Consultation Digest Issue 30, 19 March 2019: Get your views in now to the SPT regional survey and the Get Glasgow Moving petition, and is transformation possible?

In this issue we have two chances to input on public transport. The first is closing tomorrow, for the SPT, which is very active and public transport oriented, and the second is a Get Glasgow Moving petition. A strong voice on the Get Glasgow Moving input could influence official thinking on both the SPT and transformational frameworks such as that for the Glasgow Broomielaw featured below. Plus a late entry - a survey on a possible bike hire scheme in Motherwell! However, 2 further late entries to this Digest throw a cloud on the long-promised Sauchiehall Street avenue concept.

Contents

Section 1: Current Consultations

1. Battlefield Street Design - Public Consultation Event NOW, until 8pm today, Tuesday 19 March and on-line until 12 April
2. Strathclyde Passenger Transport (SPT) Regional Transport Strategy - Public Survey, closes TOMORROW 20 MARCH
3. **NEW** Survey on bike hire scheme in Motherwell, closes 31 March
4. Glasgow Broomielaw District Regeneration Framework, closes 05 April
5. North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan, closes 05 April
6. **NEW** Glasgow Woodside Health Centre, Traffic Regulation Order, to prevent obstructive parking, closes 08 April
7. **NEW** East Dunbartonshire Council, Proposed Waiting Restrictions in Lenzie, closes 22 April
8. Get Glasgow Moving, on-line petition, open but needs your support

Section 2: Forthcoming Consultations

Section 3: Consultation Feedback

1. Glasgow, Heathcot Avenue Drumchapel, GCC response to our objection
2. Glasgow City Centre Congestion Improvement
3. Glasgow Sauchiehall Street, what happens at Charing Cross?
4. Glasgow Sauchiehall Street, Elmbank Street, astonishing response from GCC

Section 1: Current Consultations in date order for responses

1.1 Battlefield Street Design - Public Consultation Event NOW, until 8pm today, Tuesday 19 March and on-line until 12 April

If you haven't been to this event, you'd better get your fast bike out since it closes at 8pm today. If you missed it don't worry though - you are still able to put comments on-line until 12 April. Sustrans and Glasgow City Council are putting a lot of effort into working with the community to improve this area so do please respond.

1.2 Strathclyde Passenger Transport (SPT) Regional Transport Strategy - Public Survey, closes TOMORROW 20 MARCH

A touch more relaxed with this one but do complete this survey, if you want to press for more active travel and public travel provision in the SPT area.

1.3 **NEW** Survey on bike hire scheme in Motherwell, closes 31 March

Here's the survey, if it's not clear on the poster. It's only short so please complete it.

1.4   Glasgow Broomielaw District Regeneration Framework, closes 05 April

This looks incredibly promising, very active travel and public realm oriented, as we told you two weeks ago in Digest 29, Item 1.5 - let's hope it stays that way! GoBike is currently developing a response. Our current thinking is that while the document (see this link) is very long and very detailed, it has very little in it that ensures that the actions will be carried out. A massive amount of political will is required, as well as a gigantic amount of public and lobby group persuasion for it to happen.

Who wouldn't want Anderston Station to be in a pleasant environment? Who wouldn't want the riverside to be a pleasant place to stroll and sit in the sun, etc etc.

So it could be a good idea to complete the survey by choosing "Strongly Agree" with the proposals and "Strongly Disagree" that the content of the document can make them real. You might then use the boxes to say why you are concerned with traditional traffic modelling, how you don't think that the use of electric vehicles will reduce city centre congestion and so on. We also advise that you use "Strongly Agree" with the ideas and use a comment box to  point out how important it is to create conditions for cycling that will  get people out of their cars for short trips, whether or not the  ambitious ideas are successfully implemented.

Most of you who read these Digests have the cycling experience, the knowledge of political systems and local government (did I say "cynicism"?) and a sensible view of what is needed to get people out of their cars and onto their feet or their pedals to give this survey a good response! Please do so!

