Roads Safety Forum

Council Offices, Almada Street Hamilton, ML3 0AA

Dear Councillor

Roads Safety Forum

The Members listed below are requested to attend a meeting of the above Forum to be held as follows:-

Date: Tuesday, 12 March 2019 Time: 10:00 Venue: Committee Room 5, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton, ML3 0AA

The business to be considered at the meeting is listed overleaf.

Members are reminded to bring their fully charged tablets to the meeting

Yours sincerely

Lindsay Freeland Chief Executive

Members Julia Marrs (Chair), Walter Brogan, Robert Brown, Janine Calikes, Margaret Cowie, Mark Horsham, Lynne Nailon, Collette Stevenson, Margaret B Walker, Jared Wark

Substitutes Maureen Chalmers, Allan Falconer, Alistair Fulton, Ann Le Blond, Kenny McCreary, Bert Thomson

1 BUSINESS

1 Declaration of Interests

2 Minutes of Previous Meeting 5 - 8 Minutes of the Roads Safety Forum held on 10 October 2018 submitted for approval as a correct record. (Copy attached)

3 Minutes of Special Meeting 9 - 10 Minutes of the special meeting of the Roads Safety Forum held on 15 January 2019 submitted for approval as a correct record. (Copy attached)

Item(s) for Consideration

4 Review of Residents' Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) 11 - 16 Report dated 25 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

5 Restricted Roads (20mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill 17 - 24 Report dated 22 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

6 Road Accident Casualty Statistics for 2018 25 - 38 Report dated 22 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

7 Priority Road Safety Engineering Projects 2019/2020 39 - 44 Report dated 22 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

8 Pass Plus 45 - 48 Report dated 7 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

9 Kerbcraft Road Safety Training Initiative 49 - 54 Report dated 11 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

10 Police Scotland - Lanarkshire Division Road Safety Update 55 - 56 Report dated 18 February 2019 by the Local Authority Liaison Officer. (Copy attached)

11 School Crossing Patroller Assessments 57 - 74 Report dated 7 February 2019 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources). (Copy attached)

Urgent Business

12 Urgent Business Any other items of business which the Chair decides are urgent.

For further information, please contact:- Clerk Name: Tracy Slater Clerk Telephone: 01698 454185 Clerk Email: [email protected] 2

ROADS SAFETY FORUM 2

Minutes of meeting held in Committee Room 2, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton on 10 October 2018

Chair: Councillor Julia Marrs

Councillors Present: Walter Brogan, Robert Brown, Margaret Cowie (substitute for Councillor McLachlan), Mark Horsham, Lynne Nailon, Jared Wark

Councillors’ Apologies: Janine Calikes, Davie McLachlan, Collette Stevenson, Margaret B Walker

Attending: Community and Enterprise Resources S Laird, Traffic and Transportation Engineer; C Park, Engineering Manager; M Shearer, School Travel Plan Co-ordinator Education Resources D Hinshelwood, Support Services Manager Finance and Corporate Resources J Davitt, Public Relations Officer; T Slater, Administration Officer

Also Attending: Police Scotland Sergeant T Flynn, Local Authority Liaison Officer

Chair’s Opening Remarks The Chair, on behalf of the Forum, welcomed June Moir, Acting Head Teacher and pupils Andrew Jackson and Isobel Watt, Wester Overton Primary School, Strathaven to the meeting.

1 Declaration of Interests No interests were declared.

2 Minutes of Previous Meeting The minutes of the meeting of the Roads Safety Forum held on 15 May 2018 were submitted for approval as a correct record.

The Forum decided: that the minutes be approved as a correct record.

3 School Travel Plans A report dated 17 September 2018 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources) was submitted on the School Travel Plan programme within South Lanarkshire.

The aim of School Travel Plans was to encourage more sustainable modes of travel, such as walking and cycling, which would reduce congestion outside schools, increase safety and improve health and environmental awareness, whilst setting active travel patterns for life. 5

At present, 68 schools had completed a Travel Plan, with a further 62 currently working towards completion. Meetings had been taking place with the remaining schools to encourage uptake.

Information was provided on the process involved in creating a School Travel Plan and the information that would be included within it. The Council’s School Travel Plan Co-ordinator contacted all schools on a regular basis and engaged with the school community to assist with this process. A template was also available to help schools.

There were many initiatives available to schools to progress their School Travel Plan, a list of which was attached as Appendix 1 to the report. It was highlighted that an important part of the School Travel Plan was the mechanisms for monitoring and review.

The Acting Head Teacher, Wester Overton Primary School, Strathaven gave a presentation on its School Travel Plan, which was attached as Appendix 2 to the report.

Forum members congratulated Wester Overton Primary School on its School Travel Plan and the work that had gone into producing it.

During discussion, key points were raised in relation to:-

 involving neighbouring residents in the consultation process  whether School Travel Plans were pro-active and ambitious enough  how to measure the effectiveness of School Travel Plans  the involvement of Parent Councils  initiatives that could improve road safety at schools, such as closing roads at certain times and the use of CCTV

A list of schools and their status in relation to School Travel Plans would be circulated to members of the Forum.

The Forum decided:

(1) that the School Travel Plan programme be noted;

(2) that the presentation on Wester Overton Primary School’s Travel Plan be noted; and

(3) that the development of future School Travel Plans be supported.

Ms Moir and the pupils of Wester Overton Primary School left the meeting after this item of business

4 Review of Residents’ Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) A report dated 17 September 2018 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources) was submitted on the review of the Council’s Residents’ Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) policy.

The Executive Committee, at its meeting on 5 October 2011, had approved the recommendations of the Member/Officer Task and Finish Group which had been established to review the policy in relation to RPPZs and, as a result, the introduction of further RPPZs had not been considered since that time. However, demand for parking throughout the South Lanarkshire Council area continued to increase and it was considered appropriate to review the current policy.

The Community and Enterprise Resources Committee at its meeting on 21 August 2018, agreed that the Roads Safety Forum be authorised to review the current policy in relation to RPPZs, as detailed in the Terms of Reference attached as Appendix 1 to the report. 6

In addition, the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee agreed that, in order to alleviate the significant parking issues at certain locations, the following action be taken:-

 that a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) be promoted to extend the current RPPZ at Montrose Crescent, Hamilton  that consultation be undertaken with local residents in relation to the extension of the current RPPZ at Cambuslang and Hairmyres Railway Stations

The RPPZs review would be undertaken over a 9-month period commencing on 10 October 2018, with a progress report to be submitted to the Forum at its meeting on 12 March 2019.

Following discussion, it was agreed that:-

 a special meeting of the Forum be held in January 2019 in order to give members time to consider and consult on any issues and provide an opportunity for further discussion prior to final recommendations being agreed in March 2019  relevant officers to consider, in detail, the issues highlighted and report back to the meeting of the Forum on 12 March 2019 with recommendations

A report on the Forum’s recommendations would then be submitted to a future meeting of the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee for consideration.

The Forum decided:

(1) that a special meeting of the Forum be held in January 2019 to give members time to consider and consult on any issues and provide an opportunity for further discussion prior to final recommendations being agreed in March 2019;

(2) that relevant officers consider, in detail, the issues highlighted and report back to the meeting of the Forum on 12 March 2019 with recommendations; and

(3) that a report with the Forum’s recommendations be submitted to a future meeting of the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee for consideration.

[Reference: Minutes of the Executive Committee of 23 February 2011 (Paragraph 9), 5 October 2011 (Paragraph 9) and the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee of 21 August 2018 (Paragraph 13)]

5 Education, Training and Publicity Initiatives A report dated 17 September 2018 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources) was submitted on the range of road safety education, training and publicity initiatives being undertaken in South Lanarkshire.

The Forum decided:

(1) that the road safety education, training and publicity initiatives being undertaken in South Lanarkshire, as detailed in the report, be noted; and

(2) that future road safety education, training and publicity initiatives in South Lanarkshire be supported.

[Reference: Minutes of 5 December 2017 (Paragraph 3)]

6 Police Scotland - Lanarkshire Division Road Safety Update A report dated 21 September 2018 by the Local Authority Liaison Officer, Police Scotland was submitted on national and local road safety campaigns.

A verbal update was given on the following initiatives:-

 end of Motorcycle Safety Campaign  Get Ready for Winter  Carriage of Dangerous Goods  Transport Scotland Winter Service Plan  Speed, Seatbelt and Mobile Phone Campaign  Festive Drink and Drug Drive Campaign

The Forum decided: that the report and verbal update be noted.

[Reference: Minutes of 15 May 2018 (Paragraph 3)]

7 Dates for Future Meetings A report dated 20 September 2018 by the Executive Director (Finance and Corporate Resources) was submitted proposing that future meetings of the Roads Safety Forum take place at 10.00am on the following dates:-

 Tuesday 12 March 2019  Tuesday 27 August 2019  Tuesday 22 October 2019

As noted at item 4, a special meeting of the Forum would be held in January 2019 to further consider the review of the Council’s Resident’s Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) policy.

The Forum decided: that future meetings of the Forum be held on the dates detailed above.

