A68 PATHHEAD VILLAGE – STREET IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

3 March 2016

4G TERM CONTRACT FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SCOTTISH TRUNK ROAD NETWORK – SOUTH EAST UNIT

A68 PATHHEAD VILLAGE – STREET IMPROVEMENT SCHEME

.Pathhead Consultation.jpg

BACKGROUND

Amey is contracted by Transport Scotland to maintain and improve the motorways and trunk roads in South East Scotland and as such we are responsible for the design and delivery of major road maintenance work, as well as inspections to ensure routes in the South East remain safe and well maintained.

Transport Scotland requested Amey prepare a draft proposal to deliver street improvements on the A68 through Pathhead village.

Community Engagement Events

As a first step in this process, three initial Community Engagement Events were held. These were at the following locations/dates:

 Tuesday 27th October - Callendar Pavillion, Pathhead 4pm – 8pm

 Thursday 29th October - Callendar Pavillion, Pathhead 4pm – 8pm

 Wednesday 4th November - Tynewater Primary School, Pathhead 5pm – 7.30pm

The focus of these events was to provide suggestions for viable improvements to parking, landscaping and road safety at this location.

At each consultation a series of possible designs, plans and suggestions for other potential schemes that could be undertaken on the A68 Pathhead main street were on display. Members of the local community were invited to attend and provide their feedback.

Members of staff from Amey attended each event to answer any questions and gather additional feedback.

Attendance: Approx 250* people in total attended all three events.

 *Some members of the local community attended more than one of the events.

Feedback Summary

Feedback is based on questionnaires returned at the Community Engagement Events; correspondences received by Amey pre & post the events and comments from conversations between Amey staff and the local community at the events.

 

Parking Provision

Possible new parking bays were displayed at these events, and were based on what was viable within the existing provisions of the 4G SE Trunk Roads contract.

o    Feedback from the local community was that none of the locations proposed were suitable for new parking bays. There were concerns over the possible loss of existing parking provision, and that new spaces would still not provide adequate parking for local residents.

  •          Action: No further action will be progressed on any of the proposed schemes. Further conversations will take place with the local community and Midlothian Council to identify any other ways to alleviate the problem of safe and adequate parking provision in the village.

Relocation of bus stop

One proposal suggested a relocation of the bus stop opposite the Village Hall, to create additional parking bays at the north of the village.

o    There seemed to be no desire amongst the local community for the relocation of this bus stop, with some concerns that there will be a detrimental impact on access to and from the Village Hall.

  •          Action: There are no plans to take this proposal any further.

Relocation of controlled Pedestrian Crossing

A suggestion was made in the street improvement proposals for the relocation of the existing controlled crossing from the centre of the village to the north end.

o    Local majority of local residents were opposed to the relocation of these traffic lights, but there were requests for a second controlled crossing to be provided. However, there appears to be no consensus from the local community on where a second set of controlled signals would be located. Furthermore, based on the most recent, traffic and incident surveys (2013 onwards) there is little justification, under current requirements, for an additional crossing in the village.

  •          Action: There are no plans to take this proposal any further. Further consultation is to be held with the local community and other stakeholders to determine the need for a second crossing and to arrive at a consensus on its possible location.

Landscaping

Proposals were submitted of improvements that could be made to existing landscaping assets on the A68 Pathhead village route.

o    The local community expressed concerns over additional maintenance requirements arising from any landscaping work, and also concern that any existing landscaping assets might be removed.

  •          Action: Transport Scotland has requested Amey prepared a proposal on how to improve the existing landscaping assets on A68 Pathhead village, and wherever possible look at ways to engage with the local community in relation to the maintenance and improvement of landscaping assets.

 

Future Community Engagement Events

Based on the response to the initial consultation events, Amey has indicated there will be further opportunities for consultation with the local community. These will take on-board feedback from the local community on how to improve access for all members of the community, and improvements to the format and publicity for similar events in the future.

Conclusion

With the exception of some additional work to improve and maintain the existing landscaping assets on A68 Pathhead (i.e. cutting back overgrown trees/shrubs), none of the other suggested plans or designs presented at the Community Engagement Events will be progressed further.

Amey will undertake further consultation with local community groups and other stakeholders to develop a consensus approach to street improvements for A68 Pathhead.

Communications for any future Community Engagement Events will be reviewed and improved based on the feedback received.