1.5 North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan, closes 05 April

We have mentioned this twice before, the latest in Digest 29, Item 1.6 and one of our members has now found some references to active travel in the documents! The Modified Proposed Plan is here,  the Local Development Plan is here and the four references are:

1. Document p16, pdf p9 Strategic Planning Context / Low carbon infra … (list)…connected transport networks including active travel …
2. Document p31, pdf p16 PROM:  promoting development locations and infra / Transport improvements / …Policies in this Plan seek to ensure that development improves access to ...… and increasing active travel through the creation and improvement of walking and cycling routes
3. Document p81, pdf p41 Policy C1  Contributions [from developers] to Infra / Contributions to Infra Policy Categories and Guidance / Category C13 Transport / Full details of any transport infra will be identified by the Council … Forms of Transport infra can (sic) include road and public transport as well as active travel such as walking and cycling.
4. Doc p152, pdf p77 Glossary / (‘Active travel’ not in glossary…) … inside the definition for ‘Compact City Model’ .. development geography seeks to … encourage active travel…

So that isn't very much and there's nothing  substantial that could be measured, so we will be writing to them over the next fortnight pointing out what we see as shortcomings. If you cycle or walk in North Lanarkshire please do respond.

1.6 **NEW** Glasgow Woodside Health Centre, Traffic Regulation Order, to prevent obstructive parking, closes 08 April

Here's the email we received from Glasgow City Council on 08 March:

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

Dear Sir / Madam

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (WOODSIDE HEALTH CENTRE), (TRAFFIC REGULATION) ORDER 201_

The Council propose to consider the introduction of the above named Traffic Regulation Order.
Please find enclosed a copy of the press notice of the proposed Order, relevant map, statement of reasons and report.
Details of the proposals will also be available on the Glasgow City Council website at www.glasgow.gov.uk/proposedtro.
As stated in the  attached documentation, any person wishing to object to the proposed  Order should send details of the ground for their objection in writing  to Andy Waddell, Director of Operations, Neighbourhoods  and Sustainability, Exchange House, 231 George Street, Glasgow, G1 1RX  or by email to land@glasgow.gov.uk by 8^th April 2019.

Yours faithfully (etc)"

Here are the documents referred to: the press advert (which uses the term "obstructive parking" which is a new term on us), the draft report, the plan of the area affected and the very brief statement of reasons.

This is one that GoBike will be supporting as it will improve the local environment. If you live, work or travel in this area please write in and add your support.

1.7 **NEW** East Dunbartonshire Council, Proposed Waiting Restrictions in Lenzie, closes 22 April

Here's the email we received from East Dunbartonshire Council on 15 March:

"Dear Sir,
PROPOSED WAITING RESTRICTIONS IN LENZIE

The  Council  is  promoting  the  undernoted  Traffic  Regulation Order. Attached  is a copy of the draft Order together with a copy of the plan indicating  the  locations of the restrictions and Statement of Reasons for  the  proposal.  Also  enclosed  is a copy of the Notice that is to appear in the Kirkintilloch Herald that is published on 19 March 2019. Should you wish to comment on the proposal you must do so in writing by Monday,  22 April 2019. Your comments should be sent to Chief Solicitor &   Monitoring Officer,     Executive  Officer,  Legal  Services,  12 Strathkelvin Place, Kirkintilloch, G66 1TJ. (See attached file: 190315 Lenzie Proposed Waiting Restrictions.pdf)
Yours faithfully

Fiona Stirling
Legal Services
East Dunbartonshire Council Headquarters
Southbank Marina
12 Strathkelvin Place
Kirkintilloch G66 1TJ

Here's the document referred to and this is one that GoBike will be supporting. Streets are for getting from place to place and not for the long-term storage of vehicles.

1.8  Get Glasgow Moving, online 38 degrees petition , open

We have featured this before - if you didn't support it then please add your name now. Here are the links to Get Glasgow Moving and to the petition. It's a no-brainer.

Section 2: Forthcoming Consultations

Nothing new this time. We have the Byres Road Design Workshop coming up this Thursday, which we had told you about last time, and we will report on in the next Digest. Apart from that we live in hope of seeing confirmed plans to build useful, high-quality cycle lanes.