8 Urgent Business There were no items of urgent business.

ROADS SAFETY FORUM 3

Minutes of special meeting held in Committee Room 5, Council Offices, Almada Street, Hamilton on 15 January 2019

Chair: Councillor Julia Marrs

Councillors Present: Councillor Walter Brogan, Councillor Robert Brown, Councillor Janine Calikes, Councillor Margaret Cowie, Councillor Mark Horsham, Councillor Lynne Nailon, Councillor Collette Stevenson, Councillor Margaret B Walker, Councillor Jared Wark

Attending: Community and Enterprise Resources L Cosh, Parking Unit Co-ordinator; S Laird, Traffic and Transportation Engineer; A Martucci, Parking Unit Team Leader; C Park, Engineering Manager Finance and Corporate Resources J Davitt, Public Relations Officer; T Slater, Administration Officer

1 Declaration of Interests No interests were declared.

2 Review of Residents’ Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) A report dated 24 December 2018 by the Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources) was submitted on the review of the Council’s current policy in relation to Residents’ Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs).

At its meeting on 21 August 2018, the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee agreed that the Roads Safety Forum review the Council’s policy in relation to RPPZs, as detailed in the Terms of Reference attached as Appendix 2 to the report, and report on its findings at a future date.

At its meeting on 10 October 2018, the Roads Safety Forum commenced the review and agreed that a special meeting of the Forum be arranged in January 2019 to give members the opportunity to consider and consult on any issues, and have a further discussion prior to consideration of the final recommendations at the Forum’s meeting on 12 March 2019.

Information was provided on the background and enforcement of RPPZs, together with current arrangements across South Lanarkshire, as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report.

Following full discussion and consideration of items 1 to 9, detailed in paragraph 5.2 of the report, it was agreed that an update report would be considered by the Forum at its meeting on 12 March 2019 and, subsequently, form the basis of future recommendations to be referred to the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee for consideration. Officers from Roads and Transportation Services would also:-

 take into consideration all issues raised by the Forum  ensure that any impacts from the proposals were investigated and considered  contact all elected members to outline the issues considered and ascertain if they were aware of any areas of high demand that would merit consideration of the implementation of RPPZs within their ward 9

Members welcomed the opportunity to further consult with constituents and community groups prior to consideration of the final proposals and agreed to feed back any further issues to Roads and Transportation Services’ officers.

The Forum decided:

(1) that the content of the report be noted; and

(2) that the issues raised in relation to points 1 to 9, detailed in paragraph 5.2 of the report, would be considered when preparing the final recommendations in relation to the RPPZs’ review.

[Reference: Minutes of the Executive Committee of 5 October 2011 (Paragraph 9), Community and Enterprise Resources Committee of 21 August 2018 (Paragraph 13) and Roads Safety Forum of 10 October 2018 (Paragraph 4)]

Councillors Calikes and Stevenson entered the meeting during this item of business

3 Urgent Business There were no items of urgent business.

10 Agenda Item

Report 4 Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Review of Residents' Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs)

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  outline the progress to date from the review into Residents’ Parking Permit Zones (RPPZs) [1purpoe] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [recs] (1) that the contents of the report be noted. [1r 3. Background 3.1. The requirement for residents’ parking permits in areas throughout South Lanarkshire followed the introduction of the Car Parking Charter in 1997.

3.2. There are significant RPPZs in East Kilbride, The Village (East Kilbride), Hamilton and Rutherglen. To park in these zones, residents or their visitors need to display a permit, however, it does not mean there will always be a space available.

3.3. At the Community and Enterprise Resource Committee of 21 August 2018 the commencement of a review of the current RPPZs policy was approved as was the commencement of initial consultation for new RPPZs at Hairmyres in East Kilbride and in the area surrounding Cambuslang Station. This was in addition to the extension of the RPPZ in the Montrose Crescent area of Hamilton and in The Murray area of East Kilbride. Consultation has concluded for the new RPPZs, and is currently being considered, and the statutory processes for the extension of those in Montrose Crescent and The Murray areas are nearing their conclusion.

3.4. It was agreed that the Roads Safety Forum would be the overseeing group for the review and, at the Forum meeting of 10 October 2018, a special meeting of the Forum was requested to discuss matters in more detail; this meeting occurred on 15 January 2019.

4. Matters Discussed/Debated and the Outcomes 4.1. At the special meeting, the Roads Safety Forum was asked to consider and discuss the following nine questions shown in italics below:

1. Are RPPZs seen as an effective demand management tool to assist in minimising the impact on residents in areas of competing parking demand?

The Forum consensus was yes. The question was asked as to whether all town centres should be considered and the Forum was directed to Question 7 below as potentially forming an appropriate “toolkit” when considering areas to assess. The question was also asked as to whether areas around schools should be considered and the consensus was that other measures such as waiting and loading restrictions, Keep Clear zig-zags and similar are more appropriate.

2. What are the main factors (positive and negative) that should be considered when considering the introduction of RPPZs?

The biggest factor was considered to be the need to balance the competing demands of residents, businesses, employers and commuters. Parking displacement into adjacent streets or areas was an area of concern, as was the possible disincentivisation of the use of public transport.

3. Is there a need to expand existing RPPZs or amend their boundaries?

There was no consensus on this. It was generally felt that it was necessary to consider each zone on its merits.

4. Are there any other areas of high demand where RPPZs should be seen as a priority for implementation?

It was suggested that all members, not just those on the Forum, be consulted on this. To this end all Elected Members were sent a copy of the Report from the Roads Safety Forum meeting of 15 January 2019 and asked to comment on Paragraph 5.2, in particular Questions 4, 7 and 8 (also as set out in 4.1 of this Report).

As a consequence the following locations have been suggested:-

Reid Street, Rutherglen; Tuphall Road, Hamilton; Abercorn Drive / Chestnut Crescent area, Hamilton; Station Road, Blantyre; Biggar; Dundas Place, The Village, East Kilbride; South Avenue, Carluke; Fairyknowe Gardens; Bothwell; Main Street area, Uddingston; Craigallian Avenue, Halfway; and Westwood area, East Kilbride (part of which was included in the Hairmyres consultation discussed at 4.1 above).

It should be noted that, at the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee of 22 January 20191, a paper on a Parking Demand Management Review was tabled and debated. As a result of a proposed amendment, which was carried, options to address residential parking pressures at Station Road, Blantyre are to be considered by undertaking a consultation exercise which will shortly commence. Other suggested locations will be considered following the conclusion of the review into RPPZs.

5. Should RPPZs be considered at all locations where there could be pressure on residential areas or only in areas of high demand e.g. near town centres/train stations where parking is at a premium?

It was agreed that it should be both. See also Question 7 below.

6. Should other demand management approaches be considered for certain areas (e.g. waiting and loading restrictions, driveway protection markings).

Yes, however, the ability to effectively enforce restrictions is a consideration. It was the general feeling of the Forum that it is not best practice to promote restrictions that cannot be effectively enforced.

7. Should prioritisation criteria for the implementation of further RPPZs be considered/developed e.g.

• Is the residential area within or close to a Town Centre? • Is there a significant generator of parking in the area, e.g. a railway station, medical or educational establishment, leisure facility or large employer? • Is the road geometry/layout such that it compromises parking i.e. lack of off- street parking, narrow/circuitous streets? • Could the issues be addressed by other means, for example waiting and loading restrictions? • Could additional parking be introduced to the area, for example increased park and ride or town centre parking provision?

All of the listed criteria were agreed by the Forum. It was suggested that all Elected Members, not just those on the Forum, be consulted on this, see Question 4 above, however, no additional feedback on this item has subsequently been received from Elected Members. 8. Given increasing financial pressures and potential to expand/introduce new RPPZs, is it time to revisit this policy and consider charging a small fee? This links to Audit Scotland’s report from 2013 encouraging Councils to better understand their unit costs and seek to recover them.

1 See https://southlanarkshire.cmis.uk.com/southlanarkshire/Meetingscalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/699/Committee/ 15/Default.aspx for details. 13

After much debate, the Forum agreed that there should be some sort of fee which, at the very least, covers the administrative costs associated with issuing permits. It was suggested that there could be some form of scale of fees, with the first permit being £10 and additional ones increasing thereafter. It was agreed that Officers would develop a range of charges for consideration and these will be tabled at the Forum on 12 March 2019. Again, it was suggested that all Elected Members, not just those on the Forum, be consulted on this, see Question 4 above. Limited additional feedback on this item was received, however, one proposal was that the £10 fee should cover a 3-year period.

Of interest, it should be noted that at North Lanarkshire Council’s Environment and Transportation Committee of 13 February 2019, a report was tabled on Residents’ Parking Permits. The report outlined the proposed permit scheme, identifying where they would be available and the charges associated with them. This was in response to the Council decision of 4 October 2018 to ‘begin work to introduce parking permits for areas where limited time parking bays are in force, to allow residents to park their cars near their homes without the risk of fines’. The charges are outlined in Appendix 1, along with those for the City of Edinburgh Council and Glasgow City Council for comparison/discussion.

9. Currently permits are issued manually on a rolling programme every two years and an online system is proposed. Do you agree that the process of applying for/purchasing permits should move online in part or in its entirety?

The consensus of the Forum was that the primary process for applying for permits should be on-line but that all other existing options should remain available.

