Late-night ‘boy rac­ers’ leav­ing us ex­hausted, claim town res­i­dents

Au­thor­ity of­fi­cers say no grounds to cut speed limit

The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition) - - NEWS - JONATHAN WAT­SON jowat­son@the­courier.co.uk

Glenrothes res­i­dents claim they are en­dur­ing sleep­less nights be­cause of lead-footed boy rac­ers.

Res­i­dents of three of the town’s largest sub­urbs have joined forces to call on Fife Coun­cil to cut the speed limit on a stretch of the B921 dual car­riage­way.

More than 130 peo­ple from Fin­glassie, Sten­ton and Pit­teuchar – all of which bor­der the route – have signed a pe­ti­tion call­ing for the 70mph limit to be cut to 50mph be­tween the Bankhead and South­field Round­abouts.

They claim loud ex­hausts are keep­ing peo­ple awake at night, with Peter Eh­mann, a res­i­dent of the Fin­glassie area, say­ing: “At present the speed limit is 70mph and as a re­sult the traf­fic noise im­pacts neg­a­tively on the qual­ity of life of the many res­i­dents whose homes are ad­ja­cent to the B921.

“An­other nui­sance on this al­ready busy and noisy stretch of road are a pro­por­tion of cars and mo­tor­cy­cles with revved up and very loud en­gines, who think noth­ing of us­ing this stretch of road as a makeshift speed track.

“We feel it is only a mat­ter of time be­fore some­one is se­ri­ously in­jured as a re­sult of the present speed limit, or in fact, a fa­tal­ity oc­curs,”

Used by thou­sands of ve­hi­cles ev­ery day, the road’s 70mph limit re­mains in place de­spite its lo­ca­tion run­ning through the heart of sev­eral large res­i­den­tial schemes.

How­ever, lo­cal au­thor­ity of­fi­cers have ad­vised coun­cil­lors to throw out the pe­ti­tion, claim­ing there are no suit­able grounds for cut­ting the limit.

Ken Gourlay, the coun­cil’s head of trans­porta­tion, said in a re­port pre­pared for lo­cal mem­bers that only three in­jury caus­ing crashes have oc­curred on the route since 2012, with anal­y­sis sug­gest­ing speed was not a fac­tor in any of them.

Re­gard­ing noise, he con­tin­ued: “No plan­ning con­di­tions were im­posed upon the ad­ja­cent hous­ing de­vel­op­ments to com­bat traf­fic noise from the B921 (and) this would also be the case if the plan­ning per­mis­sion for these res­i­den­tial de­vel­op­ments were be­ing sought in 2017.

“Over the next few years it is an­tic­i­pated that the in­creas­ing num­ber of elec­tri­cally pow­ered ve­hi­cles will re­duce the over­all im­pact of engine noise.

“The cur­rent der­e­stricted sta­tus of the B921 should be re­tained as the cri­te­ria for the in­tro­duc­tion of a speed limit has not been met.”

An­other nui­sance on this al­ready busy and noisy stretch of road are a pro­por­tion of cars and mo­tor­cy­cles with revved up and very loud en­gines

Pic­ture: Steven Brown.

The sec­tion of the B921 where speed­sters are caus­ing a noise nui­sance.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.