MEnu-cancel
Close Menu Open Menu

RTPI Scotland's response to the Strategic Transport Project Review 2 Consultation

  1. Were you aware of STPR2 prior to this consultation?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the STPR2 process reflects the NTS2 Priorities and Outcomes?
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Please provide any further comments you have in relation to the STPR2 process.

RTPI Scotland welcomes the opportunity to comment on the STPR2.  The planning system has an important role to play in delivering active travel networks, reducing congestion and thereby creating liveable streets[1].  Place-based approaches to decarbonisation require the close integration of transport and spatial planning, at a range of spatial scales, identifying holistic solutions which are appropriate to the local context and deliver multiple benefits. There are a variety of mechanisms within the planning system that can support this, including:

  • The ‘place-leadership’ role, where planners can coordinate across sectoral and geographical boundaries to create a shared vision and set of objectives for place, including sustainable transport and land use, and develop multi-agency delivery strategies[2]
  • The Local Development Plan (LDP) preparation process, which can support a wider spatial vision for place by directing development towards locations which reduce travel demand and maximise accessibility by sustainable modes of transport, and identify the infrastructure needed to make development sustainable
  • The development management process, which can influence design to support the vision and objectives for place, and restrict development which does not comply with national or local planning policy
  • The use of planning obligations and conditions, which secure financial contributions for measures to reduce carbon emissions, such as public and active transport infrastructure, electric vehicle charging points and green infrastructure

In relation to the STPR2 process as we highlighted in our response to the draft NPF4, there is a need for renewal of the Development Planning Transport Appraisal Guidance (2011) and Designing Streets (2010) - both of which will have an important influence on achieving the outputs of the STPR. Therefore, we would welcome the inclusion of a timeframe setting out when these documents are to be renewed.

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that it was correct to take both a Regional and National approach to STPR2?
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

Please provide any further comments:

RTPI Scotland broadly supports this approach but has some outstanding concerns of alignment at a regional and national level.

Nationally we have some concerns over alignment between the draft NPF4 and the STPR2. We note that in the draft NPF4 the National Development 3 on Urban Mass/Rapid Transit Networks has referenced the STPR2 but no reference to the STPR2 is found in any other National Developments. Considering the STPR2 Key Themes and Recommendations, RTPI Scotland is particularly concerned that no reference was made to the STPR2 in the proposed National Development 2 for a National Walking, Cycling and Wheeling Network. Likewise partial and inconsistent reference is made to the National Developments in STPR2 with specific reference to National Developments 8, 11 & 18 but not made with a number of other relevant National Developments. This is particularly important to consider given that this review of strategic transport network’s performance will inform transport investment in Scotland for the next 20 years. For successful delivery of STPR2 and to ensure that funding unlocks wider placemaking outcomes, aligning funding with the NPF4 will be crucial. This is particularly important to consider as no capital investment plan has been published alongside the draft NPF4.

Regionally, RTPI Scotland wishes to highlight a disjointed approach regarding the STPR2 regions geographic boundaries as set out in Figure 1 and the Action Areas proposed in the draft NFP4. We note that no reference to the STPR2 has been made in the Action Areas within the draft NPF4 or vice versa. To ensure a joined-up approach at a regional level between land use and transport planning, RTPI Scotland wishes to highlight the opportunity in the emerging Regional Spatial Strategies, guidance for which is still to be published.

Fundamentally the delivery of the ambitions set out in STPR2 will also require locally developed approaches. LDPs will be an important means by which this is achieved. The National Transport Strategy 2 has recognised this and has made specific reference LDPs alongside the NPF (both of which forming part of the statutory development plan). In our response to the draft LDP Regulation and Guidance[3], we noted that there was no reference made to the STPR2 and likewise no reference has been made to the role of LDPs in delivering aspirations set out in the STPR2.

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the engagement process has allowed you to provide a contribution to STPR2?
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Please provide any further comments you have on the engagement carried out throughout STPR2

No comment.