5. Employee Implications 5.1. There are no significant employee implications associated with undertaking a review or introducing or amending zones, as this work would be undertaken by existing employees. There would be potential employee costs associated with introducing expanded zones, as additional parking attendants may be required and technical employee resources would also be required to promote and implement the new zones. This will, however, be considered and evaluated as part of the proposed review.

6. Financial Implications 6.1. There are no financial implications associated with undertaking a review. There would, however, be potential capital and additional administrative costs associated with introducing new or amending zones, as additional permit applications would require to be processed and issued, however, this will be considered and evaluated as part of the proposed review.

7. Other Implications 7.1. There are no significant risks associated with this report, nor any environmental implications. There are no implications for sustainability in terms of the information contained within this report.

8. Equality Impact Assessment and Consultation Arrangements 8.1. This report does not introduce a new policy, function or strategy or recommend a change to an existing policy, function or strategy and, therefore, no impact assessment is required.

8.2. There is no requirement to undertake any consultation at this time in terms of the information contained in this report.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

25 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives  Improve the quality of life of everyone in South Lanarkshire  Improve the road network, influence improvements in public transport and encourage active travel  Work with communities and partners to promote high quality, thriving and sustainable communities

Previous References  Executive Committee 5 October 2011  Community and Enterprise Resources Committee 21 August 2018  Roads Safety Forum 15 January 2019

List of Background Papers None

Contact for Further Information If you would like inspect any of the background papers or want any further information, please contact: -

Colin Park, Roads and Transportation Services Ext: 3653 (Tel: 01698 453653) E-mail: [email protected]

Appendix 1

Examples of Other Local Authorities’ Residents’ Parking Permit Charges

North Lanarkshire Council

• First permit £60 • Second permit £90 • Third permit £120 • Fourth permit £180

Glasgow City Council

• City Centre zone £285 • Anderston zone £170 • Garnethill zone £135 • Hillhead zone £170 • All other zones £85

City of Edinburgh Council

Engine 0 - 1000 1001 - 1801 - 2501 - 3000+ size (cc) 1800 2500 3000 Central Permit 1 £72 £212 £244.50 £308.50 £499 zones Permit 2 £92 £265 £312 £384.50 £630 All other Permit 1 £35.50 £105.50 £122.50 £157 £252 zones Permit 2 £45 £134.50 £156 £193.50 £315

All charges shown are annual.

16 Agenda Item

Report 5 Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Restricted Roads (20mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  advise the Forum of the proposed Restricted Road (20mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill [1purpose] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [recs] (1) that the contents of the report are noted. [1recs] 3. Background 3.1. The Scottish Parliament launched an inquiry inviting views from the public and stakeholders on whether they would support a change in the law to introduce a 20 mile per hour speed limit in built up areas throughout Scotland.

3.2. The Restricted Road (20mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill is intended to encourage a change in social and cultural attitudes towards road safety by restricting speeds in built up areas.

3.3. In Scotland, a restricted road is defined as one which is provided with "a system of carriageway lighting furnished by means of lamps placed not more than 185 metres apart and the road is of a classification or type specified" in regulations. The Restricted Roads (Classification or Type) (Scotland) Regulations 1985 specify that class C or unclassified roads are restricted roads. The default speed limit on restricted roads is currently 30mph.

3.4. Speed limit regulations can be complex in nature depending on the characteristics of the road such as whether they are urban, rural or whether they have development frontage etc.

3.5. The Bill proposes that the default speed limit on restricted roads be 20mph rather than 30mph. An Order would still be required on these roads for any other speed limit and for any speed limit other than the default limit on class A or class B roads. For example, depending on the outcome of the Bill, it may be that roads such as Almada Street in Hamilton which is a classified road may retain a 30mph speed limit. This would likely require transitional speed limit signage on Almada Street itself as well as on adjacent streets.

3.6. At this time enforceable 20mph speed limits can take three forms:

a) 20mph speed limit (red circular signs). Possible where traffic speeds are low and speed reducing measures are not required;

b) 20mph zone (rectangular “zone” signs). Legislation requires that all parts of the zone are within 50m of a traffic calming feature. Under the TSRGD 2016 (Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions), a 20mph speed limit repeater sign is considered a traffic calming feature, although a 20mph zone must still have at least one physical traffic calming feature;

c) “Part time” 20mph speed limit (signs with a 20mph red circular sign, a “when lights flash” message and amber flashing lights). These have generally been used in the vicinity of schools.

3.7. South Lanarkshire Council’s Local Transport Strategy 2013-23 (LTS) provides a number of policy and actions relating to road safety. One of these states that the Council will support and encourage driving at 20mph or below in residential areas and outside schools.

3.8. The proposed Bill is consistent with our LTS as well as national commitments to move towards a 20mph speed limit in built up areas. The introduction of lower speed limits will likely have a positive impact on the frequency and severity of accidents and the associated casualty numbers in Scotland.

3.9. The Council is, therefore, supportive of the principles of this Bill and on 1 February 2019, responded to the Scottish Parliament’s Finance and Constitution Committee’s (FCC) request for evidence. A copy of the response is attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

3.10. While we are generally supportive of the Bill and the principles behind it, there are cost and practicalities surrounding the proposed changes that require further detailed consideration. These are outlined in sections 4, 5 and 6 of this paper and formed part of our reply to the FCC.

4. Employee Implications 4.1. It is noted that the introduction of the Bill would result in any required changes to signing being necessary over a relatively short period of time. This would bring significant challenges in terms of deliverability due to available employee resources and other competing priorities.

5. Financial Implications 5.1. It is inevitable that there would be costs associated with the introduction of the Bill. The estimated costs that have been used for the introduction of the Bill in our view seem to be under estimated as a significant number of existing signs and initiatives currently on-street would require to be removed or altered. These relate to the following

a) alterations to settlement/gateway signage and road markings; b) removal/alterations to vehicle activated signs; c) removal of 20’s Plenty initiative signing and road markings; d) removal of 20mph repeater signs in existing areas/zones; and e) removal of 20mph part time speed limits at schools.

5.2. At this stage the anticipated costs are not quantifiable.

6. Other Implications 6.1. At this time it is unclear how the legislation will be introduced. It is likely that current Traffic Regulation Orders will require to be revoked or amended. Preference would be to implement a simplified process such as a default speed limit to apply from a nationally set date.

6.2. It is noted that a national publicity campaign is being considered as part of the introduction of the Bill. This would require to be co-ordinated at both a national and local level.

6.3. The introduction of the Bill would benefit from a longer lead in time to allow for the practicalities of altering any Orders and implementing signing/lining alterations.

6.4. There are no significant risks other than those identified above in relation to financial and employee implications.

7. Equality Impact Assessment and Consultation Arrangements 7.1. This report does not introduce a new policy, function or strategy or recommend a change to an existing policy, function or strategy and, therefore, no impact assessment is required.

7.2. There was no consultation requirements in terms of the information contained in this report.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

22 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives • Make communities safer, stronger and sustainable • Protect vulnerable children, young people and adults • Support our communities by tackling disadvantage and deprivation and supporting aspiration • Improve the road network, influence improvements in public transport and encourage active travel

Previous References Road Safety Forum Paper 20mph Speed Limits 5 November 2015

List of Background Papers None.

Contact for Further Information If you would like inspect any of the background papers or want any further information, please contact: - Stuart Laird, Roads and Transportation Services Ext: 3607 (Tel: 01698 453607) E-mail: [email protected]

20 REF NO.

SUBMITTING EVIDENCE TO A SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT COMMITTEE

DATA PROTECTION FORM

Name: Stuart Laird Date: 1 February 2019 Organisation: South Lanarkshire Council (if required) Topic of Restricted Roads (20mphSpeed Limit) (Scotland) Bill submission:

☒ I have read and understood the privacy notice about submitting evidence to a Committee.

☒ I am happy for my name, or that of my organisation, to be on the submission, for it to be published on the Scottish Parliament website, mentioned in any Committee report and form part of the public record.

☒ I would like to be added to the contact list to receive updates from the Committee on this and other pieces of work. I understand I can unsubscribe at any time.

Non-standard submissions Occasionally, the Committee may agree to accept submissions in a non-standard format. Tick the box below if you would like someone from the clerking team to get in touch with you about submitting anonymously or confidentially (not for publication). It is for the Committee to take the final decision on whether you can submit in this way. ☐ I would like to request that my submission be processed in a non-standard way.

21 REF NO.

FINANCE AND CONSTITUTION COMMITTEE SOUTH OF SCOTLAND ENTERPRISE BILL FINANCIAL MEMORANDUM SUBMISSION FROM Please do not add any organisation logos Please insert your response below Introduction 1. South Lanarkshire Council’s Local Transport Strategy 2013-23 provides a number of policy and actions relating to road safety. One of these states that the council will support and encourage driving at 20mph or below in residential areas and outside schools.

2. The Bill is consistent with the local strategy as well as national commitments to move towards a 20mph speed limit in built up areas.

3. The introduction of lower speed limits will likely have a positive impact on the frequency and severity of accidents and the associated casualty numbers in Scotland.

