PLANS to bring in traffic restrictions in Luss are now one step away from approval after many years of waiting.

A Scottish Government reporter has recommended that measures put forward by Argyll and Bute Council should be put to Scottish ministers for final consent.

 

But councillors have urged that the restrictions contained in a draft traffic regulation order (TRO) be implemented - if ministers do give the green light - in time for the start of the new tourist season.

Banning of driving within the core village area, except for residents and business owners, restricted parking unless with a local permit, and a stop to parking on the old A82 except for short stay bays are part of the plans.

A report by Mike Croft, from the Scottish Government's planning and environmental appeals division (DPEA), was considered at a meeting of the council’s Helensburgh and Lomond area committee on Tuesday, December 13.

Independent councillor Mark Irvine, one of three representatives for the Lomond North ward, where Luss is located, said: “As somebody heavily involved in discussions on Luss, I welcome the outcome of the reporter’s report and all the hard work put into it.

“It has been referred to Scottish ministers, but we are crashing towards the new tourist season. Will we be able to turn it around in that time?”

Stuart Watson, the council’s assistant network and standards manager, responded: “I hope so. The department for planning and environmental appeals, although they are technically private consultees, is part of the Scottish Government.

“I cannot think of anything that would case them to refuse. I think it will probably go through but that is just a gut feeling. How quickly it will happen I am not sure.”

Mr Watson also assured Councillor Irvine that signage would be made up and ready to go when the new measures can be enforced.

Argyll and Bute's Provost, Maurice Corry (Conservative, Lomond North), told Mr Watson: “I certainly fully support what is in the report. I go back to 2012 and many midnight meetings in the village. My thanks to you and your officers for pulling this together.

“It has been a long process but I think we have the answer now. We have been here for 10 years trying to get this sorted. Anything steering people towards the car parks would be ideal.”

Councillor Gary Mulvaney (Conservative, Helensburgh Central) added: “I think we should add a fifth recommendation that we, as an area committee, write to whoever is the right party to pick up points about the tourist season and ask for early implementation.

“They can take that at face value but if we make a political case, it might help. It seems a shame that we would end up in May, June or July trying to implement something.”

Mr Croft was asked by Argyll and Bute Council to compile a report after 73 objections were lodged to the draft TRO - some complaining about proposals to charge for on-street parking permits, another to a planned measure to prohibit driving on various roads in the village - though some of those were later withdrawn.

Mr Croft carried out unaccompanied site visits to Luss on June 4 and 5 and August 22 and 23, and held a public hearing in the village's Loch Lomond Arms Hotel on August 23.

In his report Mr Croft said: "The core of the council’s case is that the TRO is part of a package of measures that balances the mixed views within the community of Luss. It is essentially a compromise.

"My examination of it provides a substantial level of support for it. Many of the modifications that I recommend have been agreed with the council during the course of my examination.

"The other modifications represent a compromise that is slightly different from the one favoured by the council.

"The council makes frequent reference to post-implementation monitoring, and I strongly support that: that monitoring should be soundly based and aimed at demonstrating whether any adjustments ought to be made to the TRO once it is in operation.

"In the meantime, I am satisfied that, on the evidence before me and subject to
the modifications that I list, the public benefits of the TRO would outweigh the public and private disbenefits referred to by objectors."