Consultation Digest Issue 38, 10 July 2019: the South City Way approaches the City Centre

This issue, a day late – sorry – contains news of proposed building works at Glasgow University that conveniently ignore the lack of cycling access, the South City Way advances to King Street, lots of forthcoming consultations and, in feedback, we hear that more parking attendants are to be employed in Glasgow – let’s hope they can get parking controlled, but do read on for more. There’s a surprising amount of news given that we are now into summer holidays.

Contents

Section 1: Current Consultations

  1. Glasgow, Garscube Road, parking and loading restrictions to allow construction of 2-way cycle lane, closes 12 July
  2. **NEW** University of Glasgow, IHW planning application, closes 12 July
  3. Glasgow, Future Policy Development of Taxi and Private Hire Car Licensing, closes 29 July
  4. Glasgow (North Kelvin, North Woodside and Woodlands)(Mandatory 20mph Speed Limit Zone) Order, closes 02 August
  5. **NEW** Glasgow South City Way Traffic Management Order, 2-way cycle lane on Bridgegate and King Street, closes 09 August
  6. Glasgow, St Enoch District Regeneration Framework Public Consultation, closes 06 September

Section 2: Forthcoming Consultations

  1. Glasgow, Queen Margaret Drive, separated cycle lane, Traffic Regulation Order
  2. Glasgow, Battlefield Street Design, Showcase Event, 23 July
  3. Safer Streets Pollokshields
  4. North Kelvin/Woodside potential Controlled Parking Zone
  5. Dennistoun & Royston – Traffic Management & Parking Controls Order 201 drop-in events 24, 25 and 27 July

Section 3: Consultation Feedback

  1. Glasgow, Broomfield Road, GoBike submission
  2. Glasgow, Ladyloan Avenue, GoBike submission
  3. Glasgow, Laurieston Phase 2, 20mph, GCC response No 2
  4. Glasgow, Laurieston, Phase 2, Parking Controls, GCC response
  5. Scotland, Default 20mph Bill, Scottish Government response
  6. Glasgow, Denmark Street, No Waiting and Loading at Any Time, GCC response, with good news about the employment of more Parking Attendants
  7. Glasgow, Sunnybank Street, Traffic Calming, GCC response

Section 1: Current Consultations, in date order for response

1.1 Glasgow, Garscube Road, parking and loading restrictions to allow construction of 2-way cycle lane, closes 12 July

All the information pertaining to the proposals for a two-way cycle lane on the east side of Garscube Road were published in Digest 36, Item 1.4 and we have now submitted this letter in response. The supportive and constructive comments were written by Calum. Iain provided the graphic for the type of side-street junction we would like to see at Sawmillfield Street.

Iain’s proposal for the Sawmillfield Street junction.

There’s still time to get your comments in!

1.2 **NEW** University of Glasgow Institute of Health and Wellbeing. Planning application Ref 19/01636/MSC, closes 12 July

The University is progressing its development and the Institute of Health and Wellbeing is now being planned for the Institute of Health and Wellbeing on University Place, near to the junction with Byres Road, as shown on this plan. Having looked at the information available, see: https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage GoBike is submitting this letter of objection in based on their lip service to planning for active travel. The application mentions core paths nearby for cycling access, but conveniently ignores the fact that the University has been, to date, adamant that cycle lanes can not be accommodated on University Avenue to allow access to the site.

1.3 Glasgow, Future Policy Development of Taxi and Private Hire Car Licensing, closes 29 July

All the details of this consultation were in Digest 36, Item 1.5 and our considered response will be in the next Digest.

1.4 Glasgow (North Kelvin, North Woodside and Woodlands)(Mandatory 20mph Speed Limit Zone) Order, closes 02 August

Digest 37, Item 1.6 gave all the information for this next bit of Glasgow’s 20mph patchwork. Our response will be in the next Digest. Meanwhile, the Evening Times reported on 01 July that Glasgow City Council is still keen to see a city wide move to 20mph.
According to the article there are currently 80 mandatory 20mph zones in the city – that’s a lot of signage.

