Kenneth Simpson, of Yarrow Crescent in Bishopton, made representations to the council in August after new parking restrictions were proposed for Renfrewshire. The proposals, part of a nationwide effort to clamp down on off-road parking, specified which roads would be made exempt from the pavement parking ban.
While Yarrow Crescent and the four neighbouring roads which make up Bishopton’s Craighead estate were made exempt on one side, Kenneth argued that these narrow streets would be impossible to navigate without pavement parking being allowed on both sides.
Following Kenneth’s protestations, representatives from the council’s roads department conducted a site visit to Yarrow Crescent on September 6, with a number of local residents and Councillor James MacLaren also in attendance.
The council representatives were persuaded by Kenneth’s case, and agreed that the roads of the Craighead estate should be made exempt on both sides. It was also agreed that Kenneth could inform residents of this outcome by means of a letter drop to all those affected, which he subsequently did.
A Renfrewshire Council spokesperson said at the time: “These streets represent a special case and we have agreed to make changes which will exempt this and neighbouring similar roads from the pavement parking ban.
“The proposed traffic order will be put to councillors at the Infrastructure, Land and Environment (ILE) policy board in November and is subject to its agreement.”
However, the ILE policy board meeting took place on November 6 with no mention of the agreement regarding the Craighead roads.
Kenneth says that there has been no transparency or explanation from the council as to why.
“As far as everybody who attended the site visit was concerned, there was no further discussion required – the exemption had been agreed, and would be put forward at the next ILE board meeting.
“What is the delay? What’s preventing them from bringing this forward as they said they would? They’ve had two months.
“There’s been no explanation from the council as to why this issue wasn’t on the agenda at the meeting. They’re not being transparent about what the delay is.”
Kenneth is also annoyed that there was no communication from the council in advance of the meeting.
“It’s only because I looked at the agenda for the meeting, and attended it, that I’m up to speed. If I’d just taken what the council said in September at face value, I’d think it had gone through yesterday.
“There was quite a lot of press and publicity about it at the time, so people in the estate are all under the impression that it went through at the meeting. But it wasn’t even discussed.
“I don’t see why they couldn’t have at least mentioned it, then we would at least have some reassurance. Just some acknowledgement would be good.”
Councillor MacLaren, who sits on the ILE policy board, said it was disappointing that the issue was not raised at the recent meeting.
“It is a little disappointing that we are not looking at the response from Bishopton residents about pavement parking at this board,” he said at the meeting. “It is an issue that there is a lot of strong feeling about.”
Speaking to the Glasgow Times, the councillor said Kenneth was right to be angered by the situation.
“Certainly people are expecting this exemption to start in November, given the press and publicity that it’s had,” he said. “Now, it’s going to be postponed until 2025.
“People are on tenterhooks. They’re not sure if the exemptions are going to be approved or rejected.
“So Kenneth is right to be upset. People are expecting this to have been resolved, and it’s not. It’s dragging on.”
A Renfrewshire Council spokesperson confirmed: “The requested locations for an exemption to the pavement parking ban in Yarrow Crescent and surrounding streets have been accepted.
“They are included in the proposed traffic order which will be put to councillors at the Infrastructure, Land and Environment policy board in January and is subject to its agreement.
“Once enforcement of the pavement parking ban begins in Renfrewshire any further streets put forward for consideration for exemption, including those under review, will be excluded from any action, whilst they are under review.”