Section 3: Consultation Feedback

3.1 Glasgow, Heathcot Avenue Drumchapel, GCC response to our objection

In our last Digest we published our letter of opposition to the proposals to make Heathcot Avenue one-way with no exemption for bikes and we have now received this risible email by way of reply

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

Dear Ms Fort,

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (HEATHCOT AVENUE),
TRAFFIC REGULATION) ORDER 201_

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above named Traffic Regulation Order.
I can advise that this Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) was requested by the local community and proposed as a road safety measure for current issues  being experienced.
I can further advise that any vehicles parked on the grass verge opposite the flats will be subject to enforcement under the new proposed restrictions.
I understand your desire to make active travel a priority and the Council is currently investing in new cycle routes within Glasgow, however I am  unable to include two-way cycling on this road due to previous concerns raised from Police Scotland in regards to other proposals.
Having considered the above, should you wish to withdraw your objection I would be pleased if you would inform me by 27^th March 2019  by writing to Andy Waddell, Director of Operations, Neighbourhoods and Sustainability, Exchange House, 231 George Street, Glasgow, G1 1RX or e-mailing land@glasgow.gov.uk.
If you do not wish to withdraw your objection then there is no requirement for you to write to us again.
Your objection will be considered and included within the final report which will inform the decision.  Once  a decision has been taken in regards to these proposals I shall write to you again and advise of the outcome.

Yours sincerely"

This prompts the following questions:

• Why would Transport Scotland issue a design document, "Cycling by Design" when a major clause encouraging permeability to be maintained for cycling, ie Clause 5.1.5 is of such concern to Police Scotland?
• Why would Glasgow City Council use the same document for their cycling designs if Police Scotland object?
• Why is there such a varied amount of contraflow cycling in Glasgow from the no road markings, only street signs on Dalnair Street in Yorkhill, to Gordon Street with just a change of paving to Howard Street with only paint, if Police Scotland object?
• Why do members of Police Scotland say they don't object to contraflow cycling?
• Why has GoBike not been provided with evidence of objection to contraflow cycling by Glasgow City Council?
• Is there a consistent policy on cycling provision, including contraflow, within Glasgow City Council?

3.2 Glasgow City Centre Congestion Improvement

Here's a better response from Glasgow City Council; it's to our support for changes to on-street parking and other measures in the city centre, see our letter of 26 February.

We received this email on 19 March:

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

Dear Ms Fort

THE GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL, (CITY CENTRE) (TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT) ORDER 2010, (VARIATION NO 26) (CONGESTION IMPROVEMENT) ORDER 201_

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above named Traffic Regulation Order.
Your support will be considered and included within the final report which will inform the decision. Once a decision has been taken in regards to these proposals I shall write to you again and advise of the outcome.

Yours sincerely"

Nice to be appreciated sometimes!

3.3 Glasgow Sauchiehall Street, what happens at Charing Cross?

Despite item 3.4 below and the challenge to get there after a night at the King's Theatre, we are keen to see how the cycle lane on Sauchiehall Street is progressing. Slowly is the answer, so our eye was caught at Charing Cross by the pedestrian crossing arrangements, prompting this message from our Co-Convenor, (with thanks to Rachel for the words and Brenda for the photos) to Andy Waddell, Director of Neighbourhoods and Sustainability and his lead for the Sauchiehall Street works, Brian Hubbert:

"Dear Andy and Brian,
It has been good to see the recent progress on the cycle lane along Sauchiehall               Street, however we would like to highlight some concerns we have about the pedestrian crossing at Charing Cross. Currently the cycle lane stops abruptly on each               side of the pedestrian crossing, and it is unclear how you can cycle between the two parts of the cycle lane. Photo 1 shows the crossing.

The current design creates conflict between people travelling by bicycle and people               travelling on foot. As it is currently designed, people travelling on foot will be waiting in, essentially, the middle of the desire line for people travelling by bicycle. We’re               unclear if this is a mistake or if it was intentional. The original plans show the pedestrian crossing starting on the edge of a continuous cycle path. Here are the plans I’m referring to https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=43844&p=0,           and attached as ‘sheet 4 of 4’. I’ve also attached ‘sheet 2 of 4’, and that shows another crossing for people on foot, and which again clearly shows that people on foot are encouraged  to wait on the edge of the cycle lane, rather than in it (and this is the case for all the crossings on along Sauchiehall Street in the original plans). Are you planning to add cycle lights here at Charing Cross?