4. The Council are therefore supportive of the principles of this Bill.

Funding 5. It is inevitable that there would be costs associated with the introduction of the Bill, both from a financial perspective but also in the allocation of staff time.

6. The estimated costs that have been used for the introduction of the Bill are likely to be under estimated as the number of existing signs and initiatives currently on-street would require to be removed or altered. These relate to the following

f) alterations to settlement / gateway signage and road markings, g) removal/alterations to vehicle activated signs h) removal of 20’s Plenty initiative signing and road markings i) removal of 20mph repeater signs in existing areas/zones j) removal of 20mph part time speed limits at schools.

7. It is noted that the introduction of the Bill would result in any changes to signing being introduced over a relatively short period of time. This would bring its own challenges in terms of deliverability due to available resources.

Regulation 8. At this time it is unclear how the legislation will be introduced. It is likely that current Traffic Regulation Orders will require to be revoked or amended. Preference would be to implement a simplified process such as a default speed limit to apply from a nationally set date. 9. It is noted that a national publicity campaign is being considered as part of the introduction of the Bill. This would require to be co-ordinated at both a national and local level.

22 REF NO.

Timescales 10. The introduction of the Bill would benefit from a longer lead in time not only to allow the practicalities of altering any orders and implementing signing / lining alterations but also to allow for the transition from the current arrangements to the new ones to be made for the benefits of motorists and Police Scotland as the enforcement authority.

Conclusion 11. South Lanarkshire Council are generally supportive of the Bill and the principles behind it. The costs and practicalities surrounding the proposed changes require further detailed consideration due to resourcing implications.

24 Agenda Item

Report 6 Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Road Accident Casualty Statistics for 2018

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of this report is to:-

 inform the Forum of the provisional number of fatal, serious and slight casualties resulting from road accidents occurring in the Council area during the year 2018  compare the trend in casualties with the Scottish Government’s accident reduction targets

2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):-

 that the contents of the report are noted.

3. Background 3.1. In 2009, the Scottish Government published “Go Safe on Scotland’s Roads it’s Everyone’s Responsibility: Scotland’s Road Safety Framework to 2020”. This document sets out the Government’s road safety vision for Scotland, aims and commitments and the Scottish Targets for reductions in road deaths and serious injuries to 2020.

3.2. A paper to the Roads Safety Forum of 2 September 2009 outlined the contents of the framework and the Forum supported Scotland’s Road Safety Framework to 2020.

3.3. The target reductions are: 40% for all fatal casualties; 55% for all serious casualties; 50% for child fatal casualties; 65% for child serious casualties; 10% for all slight casualties. The base figure for this reduction was the average of the road accident casualty figures for the years 2004 to 2008.

3.4. The figures for 2018 are provisional on the basis that Police Scotland may still add or amend records over the coming months, but the numbers in such an event will be minimal across the greater severities. Therefore, the general trends described below are, to all intents and purposes, accurate. The confirmed figures for 2018 will be published by the Scottish Government during October 2019 in “Reported Road Casualties Scotland 2018”.

4. Road Accident Casualty Statistics 4.1. The statistics for all fatal, serious and slight casualties, including child fatal and serious casualties, within South Lanarkshire are detailed in the tables that form part of Appendix A to this report. These are given as the figures for the base period, the calendar years 2009 through to 2018 and the target for 2020. The information is also displayed graphically in Appendix A.

4.2. After five years of steady decline in fatal casualties between 2009 and 2013, the following years have been erratic and failed to follow this continual downward trend. The year-end total for 2018 was 13, an increase of 6 when compared to 2017.

4.3. Road accidents are described as rare, random and multi-factored events and fatal road accidents can be described as the rarest, so their occurrence can be hard to influence.

4.4. The number of serious casualties has dropped significantly from 86 to 55.

4.5. There was one fatal child casualty during 2018.

4.6. The number of serious child casualties dropped by 8 to a total of 7 during 2018. This is slightly higher than the all-time lowest figure achieved in 2014 and 2015 of six casualties.

4.7. A slight increase in slight casualties occurred from 418 to 421. The number continues to be significantly below the trend line for 2020 target as well as the target itself (746 slight casualties).

5. Discussion 5.1. We are now closely approaching the final 2020 targets. Progress towards all fatal casualties has been disappointing in recent years and serious casualties, with the exception of the unusually low 2018 recorded figures, was similarly disappointing. Child fatal casualties have also been disappointing with a fatality occurring in each of the previous two year periods. Maintaining or lowering casualties within the other classifications is also a significant challenge. The results confirm that the targets are, and have always been, challenging and confirm that year on year reductions have become harder and harder to achieve and maintain as we closely approach 2020.

5.2. Despite these challenging figures, based on 2018 figures, we are currently on schedule to achieve the 2020 targets for all slight casualties within South Lanarkshire. We are also expectant of achieving the target for all serious casualties and all child serious casualties, however, a reversal of the decreased casualty trend may jeopardise this. Fatal casualties are unpredictable and can fluctuate dramatically. Although on track to meeting the target for all fatal casualties, this remains a challenge, as does the target for all child fatalities.

5.3. The graphs in Appendix A do, however, include a trend line and these show that in each appropriate category, the trend is generally downwards and presently on track to exceed the 2020 targets.

5.4. The number of fatalities has fluctuated between a high of 18 and a low of 5 casualties. It should not be forgotten, however, that these are small numbers and, therefore, any variations appear as a high percentage.

5.5. The significant drop in serious accidents between 2017 and 2018 is considered to be exceptional when considering previous data and trends. It would be fair to conclude that similar reductions cannot be guaranteed and an increase may be experienced in the future.

5.6. Child fatal casualties (under 16 years of age) continue to be uncommon in South Lanarkshire, however, the 2020 target remains challenging.

5.7. Child serious casualties have not followed a set trend within the last few years. The lowest figure recorded is 6 casualties during both 2014 and 2015. One casualty above the lowest recorded figure was recorded during 2018. Unfortunately, several years have shown over double this figure. The target of a 65% reduction in child serious casualties is a challenging target. We must continue our work with this vulnerable road user group to maintain and endeavour to improve upon casualty reduction within this age group.

5.8. Slight casualty numbers have marginally increased by 3 between 2017 and 2018. The numbers have generally maintained a trend downwards year on year, with the exception of a slight increase in 2014 and now 2018. The current total is significantly below the 2020 target but it is important not to lose sight of the benefits to society that the reduction in even a slight injury can bring.

5.9. Section 39 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires that all local authorities carry out studies into the cause of accidents on roads in their area and to take appropriate measures to prevent accidents. Since its formation, the Council has been proactive in reducing casualties on the road network, however, much still requires to be accomplished to further improve road safety. Through the efforts of the Council and by working in partnership with other bodies such as Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, the National Health Service, Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, we aim to have fewer people injured in road accidents.

5.10. Road safety was identified as a priority through the consultation exercises undertaken for the Council’s Local Transport Strategy and Local Development Plan. In both surveys, approximately 95% of the respondents were of the view that improving road safety was important.

5.11. To effectively reduce casualties in South Lanarkshire, the Council and its partners need to address a wide variety of issues, including vulnerable road users, road user behavior and the road environment.

5.12. Factors which contributed to each accident are recorded by the Reporting Officer at the time of each incident. Several factors which contributed to the crash can be selected. An interrogation of these causation factors has been undertaken for the last three year period. The most significant causation factors within each category, as shown within Appendix B will be considered when assigning priority to future road safety measures, in particular education and encouragement.

5.13. For road safety measures to be effective, cooperation is needed across the various disciplines – the four ‘Es’ of road safety: education, engineering, enforcement and encouragement. At the heart of road safety planning, it is essential that casualty reduction strategies are identified and that actions are developed to implement these strategies.

5.14. The Council is responsible for road safety engineering solutions and much of road safety education. Other partners, such as Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service also contribute to road safety education and Police Scotland are mainly responsible for enforcement, while all partners have a role to play in encouraging road safety.

6. Employee Implications 6.1. There are no employee implications associated with this report.

7. Financial Implications 7.1. Funding for accident reduction schemes, both route actions and single site, has been and will continue to be sought from external sources such as the Scottish Government’s “Cycling, Walking, Safer Streets” allocation and Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT). In addition, opportunities will continue to be sought to utilise Roads Investment Programme funding where accident reduction and roads investment priorities overlap.

8. Other implications 8.1. There are no significant risks associated with this report, nor any environmental implications.

9. Equality Impact Assessment and Consultation Arrangements 9.1. This report does not introduce a new policy, function or strategy or recommend a change to an existing policy, function or strategy and, therefore, no impact assessment is required.

