed bumps or cameras) 3. Railings In addition to appropriate signage (to reflect school children, elderly & vulnerable people), we as a community are asking for traffic calming measures such as driver feedback systems, speed bumps or cameras. The road narrowing island on exiting the village is repeatedly destroyed due to speeding traffic, the evidence speaks for itself — it is clearly nowhere near enough. We are also asking for the installation of railings along some stretches of the road (please see appendix 1). Not only does this account for the fact that toddlers and children use the pavements every day for school and nursery, but it also accounts for the many large vehicles regularly using the road such as farm vehicles, lorries and emergency vehicles (often travelling at high speed). It is one thing to live beside a busy road; but entirely another to be expected to live beside an unsafe road where people live in fear of it. The residents need Renfrewshire Council to make Kilmacolm Road safe again.” 1.4 The Transport and Development Manager has advised that Renfrewshire Council has a Road Safety Policy which aims to reduce the number of accidents on the network based on three key principles of Education, Engineering and Enforcement. The Council is responsible for setting speed limits and Police Scotland is responsible for their enforcement. 1.5 The Transport and Development Manager has indicated that the current 30mph speed limit is appropriate to the location. The petitioners’ issue with speeding drivers should in the first instance be taken up with Police Scotland by calling 101. The Transport and Development Manager has indicated that he has forwarded the Petitioners’ concerns to the Council’s Police Liaison Officer for attention. Page 2 of 6
Page 5
1.6 The Transport and Development Manager has intimated that in order to allow Council officers to deliver improvement to road safety across Renfrewshire it is important that processes are in place for determining the range of interventions that would be appropriate for individual locations. There is no single deciding statistic, but a series of factors which determine whether a particular area would require an increased focus. Priority is given to sites which either have a particularly acute problem, or which can be objectively assessed using measurable parameters. The increasing numbers of requests for traffic calming on roads in Renfrewshire means that assessment criteria are required to identify priority areas for traffic calming with proposed actions being decided on an evidence-led assessment. 1.7 The Transport and Development Manager has highlighted the parameters measured in the assessment as under: - i Accidents involving injury to pedestrians or cyclists. Other accidents involving other injuries and those involving damage only to vehicles may also be considered; ii Traffic speed. The observed 85th percentile speed of vehicles (the speed below which 85% of the traffic is going) is measured using remote detectors for a week, 24 hours a day; iii Locations where vulnerable people are likely to cross the road such as near nursery schools, primary schools, playgrounds, elderly lunch clubs, shops, etc.; and iv Traffic volume. While all roads are available to the public, some may experience inappropriate volumes of traffic for their nature. 1.8 When a request for traffic calming is received the set of parameters above are determined for the road in question. If they match or exceed set thresholds they will be considered further and prioritised using a points system for detailed attention and the allocation of the necessary resource to design and build appropriate traffic calming measures. 1.9 The Transport and Development Manager has advised that he will begin the process by instructing an initial vehicle speed survey. Such is the demand for these surveys that a 10-12 week waiting list is in operation at the moment. Page 3 of 6
Page 6
1.10 The role of the Board is to consider the petition and take the appropriate action in respect of the petition which will be one of the following: (a) that no action is taken, in which case the reasons will be specified and intimated to the petitioner; (b) that the petition be referred to the relevant director/and or policy board for further investigation, with or without any specific recommendation; or (c) refer the petition to another organisation if the petition relates to that organisation. The principal petitioner, together with one supporter has been invited to attend the meeting. 2. Recommendation 2.1 That the Board hears from the principal petitioner. Implications of the Report 1. Financial – none 2. HR & Organisational Development – none 3. Community/Council Planning - none 4. Legal – none 5. Property/Assets – none 6. Information Technology - none. 7. Equality & Human Rights - none The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential forinfringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety - none 9. Procurement - none 10. Risk - none. 11. Privacy Impact - none 12. Cosla Policy Position – not applicable. 13. Climate Risk – not applicable Page 4 of 6
Page 7
List of Background Papers (a) Background Paper - 1 Petition Author: Paul Shiach, Senior Committee Services Officer Tel: 0141 618 7103 Email: paul.shiach@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 5 of 6
Page 8
Page 6 of 6