Photo 1b shows the space available on the pavement next to the cycle lane, which is               wide enough to allow cycle lane and pedestrian crossing which doesn’t cause            conflict for those travelling on foot and by bicycle.
On a side note photo 2 shows the tactile paving to mark the end of the cycle lane, and our understanding is that they have been laid the wrong way around, and thus are misleading for people who are visually impaired.

We are also interested to hear more about the side streets along Sauchiehall               Street and how you are planning to ensure priority for those travelling on foot or by bicycle.

I look forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes,  
Iona on behalf of GoBike"

3.4 Glasgow Sauchiehall Street, Elmbank Street, astonishing response from GCC

Readers may remember that John and Tricia attended a meeting of Blythswood & Broomielaw Community Council to raise concern about Elmbank Street becoming one-way southbound. Bailie Philip Braat raised our concern with the Neighbourhood and Sustainability group, and here is the astonishing reply that he received:

"From: LESMLU
Date: 18 March 2019 at 13:59:04 GMT
To: "Braat, Philip (Councillor)"
Subject:NS MLU 378670 FW: Cycling in Blythswood  & Broomielaw, Elmbank Street (OFFICIAL)

MESSAGE SENT ON  BEHALF OF CHRISTINE FRANCIS, TECHNICAL                   SERVICES MANAGER – NEIGHBOURHOODS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Dear Bailie Braat,

I   acknowledge receipt of your undernoted email, dated 1^st March and following receipt of correspondence from representatives of Go-Bike in relation to the alteration                 to traffic flow on Elmbank Street to one way southbound (which was implemented as part of the Sauchiehall Street Avenue project).  
I  can confirm that Go-Bike submitted an objection to the proposal and requested that a northbound contraflow cycle lane be incorporated into the works and provided                 examples of locations where this measure had been implemented. Each of the specified locations were assessed with a view to including a contraflow cycle lane at this location, however it was not possible to incorporate the measure at Elmbank Street on safety grounds and a response providing an explanation of the reasoning for non-inclusion was issued to Go-Bike.  
I accept that the situation on Elmbank Street is not ideal for cyclists, however facilities along the full length of Sauchiehall Street from Charing Cross to Rose Street for sustainable travel including pedestrians, cyclists and public transport have been improved through the reduction in the number of parking bays, construction of                 a cycle lane the full length of Sauchiehall Street from Charing Cross to Rose Street, provision of new bus  infrastructure and the reduction in the number of  traffic lanes. On completion of the works access to Sauchiehall Street will be possible via Holland Street and Douglas Street and also on the footways of Elmbank Street .
Prior to the works being implemented, Elmbank Street comprised 4 number lanes, two vehicle running lanes and two lanes for parking/loading and two narrow footways with no cycling infrastructure. The facilities for cyclists on Elmbank Street, on completion of the works, have neither improved nor been removed however facilities within the                 Charing Cross/Sauchiehall Street area in general have improved significantly which was one of the primary objectives of the works.
I trust the above is of use however should you require to discuss the matter further please do not hesitate to contact Mr Stephen McDonagh.

Christine  Francis
Technical  Services Manager, Neighbourhoods & Sustainability"

How ludicrous; if it wasn't such a knock back for active travel, it would be funny. GCC accept that Elmbank Street is not a good location for cycling, but hey, the nirvana of Sauchiehall Street is just out of reach beyond it. How do we get there? We can use the footways on Elmbank Street, even though they are narrow! So now, because of their stubbornness on this issue (our objection was submitted over 2 years ago), they  advocate footway cycling! And one could go on.
We have good infrastructure in the selected parts of the city but Heathcot Avenue, Elmbank Street and many, many more locations are discarded.

Let's hope they eventually see sense and we get some consistent, good practice in place. It might not happen in time for our next Digest on 09 April, but perhaps sometime?