1.5 **NEW** Glasgow South City Way Traffic Management Order, 2-way cycle lane on Bridgegate and King Street, closes 09 August
Image released for the initial consultation February 2019

Good news, the South City Way is approaching the Merchant City and we received this email from the City Council on 26 June:

MESSAGE SENT ON BEHALF OF ANDY WADDELL, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, NEIGHBOURHOODS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Dear Sir or Madam,

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (CITY CENTRE) (TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT) ORDER 2010, (VARIATION No25) (SOUTH CITY WAY) ORDER 201_

The Council propose to consider the introduction of the above named Traffic Regulation Order.
Please find enclosed a copy of the press notice of the proposed Order, relevant map, statement of reasons and detailed report.
Details of the proposals will also be available on the Glasgow City Council website at
www.glasgow.gov.uk/proposedtro

As stated in the attached documentation, any person wishing to object to the proposed Order should send details of the grounds for objection in writing to Group Manager, Neighbourhoods and Sustainability, Exchange House, 231 George Street, Glasgow, G1 1RX or email
land@glasgow.gov.uk and it must be received by Friday, 09 August 2019.

Yours faithfully”
etc

Here are the documents: Press Notice, Plan, Statement of Reasons and Detailed Report.

We’ll be looking at this and, based on our experience elsewhere in the city, developing our response in good time for the closing date.

1.6 Glasgow, St Enoch District Regeneration Framework Public Consultation, closes 06 September

All the information we have was in Digest 37, Item 1.7 and as we said two weeks ago, our response will be developed when our main scrutineer of such high-level publications returns from holiday later this month. The very fact it’s high level means that detailed policy will be determined from it, so it’s crucial that we comment critically and constructively.
You might remember that the Broomielaw District Regeneration Framework; to which we responded at the beginning of April – details were in Digest 32, Item 3.1 and our response is here, – waxed lyrical about removing most of the traffic from the Broomielaw and transforming the area under the Kingston Bridge. Yes, this is the type of transformation that we are looking for and that the city needs if it’s to meet its aspirations, but we know the opposition will be intense.

Section 2: Forthcoming Consultations

2.1 Glasgow, Queen Margaret Drive, separated cycle lane, Traffic Regulation Order

The local traders on Queen Margaret Drive, which goes north from the junction of Byres Road and Great Western Road, as far as Maryhill Road, want to improve the environment outside their shops. They worked with the City Council and with Sustrans to develop proposals for a two-way cycle lane on the west side and there has been local consultation on this.
However, things have changed: we have had the Byres Road consultations with no decisive outcome and a new school is being built just north of Kelvinside Avenue, so both these things are being considered in relation to the Queen Margaret Drive proposals. Pleasingly though, we have now been told by the City Council that the Traffic Regulation Order will be issued within the next few weeks. Our breath is bated!

2.2 Glasgow, Battlefield Street Design, Showcase Event, 23 July

Sustrans have informed us of this event; here’s the email that was received on 03 July:

I’m emailing you with an exciting update from Battlefield Street Design with the details of our showcase event on the 23rd July and a focus group opportunity.

Thank you to everyone who has got involved in the Battlefield Street Design project and left your feedback for the initial design ideas. You can still view these designs and comments through our
project website. Over the last few months we engaged with over 2,800 people through various events, activities and meetings. This feedback following the last nine months of engagement has helped refine the concept design which will be showcased at our upcoming public event on the 23rd July (details below).