9.2. There was no consultation requirements in terms of the information contained in this report.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Enterprise Resources)

22 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives • Improve the road network, influence improvements in public transport and encourage active travel • Make communities safer, stronger and sustainable • Protect vulnerable children, young people and adults • Focused on people and their needs

Previous References ● Report to Roads Safety Forum 27 February 2018 ● Report to Road Safety Forum 2 September 2009

List of Background Papers ● Go Safe on Scotland’s Roads It’s Everyone’s Responsibility: Scotland’s Road Safety Framework to 2020 published by the Scottish Government in June 2009 ● Reported Road Casualties Scotland 2017 published on behalf of the Scottish Government by Transport Scotland in October 2018

Contact for Further Information

If you would like inspect any of the background papers or want any further information, please contact:- Colin Smith, Roads and Transportation Services Ext: 3607 (Tel: 01698 453607) E-mail: [email protected]

Appendix A:

2004 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 to Milestone Target 2008 11 Ave. 16 18 12 11 9 6 13 5 18 7 13 9

All Fatal Casualties within South Lanarkshire

2004 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 to Milestone Target 2008 68 Ave. 120 121 83 78 72 69 83 70 83 86 55 54

All Serious Casualties within South Lanarkshire

2004 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 to Milestone Target 2008 0 Ave. 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0

All Fatal Child (<16 years) Casualties within South Lanarkshire

2004 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 to Milestone Target 2008 8 Ave 17 14 14 14 7 8 6 6 13 15 7 6

All Serious Child (<16 years) Casualties within South Lanarkshire

2004 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 to Milestone Target 2008 776 Ave. 829 623 611 581 559 545 562 523 506 418 421 746

All Slight Casualties within South Lanarkshire

Notes

i. For all fatal casualties, the target for 2020 is a 40% reduction from the base figure which is the average for the years 2004 to 2008 inclusive. ii. For all serious casualties, the target for 2020 is a 55% reduction from the base figure which is the average for the years 2004 to 2008 inclusive. iii. For all child fatal casualties, the target for 2020 is a 50% reduction from the base figure which is the average for the years 2004 to 2008 inclusive. iv. For all child serious casualties, the target for 2020 is a 65% reduction from the base figure which is the average for the years 2004 to 2008 inclusive. v. For all slight casualties, the target for 2020 is a 10% reduction from the base figure which is the average for the years 2004 to 2008 inclusive vi. A child is considered to be aged 15 or under. vii. Averages and targets have been rounded up or down to nearest whole number.

Appendix B:

Most cited causation factors within the most recent three year period: 1 January 2016 – 31 December 2018

Driver/ Rider No. of Accidents 1 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Failed to look properly 421 2 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Failed to judge another person's path/speed 192 3 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Loss of control 172 4 Driver/Rider Factors: behaviour or inexperience Careless/reckless 167 5 Road Environment Factors Slippery road due to weather 152 6 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Poor turn or manoeuvre 125 7 Driver/Rider Factors: injudicious action Travelling too fast for conditions 105 8 Driver/Rider Factors: injudicious action Following too close 76 9 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Sudden braking 60 10 Driver/Rider Factors: behaviour or inexperience Inexperienced or learner driver/rider 54 11 Driver/Rider Factors: injudicious action Exceeding speed limit 54 12 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Swerved 53 13 Road Environment Factors Road layout e.g. bend, hill or narrow 52 14 Driver/Rider Factors: vision affected by Dazzling sun 51 15 Driver/Rider Factors: error or reaction Junction Overshoot 42 16 Driver/Rider Factors: impairment or distraction Impaired by alcohol 41 17 Driver/Rider Factors: behaviour or inexperience Aggressive driving 36 18 Driver/Rider Factors: impairment or distraction Distraction in vehicle 33 19 Driver/Rider Factors: injudicious action Disobeyed give way or stop sign 32 20 Driver/Rider Factors: impairment or distraction Fatigue 30 21 Driver/Rider Factors: behaviour or inexperience Nervous/ uncertain 28 22 Driver/Rider Factors: vision affected by Rain, sleet, snow or fog 26 23 Driver/Rider Factors: injudicious action Disobeyed automatic traffic signal 24 24 Driver/Rider Factors: impairment or distraction Distraction outside vehicle 22 25 Driver/Rider Factors: vision affected by Stationery or parked vehicle(s) 22

Pedestrian 1 Pedestrian only Factors Failed to look properly 130 2 Pedestrian only Factors Careless/ reckless 45 3 Pedestrian only Factors Failed to judge a vehicle's path/speed 40 4 Pedestrian only Factors Impaired by alcohol 28 5 Pedestrian only Factors Dangerous action in carriageway 27 6 Pedestrian only Factors Crossed road masked by stationery or parked vehicle 27 7 Pedestrian only Factors Pedestrian wearing dark clothing at night 22 8 Pedestrian only Factors Wrong use of pedestrian crossing 16

38 Agenda Item

Report 7 Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Priority Road Safety Engineering Projects 2019/2020

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  advise the Forum of the Priority Road Safety Engineering projects in 2019/2020 [1purpose] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [recs] (1) that the contents of the report are noted and priority projects identified are progressed and implemented in line with available funding. [1recs] 3. Background 3.1. The Council’s Local Transport Strategy 2013-2023 identifies a number of road safety policies and actions. As a consequence, the Council seeks to reduce the number and severity of casualties within South Lanarkshire and contribute towards the achievement of the 2020 national casualty reduction targets.

3.2. The Council will assess road safety enquiries and target resources and improvements where three or more injury accidents are occurring in the previous three years or on routes that have an injury accident rate greater than the national average for the type of route.

3.3. As a result, the Council delivers annual prioritised road safety improvements at identified accident locations/routes/areas. Funding is sought from a variety sources on an annual basis to deliver numerous projects and initiatives.

3.4. The Roads Safety Forum, at its meeting of 5 December 2017, was advised of the methodology used to identify where road accidents are occurring in South Lanarkshire and how the information is used to prioritise identified accident locations and how these tables are then used to prioritise the Capital Programme of Road Safety Engineering Works. These reports further explained the tried and tested measures that have been employed to assist in casualty reduction, to date, as well as their success.

4. Route Action Plan Assessment 4.1. The assessment for rural A class and B class routes has recently been concluded and a number of locations have been identified for detailed investigations. A total of 40 sections currently have an accident rate greater than the national average and, of these, it is proposed to investigate 13 locations. These are listed in Appendix 1. It is likely that, as a consequence, a number of these will be considered for detailed design and implementation during 2019/2020.

4.2. Locations not identified for investigation will continue to be monitored as a significant number have been treated over recent years. Also some locations are subject to improvements associated with new residential/commercial developments identified through the Planning consent process.

Single Site Assessment 4.3. Over recent years, a higher proportion of funding has been allocated to Route Action Plan locations. This approach has resulted in significant reduction in casualties. As most of the routes have now been treated, focus is now being given to single site locations. Some locations are also subject to improvements associated with new residential/commercial developments identified through the Planning consent process.

4.4. The annual Single Site Assessment has also recently been concluded and this identified that 59 locations have three or more injury accidents occurring in the previous three years. It is intended to investigate 15, as shown in Appendix 2, of these sites and from the outcome implement a number of schemes.

Other Works 4.5. There are other road safety initiatives which are developed following the identification of the levels of funding. These are outlined below: -

a) Speed Limit Initiatives – In 2015, the Forum noted and supported the proposed prioritisation of future speed limit changes following the Council’s Speed Limit Review on all A class and B class routes. 24 locations were identified and the implementation of reduced speed limits are taken forward when resources become available. b) Traffic Signals/Pedestrian Crossings – Within South Lanarkshire, there are over 200 installations. These require to be upgraded and replaced every 15 to 20 years and replacement is ongoing. New installations feature up to date vehicular and pedestrian detection and tactile paving, revised timings and dropped kerbs are also provided to meet current standards. c) Engineering measures at schools – Measures identified through ongoing School Travel Plan development such as improved/additional signing, road markings and guardrail etc. Car free school zones are also being progressed and suitable locations are being discussed with Education Resources. Potential locations are listed within Appendix 3. d) Active Travel Schemes – Development of cycle and pedestrian infrastructure, facilities and safety features. At this time, active travel studies are currently being progressed for towns such as East Kilbride, Cambuslang, Rutherglen, Hamilton and Carluke.

5. Employee Implications 5.1. There are no employee implications associated with this report.

6. Financial Implications 6.1. The projects discussed earlier in this report will be developed further and, where works or initiatives are to be taken forward, they will be prioritised through the Scottish Government Grant: Cycling, Walking and Safer Streets (£520,000), SPT funding (£580,000) for accident reduction measures on strategic routes/cycle facilities and South Lanarkshire Council’s Roads Investment Plan (£500,000) for improved infrastructure.

7. Other Implications 7.1. There are no significant risks associated with this report, nor any environmental implications.

7.2. There are no implications for sustainability in terms of the information contained within this report.

8.2. There was no requirement to undertake any consultation in terms of the information contained within this report.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

22 February 2019

Previous References Road Safety Forum Paper 20mph Speed Limits 28 October 2015

List of Background Papers None.