  1. Which of the overall key themes is your / your organisation’s top priority?
  1. Improving active travel infrastructure
  2. Influencing travel choices and behaviours
  3. Enhancing access to affordable public transport
  4. Decarbonising transport
  5. Increasing safety and resilience on the strategic transport network
  6. Strengthening strategic connections
  1. Which of the overall key themes is your / your organisation’s lowest priority?
  1. Improving active travel infrastructure
  2. Influencing travel choices and behaviours
  3. Enhancing access to affordable public transport
  4. Decarbonising transport
  5. Increasing safety and resilience on the strategic transport network
  6. Strengthening strategic connections
  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme will contribute to Improving Active Travel Infrastructure?

1. Connected neighbourhoods

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Active freeways
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Village-town active travel connections
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Connecting towns by active travel
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Long distance active travel network
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Improving Active Travel Infrastructure?

1. Connected neighbourhoods

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Active freeways
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Village-town active travel connections
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Connecting towns by active travel
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Long distance active travel network
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Improving Active Travel Infrastructure and the recommendations within it.

RTPI Scotland is very encouraged by the themes set out in this section and if delivered should support of number of placemaking outcomes our members are trying to achieve. As always, funding delivery of these projects will be challenging and as mentioned in response to Q2 we wish to see alignment with the NPF4, especially in terms of National Development 2, RSSs and LDPs. We also wish to highlight the importance of community engagement regarding such matters.  Local Place Plans (LPPs) were introduced as a provision in the 2019 Planning (Scotland) Act. They are a new type of plan providing opportunities for communities to develop proposals and ideas for the development of where they live. LPPs can help community planning and land-use planning achieve better outcomes for communities. LPPs could be a useful means of developing active travel plans. RTPI Scotland wishes to highlight, for example, the Sustaining Choices pilot project delivered by Paths for All and Planning Aid Scotland which aims to produce a series of community-led active travel plans across Scotland. RTPI Scotland believes such projects could be integrated into the LPP preparation process. Unfortunately the summary report fails to mention LPPs and there is outstanding issue of no allocated resources to support communities and local authorities through the LPPs preparation process. 

As discussed in Q3, the need to update Designing Streets is important in this regards. Designing Streets intends to steer street design towards place-making and away from a system focused upon the dominance of motor vehicles. However, the consideration of active travel infrastructure is now outdated with the inclusion of wording such as “Only where traffic volumes and speeds are high should the need for a cycle lane be considered.” A refreshed ‘Designing Streets’ needs to better emphasise the importance of active travel when considering street design including the consideration of strategic active travel networks and core paths

Influencing Travel Choices and Behaviours

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme contribute to Influencing Travel Choices and Behaviours?

1. Behaviour change initiatives

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

2. Changing road user behaviour

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

3. Increasing active travel to school

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

4. Improving access to bikes

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

5. Expansion of 20mph limits and zones

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Influencing Travel Choices and Behaviours?

1. Behaviour change initiatives

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion

2. Changing road user behaviour

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion

3. Increasing active travel to school

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion

4. Improving access to bikes

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion

5. Expansion of 20mph limits and zones

  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Influencing Travel Choices and Behaviours and the recommendations within it.

RTPI Scotland is very encouraged by the themes set out in this section and should support of number of placemaking outcomes our members are trying to deliver. Regarding the expansion of 20mph zones we note that following a reduction in speed limit, often speed cameras on major roads are subsequently made dormant due to an expected reduction number of collisions and offences. We would question this approach as many cars, without enforcement, will still travel at high speeds to the detriment of residents in the vicinity of such roads for a number of reasons beyond road safety concerns such as noise.

Please see response to Q29 querying the lack of reference to Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in STPR2.