Showcase event: Tuesday 23rd July 2019

On Tuesday 23 July, at Langside Parish Church in Glasgow, the public are invited to have the opportunity to:

  • Drop-in anytime between 4pm and 7pm to view the updated concept design for the following areas; Battlefield Road, Mount Florida corner, Battlefield Rest junction, Grange Road and Langside Road.
  • Find out about activities in the area from Give a Dog a Bone, Urban Croft South Seeds, Battlefield Community Project, Langside Heritage Group and many more;
  • Come and say hello to us outside Coffeescene between 3pm and 6pm where we’ll have a summary of the designs and some Sustrans freebies to give away

Do get along if you can and contribute to making the area more active-travel-friendly. Here’s a link to the 23 July event with a bit more news: https://battlefieldproposals.commonplace.is/news/2019/07/03/battlefield-street-design-showcase-event:-23-july

2.3 Safer Streets Pollokshields

Further to the drop-in event on 17 June, we have now heard from Bill Fraser, chair of the Pollokshields Trust. The Baseline Study is now at draft stage and once it’s finalised it will be opened to community engagement. If you are interested keep your eyes peeled for further updates.

2.4 North Kelvin/Woodside potential Controlled Parking Zone

We have heard from GoBike member, Alasdair, who is on the local Community Council who tells us that there was a well-attended Community Council meeting earlier this month when the possibility of a Controlled Parking Zone in this area was discussed. Currently there is commuter parking in the area. The City Council will now consult with the Police etc as they draw up plans with a view to issuing a Traffic Regulation Order at some future date.

2.5 Dennistoun & Royston – Traffic Management & Parking Controls Order 201 drop-in events 24, 25 and 27 July

GoBike member Derek has told us about a forthcoming Traffic Management and Parking Controls Order for Dennistoun & Royston
Public exhibitions are to take place:
Wed 24 July, 2-7pm – Royston Library
Thu 25 July, 2-7pm – Dennistoun Library
Sat 27 July, 10am-1pm – Dennistoun Library
Dennistoun Community Council has been asking the City Council for some time to bring in such an order to stop commuters using area like a park and ride.
There will be charges for parking that might not go down well with some of the residents but if it reduces car parking overall then it could help moves towards providing separated cycle lanes on Duke Street and/or Alexandra Parade!

Section 3: Consultation Feedback

3.1 Glasgow, Broomfield Road, GoBike submission

Details of the proposals for traffic calming using speed cushions on Broomfield Road, in the north-east of the city, was detailed in Digest 37, Item 1.2 and we submitted our response last week, prior to the 05 July closing date.
While we accept that speed cushions do slow down traffic, we consider that roads such as this. near parks and schools, particularly in an area of low car ownership, in a city of low car ownership. should be made more active-travel friendly. Our response gives our reasons.

3.2 Glasgow, Ladyloan Avenue, GoBike submission

Carrying on the theme of slowing motor traffic down with speed cushions came this proposal to improve safety near St Clare’s Primary School in Drumchapel. Other schools in the city are about to start a trial of closed approach roads at start and finish times, but St Clare’s gets speed cushions. We suggest a more active travel solution ….. and this is our letter of response.

3.3 Glasgow, Laurieston Phase 2, 20mph, GCC response No 2

Soon after submitting our support (admittedly with concern about the localised nature of yet another 20mph zone in the city) we received an initial response from the City Council, which was published in Digest 36, Item 3.2. This explained why the City Council feels it can’t go for a city-wide zone (this view, might of course change with the demise of Mark Ruskell’s bill) but now we have received, on 28 June, this formal response:

MESSAGE SENT ON BEHALF OF ANDY WADDELL, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, NEIGHBOURHOODS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Dear Ms Fort

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (Laurieston Phase 2), (20mph Speed Limit) Order 2019

I refer to your support of the above named Traffic Regulation Order and can advise that your support was reported and considered. The Council have decided under its scheme of delegated functions to proceed with the proposal as advertised.

The Order was made on 24 June 2019 and an advert was placed in the Evening Times on 26 June 2019 stating that the Traffic Regulation Order has been made.
Should you require any further information on the above named Order please contact my assistant (name and phone no removed by GoBike).

Yours sincerely
” etc

We have yet to see major opposition to these localised 20mph proposals, so why the concern when it comes to larger areas? Could it be a case of driving slowly near home but putting the foot down elsewhere?