Appendix 1 – Rural Sections for Investigation (A and B Class Roads)

Route Point Start Point End Fatal Serious Slight Total Traffic (vpd) Flow Rate Acc Route vkm) m (acc/100 Rate Acc National vkm) m (acc/100 as Rate Route %age Rate of National A70 Glespin Douglas 0 3 1 4 2429 45.57 12.02 379.14 A70 Carnwath Council 0 3 7 10 1888 43.19 12.02 359.30 Boundary B7011 A71 Mauldslie 0 0 5 5 9191 62.10 18.44 336.78 Brownle Horsely Road e Road Brae B7012 A726 EK High 0 1 2 3 4776 57.36 18.44 311.09 Expressway Blantyre B759 A749 East Council 0 2 3 5 4552 34.59 12.02 287.77 Cathkin Kilbride Boundary Road Road B7086 Strathaven Kirkmuirhil 1 1 5 7 1239 52.12 18.44 282.63 l B7078 M74 J10 M74 J11 0 2 5 7 1723 50.14 18.44 271.90 (Poneil) B7078 Kirkmuirhill M74 J10 0 2 5 7 6796 49.51 18.44 268.48 A73 A70 A72 1 2 6 9 4716 29.54 12.02 245.75 Hyndford Junction Bridge Symington A73 Braidwood Lanark 0 1 12 13 9252 26.19 12.02 217.87 A70 Glespin Council 0 1 1 2 1654 20.84 12.02 173.34 Boundary B7078 Canderside Blackwood 1 2 6 9 6752 25.90 18.44 140.45 A706 Harelaw Forth 0 1 5 6 5618 14.14 12.02 117.60 Roundabou t

Appendix 2 – Single Sites for Investigation

Location Road Class Up/ Built Built Non up Fatal Serious Slight Total SIMD Weight Weight Total Main St, 100m west of A BU 1 0 4 5 1.4 7 Greenlees Road, Cambuslang A724 Burnbank Road / A BU 0 0 5 5 1.3 6.5 Glasgow Road, Burnbank A723/A72 Low Patrick Street A BU 0 0 5 5 1.2 6 at Townhead Street, Hamilton Calderwood Road / U BU 0 1 3 4 1.4 5.6 Greystone Avenue, Rutherglen Hillhouse Road / Clarkwell U BU 0 0 4 4 1.4 5.6 Road, Hillhouse A724 Main Street at A BU 0 2 2 4 1.3 5.2 Clydeford Road, Cambuslang

B7078 at M74 J9 off ramp B NBU 0 2 3 5 1 5

B7071 Bothwell Road near B BU 0 0 5 5 1 5 Douglas Gardens, Bothwell Broompark Road / Main St U BU 0 0 3 3 1.4 4.2 Blantyre A749 Stonelaw Road, A BU 0 0 4 4 1 4 Rutherglen A73 at Station Road A NBU 0 1 3 4 1 4 Junction, Thankerton B7071 Main Street, B BU 0 0 3 3 1 3 Uddingston near Lower Millgate A73 Lanark Road near A NBU 0 0 3 3 1 3 March Bridge, Lanark A70 North of Dryburn Bridge, A NBU 0 1 2 3 1 3 Tarbrax Newhousemill Road at U NBU 0 1 2 3 1 3 Bridge, East Kilbride

Appendix 3 – Potential Car Free Zone Schools

1. Burnside Primary School - Glenlui Avenue, Rutherglen 2. Glengowan Primary School – Summerlee Road, Larkhall 3. St Antony’s/ Loch Primary Schools, Rutherglen 4. Kirkland Park Primary School – Kirkland Park Avenue, Strathaven 5. Neilsland / St Peters Primary Schools – Highstonehall Road 6. St Joseph’s Primary School – Park Lane Blantyre 7. St John the Baptist Primary School – North British Road, Uddingston 8. Strathaven Academy – Bowling Green Road, Strathaven

Agenda Item

8 Report

Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Pass Plus

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  provide the Forum with an update on the subsidised Pass Plus Scheme within South Lanarkshire [1purpose] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [recs] (1) that the contents of the report are noted. [1recs] 3. Background 3.1. In order to provide newly qualified drivers with the necessary skills and knowledge to cope with varying road conditions, South Lanarkshire Council launched the Pass Plus subsidised scheme on 26 July 2007.

3.2. The Pass Plus road safety initiative aims to assist newly qualified drivers to gain valuable driving experience, which builds on the existing skills and knowledge gained during training for their Learner Driver Test. The topics covered in this project are driving in town, all weather driving, driving out of town, night driving, driving on dual carriageways and driving on motorways.

3.3. Following the Road Safety Forum Meeting on 27 February 2018 it was agreed that officers would review the level of subsidy on offer. A revised subsidy of £100 was thereafter ratified at the Community and Enterprise Resources Committee meeting on 21 August 2018.

3.4. The current subsidy towards the total cost of Pass Plus training aims to encourage more newly qualified drivers to participate in this initiative.

3.5. The uptake of Pass Plus has reduced in recent years as illustrated below:-

Participants in Pass Plus Scheme Y 2007/ 2008/ 2009/ 2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2013/ 2014/ 2015/ 2016/ 2017/ e 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 a r 175 271 182 265 196 156 146 150 105 74 59

3.6. While cost alone was not the reason for the reduced uptake, the increase in the subsidy from £75 to £100 was deemed a positive action to take and this became effective on 21 August 2018.

3.7. A lower number of applications was observed in 2018, however, a period of successful Pass Plus promotional activity across the Council’s Facebook and Twitter account has generated a sustained increase in applications in 2019. To date, there have been 79 people signed up to this scheme with approximately 60 expected to complete by the end of the financial year. Given this increase towards the end of 2018/2019, a greater uptake of this scheme during the next financial year is expected.

4. Evaluation 4.1. An evaluation of the project has been completed for the previous financial year. The main findings for 2017/2018 are:-

• 86% of participants reported that the main reason they took part in the Pass Plus scheme was to improve their driving

• 36% stated that they participated in order to gain cheaper insurance

• 25% expressed the view that their participation was mainly due to parental influence

• 78% of Pass Plus participants reported that the scheme had a major impact on their technical ability to drive

• 83% reported that it had significantly improved the safety of their driving

• 76% stated that Pass Plus had resulted in major improvements in their attitude and behaviour in a positive way

• experience of motorway accompanied by an instructor driving was one of the main cited benefits of the Pass Plus scheme

5. Casualties 5.1. Casualties involving young drivers have also been studied and are listed in the following table:-

Year Injury accidents Casualties Total casualties Young driver where driver of where driver of in SLC casualties as car/van in 17 to car/van in 17 to (Reported Road percentage of 25 age group was 25 age group Casualties all casualties vehicle 1 was vehicle 1 Scotland) 2006 197 271 958 28.3 2007 194 274 946 29.0 2008 155 206 869 23.7 2009 138 196 760 25.8 2010 110 147 705 20.8 2011 105 154 671 22.9 2012 95 137 640 21.4 2013 95 138 621 22.2 2014 96 127 658 19.3 2015 85 118 599 19.7 2016 108 127 601 21.1 2017 78 118 534 22.1 2018 49 73 488 * 15.0 *provisional figure

5.2. The number of overall casualties in South Lanarkshire continues to show a downward trend over recent years. This has been replicated with a general downward trend in young driver casualties as a percentage of all casualties. Reported Road Casualties Scotland 2018 will be published in October 2019, however, 2018 has shown a significant decrease based on provisional figures.

6. Employee Implications 6.1. There are no employee implications associated with this report.

7 Financial Implications 7.1. Funding for this financial year 2018/19 Pass Plus Scheme will be met by the Community Safety Partnership who have allocated £7,000.

8. Other Implications 8.1. There are no significant risks associated with this report, nor any environmental implications.

8.2. There are no implications for sustainability in terms of the information contained within this report.

9.2. Consultation on the effectiveness of the initiative was completed by participants and results are available from the Traffic and Transportation Section.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

7 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives • Make communities safer, stronger and sustainable • Protect vulnerable children, young people and adults • Improve achievement, raise educational attainment and support lifelong learning • Focused on people and their needs

Previous References Report to Community and Enterprise Resources Committee 21 August 2018 Report to Road Safety Forum 15 May 2018

List of Background Papers None.

Contact for Further Information If you would like inspect any of the background papers or want any further information, please contact: - Colin Smith, Roads and Transportation Services

Ext: 3617 (Tel: 01698 453617) E-mail: [email protected]

Agenda Item

9 Report

Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: Kerbcraft Road Safety Training Initiative

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of this report is to:-

• advise the Forum of the progress of the Kerbcraft Road Safety Training Initiative within South Lanarkshire

2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):-

(1) that the contents of the report are noted.

3. Background 3.1. The Kerbcraft Road Safety Training Initiative is an on-road pedestrian training scheme which was introduced to South Lanarkshire in 2004. It was initiated by the Scottish Government and backed by the Department for Transport to target areas of deprivation where children were found to be more at risk of being injured in a road traffic collision.

3.2. The Kerbcraft model necessitates collaboration with families and the local school community in order to provide effective road safety education.

3.3. Creative and critical thinking is essential in order to solve problems at the roadside, particularly during “safer places” training.

3.4. Communication between children and with an adult volunteer is an integral part of the roadside training. Children are also encouraged to relay their experiences back in the classroom and with their parents at home.

3.5. Each part of the Kerbcraft model provides children with a problem to solve through the creation of starting positions and roadside destinations.

3.6. Throughout the Kerbcraft training, children are encouraged to comment on the suggestion of others. The use of open questions are part of the safer places programme and helps to facilitate constructive comments by the children.

