A75 maintenance contract and Unacceptable Actions Policy: FOI release (1)

You asked for the following information:

“1) We wish to know the performance standards specified in the A75 maintenance contract currently in force with Scotland TranServ in so far as these specify a minimum carriageway surface maintenance standard, frequency of surface defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported surface defects and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent.

2) We wish to know the performance standards specified in the A75 maintenance contract currently in force with Scotland TranServ in so far as these specify a minimum carriageway road signage and surface markings maintenance standard, frequency of defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported signage road marking and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent.

3) We wish to know (without identifying details) how many and from what dates and for what durations individuals or organisations have been informed in writing  that they are judged by senior Transport Scotland officials to be corresponding or communicating in a manner relating to the road network which, in the judgement of such officials, triggers Transport Scotland's Unacceptable Actions Policy. We wish to know if any supporting reasons have been given to such persons and, if so, what these were. We also wish to know the number of appeals made by such subsequently restricted contact complainants against such official judgements, past or pending and the outcomes thereof i.e. whether the complainants concerned were thereafter restored to normal status or that their ongoing communications remained to be treated differently and restricted, as per the policy, with no reply being issued as matter of routine.

4) We wish to know what external oversight is given to the framing and implementation of Transport Scotland's Unacceptable Actions Policy and what avenue exists, if any, to any aggrieved party for taking an appeal against its application outwith Transport Scotland.

5) Assuming our current appeal is refused we wish to know the timescale within which Transport Scotland's Management Board will be invited to review our restricted contact status and what opportunity  in terms of natural justice or otherwise we shall then be afforded to make representations to the Board in advance of the conclusion of their periodic review.

6) We wish to know what action(s) in terms of revised hard engineered carriageway design, as adopted as a first resort calming intervention at many other trunk road residential street gateways e.g. Crocketford, or by some other measure, Transport Scotland proposes to take to address the actions of very large numbers of speeding drivers, many of whom are revealed to be adopting speeds between twice and three times WHO road safety standards beside vulnerable pedestrians present on the exiting channels at Springholm as revealed by the ongoing speed bin data collected at the ATC SH1 channel 2 and SH4 channel 1 monitoring points. We have drawn specific attention to the speed data extract for SH4 channel 1 for the week 7-14 January 2019 wherein 3,370 drivers were revealed as adopting speeds there of 41mph and upward in the 30mph limit.”