3.4 Glasgow, Laurieston, Phase 2, Parking Controls, GCC response


To inhibit the sort of parking shown here, GoBike supported the proposals for waiting and loading restrictions in Laurieston Phase 2, where building is currently ongoing. Details were given in Digest 34, Item 1.7 and our response was given in Digest 35, Item 1.6





We have now, 28 June, received this response from the City Council:


MESSAGE SENT ON BEHALF OF ANDY WADDELL, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, NEIGHBOURHOODS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Dear Ms Fort

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (Laurieston Phase 2), (Traffic Regulation) Order 2019

I refer to your support of the above named Traffic Regulation Order and can advise that your support was reported and considered. The Council have decided under its scheme of delegated functions to proceed with the proposal as advertised.

The Order was made on 24 June 2019 and an advert will be placed in the Evening Times on 26 June 2019 stating that the Traffic Regulation Order has been made.
Should you require any further information on the above named Order please contact my assistant (name and phone no removed by GoBike).

Yours sincerely
” etc

No details of the monitoring and compliance regime, so let’s hope for the best ….

3.5 Scotland, Default 20mph Bill, Scottish Government response

Many of us, I think, wrote to our MSPs to urge them to support the Restricted Roads (20mph) Bill that recently failed to get approval in the Scottish Parliament. Here’s a reply sent by Transport Scotland, on 27 June, in response to a plea direct to the Transport MInister, Michael Matheson, to support the bill:

Roads Directorate
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ


Thank you for your email of 8 June to Michael Matheson, Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure & Connectivity, regarding the 20 mph Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limits)(Scotland) Bill. As I have responsibility for road safety policy the First Minister has asked that your letter be passed to me for reply.
The Scottish Government is committed to achieving our shared desired outcomes of a more active and healthier nation, with ultimate visions for Scotland to have the cleanest air in Europe and no fatalities on roads.
We are also committed to the long-term vision for active travel in Scotland where communities are shaped around people, with walking and cycling the most popular choice for shorter everyday journeys. We know that the perception of urban roads as unsafe is a barrier against these everyday journeys and the reduction of traffic speed can be a positive step in making our towns and cities safer places, where people are confident to walk and cycle more often.


As you may be aware the 20 mph Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limits)(Scotland) Bill fell at Stage 1 of the Scottish Parliamentary legislative process on 13 June 2019, with 83 members of the Scottish Parliament opposing the bill, 26 voting in favour and 4 abstaining. You can find the Official Report of the debate here:
http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=12183
During the debate, the Cabinet Secretary set out why the Scottish Government recommended that Parliament not agree to the general principles of the Bill. This rationale is provided below:


“This Bill brings two different issues which we need to ensure are not conflated:
The first is whether 20 mph limits are beneficial; and the Government is very clear that we support 20 mph speed limits implemented in the right environment because they have real potential to encourage more active travel and increase people’s perceptions of ‘feeling safe’.
The second is whether the blanket approach is the best way of achieving these desired benefits.


I am of the view that further consideration needs to be given to the process, impact and consequences of a nationwide default 20 mph limit including an assessment of Scotland’s road network before we can be sure that the proposed Bill will achieve its aim.
We need to ensure that there are no unintended consequences from the Bill such as whether reducing speed limits on restricted roads where a 20 mph limit could have detrimental effects or whether not reducing the limit on non-restricted roads, where a 20 mph limit would be desirable, inhibits consistency across Scotland.
We know that many drivers assess the speed limit not just by reading road signs but by using other road features such as the width of the carriageway, road markings, traffic level, and location to schools etc.
In order to achieve the benefits that 20 mph speed limits bring, particularly on road safety, we need to ensure their compliance. Police Scotland advise that speed limits should be effectively self-enforcing and seen to be appropriate by a significant majority of motorists.
By implementing speed limits which are appropriate to the road design and conditions, rather than applying a blanket 20 mph signs-only speed limit , it ensures that other speed limits are not brought into disrepute.