3.7. The Kerbcraft initiative was initially funded by the Scottish Government for three years between 2004 and 2007. Schools situated in the Hamilton and Blantyre Social Inclusion Partnership (SIP) area were chosen as part of the bid for funding to the Scottish Government and these schools are still currently involved in the project.

3.8. Due to the benefits of the initiative South Lanarkshire Council have continued to provide the Kerbcraft Pedestrian Training Initiative and the initial thirteen schools take part every year.

3.9. The training is completed on a rolling programme co-ordinated by the School Travel Plan Co-ordinator. The schools which completed the Kerbcraft training between January and Summer 2018 are as follows:-

School Number of pupils and stage Number of volunteers

Auchinraith Primary School 50 Primary 2 pupils 3 volunteers, class teachers and school support staff.

Beckford Primary School 25 Primary 1 pupils 6 parents, 2 teachers, 1 school support staff and Home School Partnership Worker.

Glenlee Primary School 45 Primary 2 pupils 3 volunteers.

Hamilton School for the Deaf 3 pupils from younger class Class teacher.

St. Blane’s Primary School 37 Primary 1 pupils 2 volunteers and 1 school support staff member.

St. John’s Primary School, 28 Primary 2 pupils 1 volunteer and 1 school support Hamilton staff member.

Udston Primary School 66 Primary 2 pupils 4 volunteers.

3.10. The following schools participated between August and December 2018:-

School Number of pupils and stage Number of volunteers

High Blantyre Primary School 35 Primary 2 pupils 3 volunteers and School staff members.

St. Cuthbert’s Primary School 30 Primary 2 pupils 4 volunteers.

St. Joseph’s Primary School 38 Primary 2 pupils 2 volunteers.

St. Ninian’s Primary School 33 Primary 2 pupils 1 volunteer.

St. Paul’s Primary School 18 Primary 1 pupils 1 volunteer and 1 school support staff member.

Townhill Primary School 50 Primary 2 pupils 4 volunteers plus 2 school support staff member.

3.11 The following schools commenced further training in January 2019 and will continue to Summer 2019:- Glenlee, Hamilton School for the Deaf, Auchinraith, St. John’s, Hamilton, Beckford, St. Blane’s and Udston Primary School. 3.12 We have considered the effects of the change from Social Inclusion Partnership Areas (SIPs) to the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMDs) which has identified the most deprived areas in South Lanarkshire. In addition, consideration has also been given to Local Outcome Improvement Plan areas (LOIPs), the priorities identified in the Area Wide Accident Action Plan and reported road traffic accidents involving primary aged pupils to ascertain any new areas of focus or change for this initiative.

3.13 It was concluded that current schools will continue to receive the intervention, however, this will continue to be reviewed with schools added or removed where changing priorities are identified. This will predominantly be informed by levels of deprivation and instances of reported road traffic accidents involving primary aged children.

3.14 For the School Travel Plan Co-ordinator to incorporate and establish new schools, it is proposed that the scheme becomes predominantly school led following the training of parents/teachers at the school by officers from the Traffic and Transportation Section. A rebrand of the scheme will be required. A member of staff at the school will be identified as the co-ordinator for the training sessions within the school and be the main contact for the helpers.

3.15 A number of proposals will be initiated and these are outlined below:-

• reduce the number of weeks training to six weeks (this is currently twelve weeks) • provide initial training to participants and identify a nominated lead person at the school to keep in contact with • offer schools initial assistance and ongoing support/visit(s) • provide regular communication with school with regards to progress • provide school specific training on site before children start participating 3.16 This condensed programme will be incorporated across existing schools on a phased basis. This may be subject to change, pending trial of the detailed amendments and as dictated by individual school circumstances. 3.17 In addition to the 13 schools presently participating, neighbouring Cairns and St. Cadoc’s Primary Schools have been identified for the trial introduction of pedestrian training. Both schools have a large proportion of pupils residing within the most deprived data zones and two reported injury accidents involving primary pupils have occurred within the most recent three year period within close proximity of these establishments.

3.18 Cairns Primary School and St. Cadoc’s Primary School will be contacted and invited to participate in the revised 6-week training scheme from August 2019. The School Travel Plan Co-ordinator will work with these schools to establish the scheme and provide support as required. This will be reviewed after 12 months of training delivery.

4. Employee Implications 4.1. The Kerbcraft Pedestrian Training programme is co-ordinated by the School Travel Plan Co-ordinator. The programme presently accounts for 60% of the officer’s working time.

5. Financial Implications 5.1. Promotional items for pupils and volunteers were funded by Road Safety Scotland during 2017/18 and 2018/19. 6. Other Implications 6.1. Risk assessment of the routes used are undertaken by the School Travel Plan Co- ordinator prior to training commencing. A dynamic risk assessment is carried out at every training session. 6.2. There are no implications for sustainability in terms of the information contained within this report. 7. Equality Impact Assessment and Consultation Arrangements 7.1. This report does not introduce a new policy, function or strategy or recommend a change to an existing policy, function or strategy and, therefore, no impact assessment is required. 7.2. Consultation with Head Teachers, volunteers, parents and pupils to ascertain the effectiveness of training received is completed at the end of training. Appendix 1, attached to this report details a breakdown of the questions. Previous feedback from the consultation has produced the following results from August 2017 to Summer 2018:- • all parents who responded rated the Kerbcraft Pedestrian Training Scheme to be worthwhile for their child to participate in, with 66% indicating the initiative either worthwhile/very worthwhile • 90% of participating children enjoyed their Kerbcraft training • all participating schools stated that the children gained valuable road safety knowledge • 100% of volunteers who responded thought that the Kerbcraft Pedestrian Training Scheme was a worthwhile initiative to participate in

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

11 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives • Make communities safer, stronger and sustainable • Protect vulnerable children, young people and adults • Support our communities by tackling disadvantage and deprivation and supporting aspiration • Get it right for children and young people • Focused on people and their needs

Previous References Road Safety Forum 15 May 2018

List of Background Papers None.

Contact for Further Information If you would like to inspect and of the background papers or want any further information, please contact: Colin Smith, Engineering Officer, Roads and Transportation Services Ext: 3757 (Tel: 01698 453757) E-mail: [email protected]

Appendix 1 – Kerbcraft Consultation with parents, children, schools and volunteers. 1. Parents Questionnaire Question - Do you feel the Kerbcraft Scheme has been a worthwhile initiative for your child to participate in? Number of 107 respondents Very Worthwhile 71 66% Yes 30 28% Very Worth While and 2 2% Yes No reply 4 4%

2. Children’s Questionnaire Question – I enjoyed my Kerbcraft Training – Yes or No. Number of 223 respondents Yes 201 90% No 18 8% Yes and No 4 2%

3. School Questionnaire – all returned forms stated that the children gained valuable road safety knowledge.

4. Volunteer Questionnaire Question – Do you feel the Kerbcraft Scheme has been a worthwhile initiative for you to participate in? Number of 35 respondents Very Worthwhile 23 66% Yes 12 34%

54 Agenda Item

10 Report

Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Teri Flynn, Local Authority Liaison Officer Police Scotland

Subject: Police Scotland - Lanarkshire Division Road Safety Update

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  update the Roads Safety Forum on forthcoming campaigns  discuss ongoing national and local campaigns [1purpose] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Roads Safety Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [r (1) that the information set out in this report in relation road safety campaigns be noted; and (2) that the verbal update regarding these road safety campaigns be noted. [ 3. Background 3.1. In terms of the remit of the South Lanarkshire Roads Safety Forum, it has been agreed that Police Scotland will provide routine updates on national and local issues and campaigns relating to keeping people living and working in South Lanarkshire safer on our roads.

4. Festive Drink/Drug Driving campaign 4.1. The campaign, which runs every year, found 565 drink/drug drivers across Scotland over the 2018/2019 period. This is very similar to the detections last year, which saw 567 drivers arrested. The ratio for detections was 1 in 15 in comparison to 1 in 28 last year. This year, 23 people were found over the limit between 0600-1000 hours compared to 39 last year.

5. National issues 5.1 A verbal update will be provided on the following National and Local campaigns:-

• 11 to 17 February 2019 - Speed, Seat-Belt, Mobile Phone Campaign • 4 to 10 March 2019 – Vulnerable Road Users – Cyclists and Pedestrians • 29 March 2019 – Motorcycle Safety Campaign (Launch) • 29 to 30 March 2019 – Motorcycle Weekend Of Action 1

5.2 These campaigns will involve engagement and proportionate enforcement. Social media will be used to launch events and provide information to the public.

5.3 Lanarkshire Division are committed to ensuring the road network is safe along with partners and the Road Safety Governance Board has oversight of reviewing all road crashes and offending to provide a proportionate response to any concerns, trends or patterns identified.

6. New Driver Early Intervention Scheme 6.1 The banners/leaflets have been produced and will be distributed to various public areas throughout South Lanarkshire to publicise the scheme. The banners can be used when presentations are being carried out. To date, 742 people have attended the input throughout Lanarkshire. Work is still ongoing to identify businesses who have new drivers as staff members.

7. Employee Implications 7.1 There are no employee implications.

8. Financial Implications 8.1 There are no financial implications.

9. Other Implications 9.1 There are no implications for sustainability or risk in terms of the information contained within this report.