Enhancing Access to Affordable Public Transport

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme contribute to Enhancing Access to Affordable Public Transport
  2. Clyde Metro
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Edinburgh & South East Scotland Mass Transit
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Aberdeen Rapid Transit
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Provision of strategic bus priority measures
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Highland Mainline rail corridor enhancements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Perth- Dundee- Aberdeen rail corridor enhancements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Edinburgh/Glasgow – Perth/Dundee rail corridor enhancements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Supporting integrated journeys at ferry terminals
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Infrastructure to provide access for all at railway stations
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Investment in DRT and MaaS
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Improved public transport passenger interchange facilities
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Framework for delivery of mobility hubs
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Smart, integrated public transport ticketing
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Enhancing Access to Affordable Public Transport?
  2. Clyde Metro
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Edinburgh & South East Scotland Mass Transit
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Aberdeen Rapid Transit
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Provision of strategic bus priority measures
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Highland Mainline rail corridor enhancements
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Perth- Dundee- Aberdeen rail corridor enhancements
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Edinburgh/Glasgow – Perth/Dundee rail corridor enhancements
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Supporting integrated journeys at ferry terminals
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Infrastructure to provide access for all at railway stations
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Investment in DRT and MaaS
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Improved public transport passenger interchange facilities
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Framework for delivery of mobility hubs
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Smart, integrated public transport ticketing
  • High priority
  • Medium priority
  • Low priority
  • Do not support this recommendation
  • Don’t know/ No opinion
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Enhancing Access to Affordable Public Transport and the recommendations within it

Whilst RTPI Scotland does not typically comment on individual schemes we welcome the general travel of direction of proposals under this them. As stated elsewhere in our response, we would stress the need for close integration of transport and spatial planning, at a range of spatial scales, to realise the intentions of this theme.

Decarbonising Transport

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme contribute to Decarbonising Transport?
  2. Ferry vessel renewal and replacement and progressive decarbonisation
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Rail decarbonisation
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Decarbonisation of bus network
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Behaviour change and modal shift for freight
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Zero emissions vehicles and infrastructure transition
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Decarbonising Transport?
  2. Ferry vessel renewal and replacement and progressive decarbonisation
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Rail decarbonisation
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Decarbonisation of bus network
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Behaviour change and modal shift for freight
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Zero emissions vehicles and infrastructure transition
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Decarbonising Transport and the recommendations within it.

RTPI Scotland supports the recommendations under this theme, many of which will be particularly valuable to rural Scotland. 

Increasing Safety and Resilience on the Strategic Transport Network

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme contribute to Increasing Safety and Resilience on the Strategic Transport Network?
  2. Access to Argyll A83
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Trunk road and motorway safety Improvements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Trunk road and motorway network climate change adaption and resilience
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1.  Trunk road and motorway network renewal for reliability, resilience and safety
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

33, 34, 35 Enhancing Intelligent Transport Systems

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1.  Strategy for improving rest and welfare facilities for hauliers
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Improving active travel on trunk roads through communities
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Speed management plan
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Increasing Safety and Resilience on the Strategic Transport Network?
  2. Access to Argyll A83
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Trunk road and motorway safety Improvements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Trunk road and motorway network climate change adaption and resilience
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1.  Trunk road and motorway network renewal for reliability, resilience and safety
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion

33, 34, 35 Enhancing Intelligent Transport Systems

  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1.  Strategy for improving rest and welfare facilities for hauliers
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Improving active travel on trunk roads through communities
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  • Don’t know/ no opinion
  1. Speed management plan
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Increasing Safety and Resilience on the Strategic Transport Network and the recommendations within it.

In recent years in Scotland there has been a significant increase in traffic volumes7. This increase in traffic has not been experienced equally across roads in urban areas with studies in England showing the greatest increase in volumes on since 1994 has been almost entirely on minor roads resulting in a greater noise, air pollution and road danger on residential streets[4]. A response to this has been the deployment of low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs)[5]. LTNs operate whereby private motorised vehicles can still access all homes and businesses, but they cannot cross through the neighbourhood.  Considering the STPR2 Key Themes and Recommendations RTPI Scotland wishes to see specific reference to LTNs in STPR2.

RTPI Scotland wishes to see a clarification regarding what is meant by trunk road and motorway network ‘reliability’ under the theme of ‘Trunk road and motorway network renewal for reliability, resilience and safety’. If this is meant to describe road investment to reduce congestion and improve journey time RTPI Scotland would be concerned that this ambition will contravene the key themes and recommendations of STPR2 and many other Scottish Government policy ambitions such as net-zero targets, especially if such projects receive significant investment. Beyond this the themes of resilience and safety in are covered in the other themes in this section so we are unclear why this particular theme has been set out in this manner.