Both the Government and CoSLA have always recognised the ambition of this Bill and
understand the rationale. However, the practical challenges and financial implications of a one size-fits-all approach are significant. Both remain supportive of creating safer roads for all road users, but this must be achieved through identifying alternative, more flexible ways of widening the implementation of 20 mph zones and speed limits in Scotland.
Therefore we are committed to continuing to work with CoSLA and with our partners such as the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland, taking time to reflect on what the Bill was trying to achieve by helping to identify more straightforward, efficient and effective procedures for Local Authorities in order to encourage wider use of 20 mph speed limits.
One example of work being undertaken is a review of the current Traffic Regulation Order process which will determine whether this does create a barrier to the implementation of 20 mph speed limits.
We have sought the views of local authorities on the TRO process and provided an opportunity for them to detail their concerns and consider whether the process could be streamlined. Once the analysis is complete, we will share the results with stakeholders and outline what options may be available for consideration.

These solutions will be found through collaborative working and any new proposal will need joint political agreement between CoSLA and Scottish Government. I consider that the blanket ‘sign only’ approach proposed within this Bill, without the identification of the roads which will be affected, will not achieve its aims. The road assessment is required in order to examine whether the current speed profile and road design would mind themselves to sign only 20 mph speed limits and will achieve the benefits that we would all wish to see”.
We have a commitment in Scotland’s Road Safety Framework to 2020 to encourage the implementation of 20 mph speed limits and have clear guidance for local authorities to support them in making decisions. We have also seen many local authorities taking those decisions in accordance with our guidance including Edinburgh and Fife.
And, as mentioned previously, we are also actively working with local authorities to identify actions which can be taken to ensure that more 20 mph speed limits are implemented in the right environments.
I hope you find this information helpful.
Kindest regards

Road Safety Policy Officer
www.transport.gov.scot”

So there we have it, a lot of words, from people who probably want a a 20mph limit outside their house and their local school, but let’s look forward to better things ..

3.6 Glasgow, Denmark Street, No Waiting and Loading at Any Time, GCC response, with good news about the employment of more Parking Attendants

In Digest 36, Item 1.2 we informed you of the proposals to prohibit obstructive parking on Denmark Street in the north of the city. We submitted an email response in the evening of the closing date, which was, fortunately, accepted and we now have this response, dated 05 July from the City Council:

Thank you for your response to the above named traffic regulation order.
In order to address your points, I have numbered them accordingly:

1.  I can advise that City Parking, who are responsible for the employment of parking attendants, have recently employed 20 new parking attendants.  This will help with the enforcement of all existing and proposed restrictions within the Glasgow area.

2.  Your comments have been noted and passed to the Council’s Cycling Infrastructure department, however, this Order has been promoted in order to prevent the indiscriminate and obstructive parking practices which are occurring in Denmark Street, north of Hawthorn Street.  The Council have received complaints from local businesses at this location as larger vehicles find it difficult to access a number of premises as a result of the existing parking practices hence why this Order has focused on eradicating this issue.”

Here, as a reminder, is our response, sent on 18 June:

“Many thanks for the opportunity to comment on the proposals below. GoBike is ambivalent about this proposal but we do have the following questions:

1. Have the resources been identified to ensure that the restrictions are complied with? So often we respond to similar consultations and the standard response is that it is the responsibility of Police Scotland, or perhaps in this case, traffic/parking wardens to ensure compliance. Yet we are not aware of any increase in the budget of these bodies to ensure compliance and all around the city we see evidence of non-compliance with parking regulations, speed limits etc.

2. Why hasn’t a more imaginative scheme been developed? This is an area of lower than average car ownership in a city with relatively low car ownership, yet we see no evidence that active travel is being encouraged. Denmark Street is wide, there are amenities along it such as a community centre, yet there is no safe cycle route. The construction of cycle lanes would reduce the space available for the storage of motor vehicles and encourage the local populace to improve their health by becoming more active. The City Council should exploit all available opportunities to improve active travel in this city, rather than having specific cycle schemes.