10. Equality Impact Assessment and Consultation Arrangements 10.1 This report does not introduce a new policy, function or strategy or recommend a change to an existing policy, function or strategy, therefore, no impact assessment is required.

10.2 There was not requirement to undertake any consultation in terms of the information contained in this report.

Teri Flynn Local Authority Liaison Officer Police Scotland

18 February 2019

Contact for Further Information If you would like any further information, please contact:-

Teri Flynn Sergeant - Police Scotland Police Liaison Officer South Lanarkshire Council

Tel 01698 483008 - Police Tel 01698 452257 - SLC Mob 07979 707820 E-mail [email protected] SLC E-mail [email protected]

Agenda Item

11 Report

Report to: Roads Safety Forum Date of Meeting: 12 March 2019 Report by: Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

Subject: School Crossing Patrol Assessments

1. Purpose of Report 1.1. The purpose of the report is to:- [purpose]  consider requests for school crossing patrols at locations within South Lanarkshire [1purpose] 2. Recommendation(s) 2.1. The Forum is asked to approve the following recommendation(s):- [recs] (1) that requests for a school crossing patrol at the following locations be refused:- • Bosworth Road, East Kilbride (6% of value required) • Crosshouse Road, East Kilbride (32% of value required) • New Road, Cambuslang (90% of value required) • Overton Road, Cambuslang (48% of value required) • Woodland Crescent, Cambuslang (85% of value required) • Glenafeoch Road, Carluke (15% and 5% of value required) • Eastfield Road, Carluke (81% of value required) [1recs] 3. Background 3.1. Assessments of the above locations are shown on the attached summary sheets. These also detail whether any previous investigations have been undertaken. The summary sheets observe that the sites do not meet the current criteria for the provision of school crossing patroller.

3.2. It is noted that a number of these sites meet a significant proportion of the criteria. In relation to these locations, we would comment as follows:-

• New Road, Cambuslang Previous assessments have been undertaken which also failed to meet criteria. These show an increasing number of pupils crossing which is in line with the growing school roll at Park View Primary School. As the school is now closer to capacity and travel patterns within the vicinity are no longer affected by the decant of Hallside Primary School, a commitment has been made to undertake a further assessment during the Spring/Summer term 2019

• Woodland Crescent, Cambuslang Previous assessments at this location have shown similar results. This area has been subject to road safety investigations and improvements have been made within this locus. Assistance will be offered to Cairns and St Cadoc’s Primary Schools towards the development of a School Travel Plan and the provision of road safety education.

• Eastfield Road, Carluke This assessment remains similar to previous investigations. Some minor improvement works are scheduled for the new financial year which includes additional school keep clear markings and the relocation of signage.

3.3. Assessment results are based on information recorded during surveys at school journey times. A measure of pedestrian demand (P) and vehicle flow (V) over the busiest ten minutes is identified from this information.

3.4. The pedestrian demand (P) is assessed by recording the number of children crossing the road, either with or without an adult, within 50 metres of the proposed crossing site. The vehicle flow (V) consists of all vehicles passing along the road within the predetermined area. These factors are then combined in the formula PV2 and compared against predetermined threshold values.

3.5. For sites pertaining to primary school pupils, where the PV2 is greater than 148,000 (threshold value), a patroller is clearly justified. Where the PV2 assessment does not prove conclusive and falls between 74,000 (50%) and 148,000, other environmental factors will be considered and used to revise the original PV2 value. This provides a weighted and more accurate assessment of potential risk at a site based upon traffic volume, pedestrian demand and the local environment.

3.6. For sites pertaining to secondary school pupils, where the PV2 is greater than 148,000 (threshold value), the location will be subject to a further risk assessment to determine whether a patroller is justified or not. The risk assessment will make the recommendation of whether the request for a patroller is justified or refused based on particular road risks. Where the PV2 assessment does not meet the threshold value, the location will not be considered to merit further investigation and the request will be refused. Generally, however, patrollers will not be provided for secondary school pupils.

3.7. The criteria are based upon national best practice and were developed by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) and the Local Authority Road Safety Officers’ Association (LARSOA), now Road Safety GB. The criteria were amended by the Road Safety Forum in 1998 to make it less onerous to justify a patroller. They were further amended in 2011 to prevent the introduction of patrollers at traffic signals with a pedestrian phase or at light controlled pedestrian crossings and in 2015 when revised criteria was introduced for locations predominantly serving secondary school pupils.

3.8. The assessments for each of the sites are detailed at the end of this report and it should be noted that none of them reach the required 100% justification value.

3.9. Schools continue to be offered support and resources to develop and implement their individual School Travel Plan and to provide road safety education.

4. Employee Implications 4.1. There are no employee implications associated with this report.

5. Financial Implications 5.1. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

6. Other Implications 6.1. Relevant risk and sustainable development issued pertaining to assessing school crossing patrols have been considered and assessed.

6.2. There are no significant risks as assessments are carried out using criteria based upon national practice.

7.2. There was no requirement to undertake any consultation in terms of the information contained within this report.

Michael McGlynn Executive Director (Community and Enterprise Resources)

7 February 2019

Link(s) to Council Values/Ambitions/Objectives • Make communities safer, stronger and sustainable • Improve the road network, influence improvements in public transport and encourage active travel

Previous References • Report to the Roads Safety Forum 15 May 2018

List of Background Papers • None.

Contact for Further Information If you would like to inspect the background papers or want further information, please contact: - Colin Smith, Engineering Officer Ext: 3757 (Tel: 01698 453757) E-mail: [email protected]

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Bosworth Road, East Kilbride

School(s) served Long Calderwood Primary

Survey undertaken on 1.11.18 (PM)/ 23.11/18 (AM)

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 17 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 23

PV ² 8,993

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 6% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction

Parking Problem

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 10: East Kilbride East

Requested By: Councillor

Previously Assessed: No

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Crosshouse Road, East Kilbride

School(s) served Crosshouse/ St. Vincent’s Primary

Survey undertaken on 11/9.18 (PM)/ 13.9.18 (AM)

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 4 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 108

PV ² 46,656

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 32% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction

Parking Problem

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 6: East Kilbride South

Requested By: MP

Previously Assessed: No

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location New Road, Cambuslang

School(s) served Park View/ Hallside Primary

Survey undertaken on 13.9.18 (PM)/ 1.10.18 (AM)

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 26 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 65

PV ² 109,850

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 74% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction Yes

Parking Problem Yes

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for 90% (132,919) recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 14: Cambuslang East

Requested By: Park View Parent Partnership

Previously Assessed: Yes (49% - 2017), (32% - 2014)

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Overton Road, Cambuslang

School(s) served Park View/ Hallside Primary

Survey undertaken on 2.10.18 (PM)/ 3.10.18 (AM)

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 35 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 45

PV ² 70,875

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 48% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction

Parking Problem

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 14: Cambuslang East

Requested By: Park View Parent Partnership

Previously Assessed: Yes (8% - 2014)

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Woodland Crescent, Cambuslang

School(s) served Cairns/ St. Cadoc’s Primary

Survey undertaken on 8.10.18(PM)/ 28.9.18 (AM)/ 17.9.18 (PM)

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 32 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 57

PV ² 103,968

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 70% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction Yes

Parking Problem Yes

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for 85% (125,801) recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 14: Cambuslang East

Requested By: Public

Previously Assessed: Yes (87% - 2016), (58% - 2013)

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Glenafeoch Road (southbound), Carluke

School(s) served Crawforddyke Primary

Survey undertaken on 4.5.18 AM / 16.5.18 PM

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 35 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 25

PV ² 21,875

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 15% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction

Parking Problem

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 1: Clydesdale West

Requested By: School

Previously Assessed: No

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Glenafeoch Road (northbound), Carluke

School(s) served Crawforddyke Primary

Survey undertaken on 4.5.18 AM / 16.5.18 PM

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 35 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 14

PV ² 6,860

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 5% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds

Visibility

Excessive Street Furniture

Closeness to Junction

Parking Problem

Concentration of Accidents

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 1: Clydesdale West

Requested By: School

Previously Assessed: No

School Crossing Patrol Assessment Sheet

Primary Pupils

Proposed location Eastfield Road, Carluke

School(s) served Crawforddyke Primary

Survey undertaken on 26.4.18 AM / 27.4.18 PM

Survey Results

Number of primary school children (P) crossing during busiest 34 ten minute period. Number of vehicles (V) during busiest ten minute period. 54

PV ² 99,144

PV ² as a proportion of the value required for recommending a 67% patroller (value required is 148,000).

If proportion is 100% or greater then Patrol recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

If percentage is between 50% and 100% then consider other factors detailed below.

Environmental Factor Relevant- Yes/No

Vehicle Speeds No

Visibility No

Excessive Street Furniture No

Closeness to Junction Yes

Parking Problem Yes

Concentration of Accidents No

Recalculated PV ² as a proportion of the value required for 81% recommending a patroller.

If proportion remains under 100% then Patrol is not recommended.

Is Patrol recommended No

Ward: 1: Clydesdale West

Requested By: School

Previously Assessed: Yes (82% - 2011)