Strengthening Strategic Connections

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the recommendations under this theme contribute to Strengthening Strategic Connections?
  2. Sustainable access to Grangemouth Investment Zone
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Access to Stranraer and ports at Cairnryan
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Potential fixed links in Outer Hebrides and Mull
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Investment in ports infrastructure
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Major station masterplans
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Rail freight terminals
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. High speed and cross border rail enhancements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Which of these recommendations would you prioritise to contribute to Strengthening Strategic Connections?
  2. Sustainable access to Grangemouth Investment Zone
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Access to Stranraer and ports at Cairnryan
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Potential fixed links in Outer Hebrides and Mull
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Investment in ports infrastructure
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Major station masterplans
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Rail freight terminals
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. High speed and cross border rail enhancements
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Do the recommendations under this theme address the transport needs of your local or regional area or the people your organisation represents?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the theme Strengthening Strategic Connections and the recommendations within it.

RTPI Scotland broadly supports the themes in this section although raises concerns over proposals to widen carriageways and improve junctions as this may will contravene the key themes and recommendations of STPR2 and many other Scottish Government policy ambitions such as net-zero targets, especially if such projects receive significant investment.

  1. Prior to this consultation were you aware of the list of Scottish Government policies below, which STPR2 aligns with and supports?

Take action against climate change

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Decarbonising transport

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Reducing car use

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Encouraging greater walking, wheeling and cycling

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Addressing inequalities, such as: Child poverty

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Addressing inequalities, such as: Affordability of transport

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Addressing inequalities, such as: Access to transport

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Transport as an enabler of inclusive economic growth

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Providing a safe transport system

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Providing a reliable and resilient transport system

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. Prior to this consultation were you aware of the Scottish Government policy documents to which STPR2 aligns with and supports?

National Transport Strategy 2 (NTS2)

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

National Planning Framework (NPF4)

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Climate Change Plan Update & Route Map

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Infrastructure Investment Plan

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

Cleaner Air for Scotland 2 & Delivery Plan

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

National Performance Framework

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion
  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the STPR2 recommendations reflect and will contribute to the aims of government policy?
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. Please provide any additional comments you have on the STPR2 recommendations’ contribution to Government policy.

Please provide further comments

For alignment with the NPF4 please see our response to Q4.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) & Other Impact Assessments

  1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall findings of the SEA?  
  • Strongly agree
  • Agree
  • Neither disagree or agree
  • Disagree
  • Strongly disagree
  1. The SEA has reviewed plans, policies and programmes relevant to STPR2. Are there any other plans, policies and programmes that should be considered?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

If yes, please provide further comments

  • Designing Streets
  • Draft Local Development Plan Guidance and Regulations
  • Development Planning Transport Appraisal Guidance
  1. The SEA sets out the current national and regional baseline environment conditions and future trends. Do you have any comments on this baseline data?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

If yes, please provide further comments

No comment.

  1. Are there any particular issues, problems or opportunities you would like to mention that have not been captured within the SEA?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
  • No opinion

If yes, please provide further comments

  1. Please provide any comments on the findings of the Equality Impact Assessment.

No comment.

  1. Please provide any comments on the findings of the Island Communities Impact Assessment.

No comment.

  1. Please provide any comments on the findings of the Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment.

No comment.

  1. Please provide any comments on the Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment.

No comment.

 

[1] RTPI (2021) Net Zero Transport: the role of spatial planning and place-based solutions. January. Available here: http://bit.ly/2OvBPfN

[2] https://www.ciht.org.uk/knowledge-resource-centre/resources/better-planning-better-transport-better-places/

[3] https://www.rtpi.org.uk/consultations/2022/march/rtpi-scotlands-response-to-draft-local-development-plan-regulations/

[4] UK Government Department for Transport (2020) Road Traffic Estimates: Great Britain 2019. Available here:  https://bit.ly/3kMzuJm

[5] Scottish Parliament Information Centre (2020) SPICe briefing - Low traffic neighbourhoods. October. Available here: https://bit.ly/3c8fygo

Back to top

Other content you might be interested in

Eastern Transport Plan - NI Consultation Response

Consultations / 01 Nov 2023

RTPI response to the DLUHC and DfT call for evidence ‘Freight, logistics and the planning syste...

Consultations / 06 Oct 2023

RTPI response to the consultation on operational reforms to the NSIP consenting process

Consultations / 19 Sep 2023