We look forward to better things.”

Thus we have 2 items of good news here! The first is that more Parking Attendants are to be employed and the second is that we have sections of the Neighbourhoods and Sustainability Group within the City Council communicating with each other, and not only that, but telling us that they do.

3.7 Glasgow, Sunnybank Street, Traffic Calming, GCC response

On 20 June GoBike submitted this letter to Glasgow City Council about the proposals for Sunnybank Street – the initial information was in Digest 36, Item 1.3 and yesterday, just as this Digest should have been coming out to you, this response arrived:

MESSAGE SENT ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL BRADY, GROUP MANAGER – TRAFFIC AND ROAD SAFETY, NEIGHBOURHOODS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Dear Ms Fort


Thank you for your undernoted email regarding the traffic calming proposals for Sunnybank Street.
I can advise that the Primary School has already received planning consent and as such there are no proposals to include any new cycle routes or lanes into the design at this late stage.
I can advise that the School Car Free Zones is a pilot project which will run for an initial trial period of 18 months across 6 selected schools where it is known that traffic related issues at the beginning and end of the school day already occur. If the trial proves successful, it is anticipated that this project will be extended to include additional schools in appropriate locations across the city and the new school on Sunnybank Street will be considered for inclusion.
Regarding the design of the speed cushions, I can advise that as per the drawing sent out alongside the consultation e-mail, there is a 1.2m gap from the kerb at either side for the safe passage of cyclists, as well as a gap of 1.1m in between the cushions themselves which both provide plenty of space for the safe passage of cyclists.


A recent speed survey found the 85th percentile speed of vehicles on Sunnybank Street to be 28mph. It is anticipated that the introduction of the proposed Traffic Calming on Sunnybank Street will see the average speed of vehicles decrease further, which will in turn lead to better road safety conditions for all road users including, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.
With regard to your concerns over the timescale for responses to our notification of the proposals, I can advise that the 21 day period for response was to begin from the date the email was sent. However, I will note your comments and ensure that the response period is more clearly stated in any future correspondence. Responses were also intended to be returned to the sender,
LandServices.Mailroom@glasgow.gov.uk

Finally, I apologize for you not receiving a response to your email of 13th June regarding the bus gate and can advise that whilst Sunnybank Street was previously intended for inclusion as part of a bus route, SPT never took up the option of providing a bus service on this route. Furthermore, a Traffic Regulation Order was never promoted to allow enforcement of this bus gate by Police Scotland. As part of the associated works to install traffic calming measures it is intended that the bus gate markings and signs on Sunnybank Street between Springfield Road and Garvald Street will be removed.
I trust the above information is of assistance, however, should you require any further information please contact (details removed by GoBike)”

While much of this reply was informative, one section was a wee bit perplexing – had a mistake been made in our letter about the position of the speed cushions? A check confirmed, phew, that our letter did not mention the spacing of the speed cushions, and this reply has been sent in for the attention of Michael Brady:

“Hello,
Many thanks for the comprehensive reply, which is very much appreciated.

Just one point: on this scheme the drawing clearly shows a 1.2m gap between the footway and the speed cushion. It is on your other schemes, Ladyloan Avenue and Broomfield Road, where the gap is shown as just 1m and I have commented on the narrow gap on both those proposals, but not on the scheme for Sunnybank Street. I attach a further copy of the GoBike letter of 20 June for clarification.

Best wishes,
Tricia Fort
for Consultations GoBike, Strathclyde Cycle Campaign, www.gobike.org”

It’s a bonus that we are getting detailed responses – long may this continue. This reply also shows why Community Councils are so important. Community Councils are able to respond to Planning Applications, while residents, unless in the immediate neighbourhood, are unable to comment. So we missed the boat on this one.

Your next Digest will be with you in 2 weeks, so stay safe on your bike until then – and beyond.